[Closed] What happened to respecting democracy?

Have you seen the state the rUK economy is in? I mean the real situation not the 'Wahey recovery!' soundbites.

The Chancellor has been noteworthy for the caution with which he has greeted the recovery and news that the recession was not as bad a first reported.

We could barely do worse.

On the contrary, what was being proposed would have made things considerably worse and would have removed your ability to respond effectively. It's was kindergarten stuff, not worthy of Scotland or rUK.

Once the hysteria has calmed and proper analysis of what just happened has been completed - the stupidity and breathtaking arrogance of AS and his approach in your downfall will be clear for all to see. The whole debate seemed to be centred in looking outside for excuses. Then as now, the answer is more internal.

But it's likely the tories will be in power come next may imo.

Labour still ahead in the polls.

the fact that labour stood so close to the tories must grate alot of people?

In the referendum, I don't think so. They were all pro-union, so if you yourself were pro union you'll be happy with your party, and if you weren't you won't. Don't think it makes a difference.

I can see how it would have harmed Labour in Scotland because you have an effective left-wing alternative.

How much did it cost to rescue those 2 scottish banks?

It took £65bn from the UK to bail out those 'Scottish' banks RBS and HBOS. What makes you think an independent Scotland would have had to foot that bill on its own? The UK didn't even do that. The US Federal reserve covered the other £400bn.

Barclays is an English bank. How much did their £550bn bailout cost the UK taxpayer? The answer is zero. The US and Qatar bailed them out.

This is exactly the kind of crap that was being bandied about by the No camp, but y'know, bygones and all that. 🙄

p.s. We should have let them fail imo.

Would those banks have been bailed out if they'd been Scottish banks and not backed by a UK economy?

molgrips - Member
But it's likely the tories will be in power come next may imo.
Labour still ahead in the polls.

the fact that labour stood so close to the tories must grate alot of people?
In the referendum, I don't think so. They were all pro-union, so if you yourself were pro union you'll be happy with your party, and if you weren't you won't. Don't think it makes a difference.

I can see how it would have harmed Labour in Scotland because you have an effective left-wing alternative.

So the answer is £65bn, just to be clear, that was the question.
Take that off the balance sheet and see where we are and you pointed out the UK didn't bail out the others.

Would those banks have been bailed out if they'd been Scottish banks and not backed by a UK economy?

The point I was trying to make in my previous post is that banks are bailed out by those in whose interests they are bailed out. There isn't some kind of sovereign rule about it that says country X's bank has to be bailed out by country X.

Given the same financial 'footprint' as it were, the banks would have been bailed out in exactly the same way, by exactly the same interests.

As a reasonable human being and also a voter in a Scotland last week, I am disturbed to observe the actual and social media aggression and intimidation by some (a minority) of Yes supporters to those who democratically did not support a Yes vote. Use that energy for something more positive please.

Going back to the OP for a moment, I've seen a couple of posts like this Twitter and Facebook and it's either I have very sensible friends and my social media bubble is protecting me, or there's very little "disrespecting" going on.

I've seen lots of Yes voters and quite a few No voters too, all putting energy into making sure 'The Vow' is delivered by keeping up the pressure on the 3 parties in question. There's obviously been a little bit of tinfoil hat type stuff but remarkably little imo.

Rock plough - with respect you need to refresh your understanding of the financial crisis.

We should have let them fail
Have no lender of last resort

Brilliant to see yS supporters spouting RW ideas that would have made Thatcher blush.

It would nice to think that this was thought through, more likely shows just how muddled you guys became through this whole exercise. Didn't help that AS was deliberately misleading you throughout.

A thought similar to that just expressed by wnb occurred to me. It's only fair to point out that just as there was a silent majority of No voters, there is now a silent majority of Yes voters who have accepted the vote and want to move on in a way which results in the best outcome for Scotland as part of the union. I feel a particular mention is deserved here for a certain ex-STWer I am still in contact with, who has come out with some very sensible and well measured comments (along with one or two on this thread).

Have you seen the state the rUK economy is in? I mean the real situation not the 'Wahey recovery!' soundbites. We could barely do worse.

Just as a counter to this

did you notice this in the news today:

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/sep/22/scotch-whisky-sales-drop-china

[i]Global sales of Scotch whisky suffered one of their worst falls in recent decades, slumping by 11% for the first half of the year and wiping £220m off overall sales.[/i]

with respect you need to refresh your understanding of the financial crisis

I'm game.

At the risk of digressing, my understanding is that the point of a lender of last resort is to guard against unforeseen/temporary demands for liquidity. To prevent panics. Not to save badly run businesses from ruin.

