Forum menu
THM, you're even abbreviating your secret codewords for people now? Worried that your posts had become too comprehensible? 😀
Sorry people get upset by the full version! Glad to see a lot of terminology has now become more widespread on here. DO, while apt, may take some time. Maybe a few months after a yes vote?
Can you explain how they will have less representation than currently given they do not vote for the current govt that represents them?
http://www.channel4.com/news/scotland-independence-85-per-cent-no-vote-poll-exclusive yougov poll
Slightly OT http://www.channel4.com/news/the-other-separatists-trying-to-carve-out-a-new-europe
teamhurtmore - Member"My argument is that if you are promoting it as authentic and of great worth, you cannot promote it from a nation of drunks."
Put it in its context...
"I promote whisky. I do it on the argument that it’s a quality drink, has a worldwide cachet and that its recent great success in markets like China is about social emulation and authenticity, not cheapness. My argument is that if you are promoting it as authentic and of great worth, you cannot promote it from a nation of drunks."
He does promote it as authentic and of great worth, ergo, he does not think Scotland is a nation of drunks.
Can't help but think he's (AS) has been caught out here. Not necessarily by any genuine fault other than saying things to the wrong people that can be portrayed in a negative light. With such scrutiny as there is at present not easy, but he must know that even the slightest wrong word will be used against him.
Half agree but at the same time, when you've got people with an agenda they'll find something they can misrepresent, unless you take a vow of silence in which case it'll be "Salmond refuses to condemn..." "Salmond silent on key issue" 😉
I think this one's quite interesting in what it says about the national debate tbh. You have outright misrepresentation to create a story without any factual basis. You've got serious people queuing up to be offended. And you've got a national press willing to print it on the front page. Meanwhile, the conservative health spokesman is ignoring a debate on public health, which is his actual job, in order to have a hysterical swipe at Salmond
It's that old Singletrack thing, if you're resorting to making shit up in order to attack your opponent, what does that say about your argument?
You've got serious people queuing up to be offended
Bloody STW big hitters again eh!
In general I agree. Just seems like a couple of easy (cheap) goals for headlines that he really should not have given.
It's quite easy to discuss Putin without giving a soundbite perfect for a sensationalist headline. Even without Ukraine you could be flamed due to gay rights issues among others.
FFS, get some context. AS made a slip and I was having a laugh. Just because one poll goes badly don't lose the SOH. That is what is required if you are a YS supporter after all.
But great revisionism NW, he would be proud!
Does anyone know why the picture is being used in the following article.
Seems a bit random.
http://wingsoverscotland.com/while-were-investigating/
Trying to distract from more important news such as the latest moodys comments?
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d0cb2cf2-d151-11e3-81e0-00144feabdc0.html#axzz30JQpMdLl
Yeh, I read that earlier today at work.
Although it's behind a paywall now unfortunately.
Another name to add to the discredited bully list!
Moody’s added that a currency union with the rest of the UK would not be good for the Britain’s rating and that the adoption of its own currency would be the best outcome.“A potential currency union with the remainder of the UK would be credit negative if it were to materialise. However, cross-party opposition to such an outcome makes this unlikely,” said Moody’s.
Not sure about this photo.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/10802400/Scottish-yes-vote-could-improve-UK-credit-says-Moodys.html
Although it's behind a paywall now unfortunately.
I've just figured out how to circumvent the paywall. The FT has always allowed free access through google news, so stop loading the page just before the paywall appears, and the headline will have loaded, copy the headline and paste it for a search under google news, that will take you to the article without the paywall.
Interesting article btw.
teamhurtmore - MemberBut great revisionism NW
No revisionism whatsoever, direct quotes in context. Salmond simply didn't say what people are claiming, he's been intentionally quoted out of context in order to deceive. Which, hey, actually is revisionism.
Ironic that you say "get some context" in response to a post doing exactly that though 😉
Do you think you should only do something when there are "overwhelming reasons" to do so?
Well, when it's a process as big and expensive as secession - yes, I think so.
Put it this way: there has been lots of talk about how Scotland must be a fairer, more egalitarian society. There has been very little discussion of the difficult and complex changes that would be required to achieve a significant restructuring of Scottish society, education, business or military policy.
[url= http://thecourier.co.uk/news/scotland/first-minister-fears-scotland-being-seen-as-nation-of-drunks-1.345958 ]decent journalism not dead in Dundee[/url] At least The Courier seems to have managed to come up with a fairly level headed factual interpretation of Mr Salmonds comments on Scotlands relationship with alcohol.
Put it this way: there has been lots of talk about how Scotland must be a fairer, more egalitarian society. There has been very little discussion of the difficult and complex changes that would be required to achieve a significant restructuring of Scottish society, education, business or military policy.
Why would Scottish society have to be restructured? And our education system is already separate. I'm not playing down the work that'll be needed to separate Scotland from the rUK, but I don't think it's beyond us.
In many ways, it could also be a good thing - instead of kludging more onto what we have, we can build anew.
Meanwhile, the No side now has it's own grassroots campaign - No Borders, which has been getting a surprising amount of press. Surprising for an organisation no-one had heard about last week.
Still, someone must have heard of them - they've already raised £140,000, and aim to raise £500,000. Which is interesting because they're only allowed to spend £150,000 under election rules.
What's also interesting is that this "grassroots" campaign was started by a millionaire Tory, who also wrote the [url= http://conservativehome.blogs.com/torydiary/files/BankruptBritain10.pdf ]blueprint for austerity[/url].
bencooper - MemberWhy would Scottish society have to be restructured?
We don't have to change a thing, but the drawback of that is that we'll end up not changing a thing 😆
True 😉
It'll be interesting to see how we cope without adult supervision...
[quote=Northwind ]We don't have to change a thing, but the drawback of that is that we'll end up not changing a thing
Ah, but it would be a government you voted for doing exactly the same thing.
Education has had plenty of change recently, ta very much. We are currently trying to get another day in the week so we can find time to bring the new highers in. Oh, and an organ sale or two to pay for the books. Mind you,there is a silver lining;if Eck gets his minimum unit pricing in,Scottish liver will be a premium product.
It'll be interesting to see how we cope without adult supervision...
It's ok, I'm here to keep an eye on you to make sure you don't do anything silly. Such as not perpetuate a society that allows the rich to get richer and the poor to get left behind. Or heaven forbid, elect a government the Scottish electorate voted for.
Finish line fever induces sloppy choice of words - Putin, Murdoch, Nation of Drunks - for man who delights in scrutinising and twisting (assets) words for his own convenience, this all seems a little slack. The euphoria of the polls must be getting to him. Hopefully the last poll will restore an element of "sobriety" to proceedings.
Why would Scottish society have to be restructured?
If everything is mostly fine and there's no need to restructure anything, then why bother going to the trouble of secession?
I'm not playing down the work that'll be needed to separate Scotland from the rUK, but I don't think it's beyond us.
You're exactly proving my point. You're so focused on separation, you're not even engaging with what needs to happen on Day 1 of iScotland. You in particular spout all this stuff about how Scots have different social values and how great it would be to be a Scandinavian style small social democracy, and the SNP is referred to as a social democratic/soft left party, but there is very little discussion about the changes that would be necessary to do that.
Isn't now the time for radical ideas about demilitarisation, renationalisation or stripping down the state, slashing state expenditure or providing minimum citizens incomes, environmental sustainability? What's the point of recreating the UK state on a smaller scale? At present, the changes brought about by Scottish independence are lining up to be[i] less[/i] transformative than New Labour's election in 1997!
but it would be a government you voted for doing exactly the same thing.
Not exactly , it would clearly be different from rUK
Pro the EU
Anti Nukes
for man who delights in scrutinising and twisting (assets) words for his own convenience, this all seems a little slack
Thanks god you dont do this and are so ready to explain your outbursts/hyperbole when questioned on them 😀
Not exactly , it would clearly be different from rUKPro the EU
Anti Nukes
The list seems endless. It must have taken you ages to compose ?
An independent Scotland will be in the EU while the rest of the UK won't be. Maybe.
An independent Scotland will hopefully not have any nuclear weapons while the rest of the UK will.
That's the conclusion we come to after over a hundred pages of debate on the subject. And some people say that they case for independence hasn't been made !
I very much doubt listing more will change your mind so i saved myself some time and even more effort.
Point remains it wont be exactly the same as arcaer claims and that was the specfic point i addressed
To be fair ernie, an independent Scotland also won't have the pound.
But since we are
"saltire-waving mel gibson wannabes"
According to you, maybe more complex reasons would confuse us?
Eg, deciding whether a currency is an asset, a liability or neither? 😉
Thankfully Alex is sure and he has said that we don't need to worry,as our lack of debt will be an [b]asset[/b] and rUK paying for the share of debt we left behind will be a [b]liability[/b]. And he has said that [b]neither[/b] Mrs Duckman nor I will ever struggle to find the money for blue facepaint ...
QED. Brilliant!
(Although tbf, smiley or no smiley, that did have to be a joke!}
I thought I'd check back in after another 1,000 posts on here and do my bit to get it to 4,000.
Re: Assets, instead of thinking of things which somehow Scotland owns and has "paid for" perhaps think of Scotland as leasing everything, when you stop making the lease payments (ie tax to HMRC) the asset goes back to it's owner (the UK). On a related point the UK debt is actually what has paid for a lot of things, so if Scotland doesn't take debt it won't get any assets.
To be fair ernie, an independent Scotland also won't have the pound.
Which pound? The Egyptian Pound, The Lebanese Pound, The Syrian Pound how about the Sudanese Pound....
Good chance there will be a Scottish Pound to add to that list as well..
I thought I'd check back in after another 1,000 posts on here and do my bit to get it to 4,000.Re: Assets, instead of thinking of things which somehow Scotland owns and has "paid for" perhaps think of Scotland as leasing everything, when you stop making the lease payments (ie tax to HMRC) the asset goes back to it's owner (the UK). On a related point the UK debt is actually what has paid for a lot of things, so if Scotland doesn't take debt it won't get any assets.
Thats a great idea.... Likewise the money gained from Scottish Oil revenues shouldn't be looked at as a UK resource... The money from them should be treated as a loan which should be repaid if independence is gained..
err yes THM, That was a joke, we don't buy blue facepaint, we just make it ourselves.
4000 had to be done!
To be fair ernie, an independent Scotland also won't have the pound.
I thought you were arguing it would do exactly the same thing which is what i challenged. Now you are adding to the list of things it will do differently despite arguing it will be
doing exactly the same thing
Thanks for the help defeating your argument, you are a true gent 😉
konabunny - MemberIsn't now the time for radical ideas about demilitarisation, renationalisation or stripping down the state, slashing state expenditure or providing minimum citizens incomes, environmental sustainability? What's the point of recreating the UK state on a smaller scale? At present, the changes brought about by Scottish independence are lining up to be less transformative than New Labour's election in 1997!
Well, we could start making great plans about all the things we want to do after we win. Or, we could concentrate on actually winning. Daydreams are great but they're worthless if we remain in the UK and get yet another tory government we didn't vote for who'll immediately set about doing exactly the opposite. Or the ghost of Labour who've forgotten who they are and so just copy the tories but stay 1 degree leftwards.
There will be plenty of time post independence for change, and that's the only time it can happen. There'll be no time for it post a no vote. Priorities seem obvious. Post independence, we should inevitably see a different conversation as the first election will be mainly contested between 2 left/centreleft parties so that'll almost happen by itself.
Personally, I do feel there's a lack of vision, a lot of the effort of the Yes campaign is about making independence less scary, which inevitably means talking down change in order to make it more palatable to the masses. Stability sells. It's a shame, but pragmatic- maybe it's too hard to sell great change in one go, you have to sell the apparatus for change first then make the changes later.
I'd love an idealogically led, optimistic, forward looking agenda for change but I think it'd be likely to lead to no change at all and no power to make it later. Groundwork first, we don't need to build Rome in a day.
Frankly though, for Scotland to be more socially progressive and fair than the UK, we don't need to change a lot- we can stand still, as long as we get off the sliding slope the UK's on. I hope we don't settle for that, we can do better, but even that's a start.
According to you, maybe more complex reasons would confuse us?
To be fair they probably would. And apparently they have. Stick to saltire-waving and shouting freedom, which seems a much more sensible ploy.
🙂
Out of the two last posts before this Ernie,one looks measured and thoughtful,one doesn't. Yours isn't the former,which strangely enough comes from somebody waving a saltire and shouting freedom.
My post wasn't designed to be "measured and thoughtful" duckman. It was in response to you digging out a little quip which I made yesterday.