And why shouldn't we let banks fail?

Iceland protected people and let banks go to the wall. They're doing relatively well now. How was their situation different from ours?

The country is in the toilet. Our debt is rocketing. Inequality is growing. Millions and millions of people can't afford to feed themselves, or buy even modest homes. Wages have plummeted in real terms, even further in purchasing power.

My problem with Salmond & co was/is they are/were beginning to sound more like a cult, we are telling you this is the way to go, no other way will do and don't question it!! Otherwise........
look at what is happening and compare to some of those cult style organisations.....

If our Scottish Government are a Government then they should be getting to grips with the situation or call an election. Show they are/were capable of delivering what they dreamed of and now deliver what has been "promised" for the good of the country. If they don't then they may have to look over their shoulders at the next election. For me now is their time to prove they are up to the job and if they do eventually get the chance to try again they can be judged on what they do from now.

As for the food banks? Guess what some of the people receiving food parcels do with them? Cross the road to the paper shop and try and swap the for cigarettes Got that little gem from my newsagent the other morning when it was a headline on a pepper. Other swap for drugs & drink!! As with everything it's another thing open to abuse.

Can you even imagine being so crushingly poor that you've been referred to a food bank by your local housing association? Because that's how it works here. You can't just walk in off the street.

And you want to tell that person they can't have a smoke or a drink? I couldn't care less where my contributions go. I'm not buying their life. If it helps someone get through the week then fine.

You think we should stop trying to help people because it's open to 'abuse'?

Honestly.

Can you even imagine being so crushingly poor that you've had to buy food for your kids rather than have a smoke or a drink?

must be awful...

Would this have changed in an independent Scotland? It really could have done. Certainly more so than the UK will ever do.

The low wage trend has a lot to do with globalisation and having the rUK on your doorstep would have severely constrained iS from doing anything too radical re tax / minimum range etc as companies could just relocate South of the border....

mikewsmith - Member
So the answer is £65bn

One thing I learnt is that people take social media far too seriously and uncritically. How the 'Yes' camp ever though it could win when ever single poll bar one (which was fundamentally flawed) said it would be a No vote, is beyond me. Forget the fancy posters and the angry Facebook & Twitter posts, and look at the data, it was never going to happen.

Do you think the referendum damaged labour in E&Ws? I think it's massively damaged them in Scotland.

I wonder if CMD played an (un?)intentional blinder regarding extra powers for England? If Labour support it then they're 40ish Scottish MPs down come the 'Engish only' vote (regardless of whether they are in power/majority or not). If Labour distance themselves from that will it disgruntle their English voters.

to make the banks come alive?

£65bn would make me come alive, certainly. More than £29bn or £26bn.

Has anyone mentioned yet that Alex Salmond is now saying there doesn't even need to be a positive referendum vote for Scotland to gain independence? How's that for respecting democracy.

How the 'Yes' camp ever though it could win when ever single poll bar one (which was fundamentally flawed) said it would be a No vote

Even the polling companies admitted they had no idea if their models were correct and they could of been wildly off.

One thing I learnt is that people take social media far too seriously and uncritically.

This is definitely true, though most decent journalists didn't use it for anything too serious. Taking twitter posts as examples of representative behaviour from either side was pretty stupid though.

grum - Member
Has anyone mentioned yet that Alex Salmond is now saying there doesn't even need to be a positive referendum vote for Scotland to gain independence? How's that for respecting democracy.

whatnobeer - Member

One thing I learnt is that people take social media far too seriously and uncritically.
This is definitely true, though most decent journalists didn't use it for anything too serious. Taking twitter posts as examples of representative behaviour from either side was pretty stupid though.

We are clearly living in a time where there are generations that have never engaged with social media. hell I even know people my age, 36, that have never engaged with it. For the generations behind me, that is becoming less and less true.

So social media wasn't quite the overall influencer on this occassion, might not even be for the next we while, but it is coming.

Social media did still have a large voice though.

I'm really conflicted on this 45 thing. A lot of the noisemakers seem to be basically cocks, and the conspiracy theory side of it is fairly pathetic (clue- if the video you're posting as evidence makes reference to NWOs, you're one step away from making your own tinfoil hat and guy fawkes mask). The whole "we woz robbed" thing leaves me cold and it's going to be a loud voice. I reckon I'm going to be rubbing shoulders with some of this lot and it's going to be a pain in the arse.

But that's modern movement politics for you, these days any group is likely to be associating with people they disagree with- you don't get that bloc opinion thing where you were a Physical Force Chartist or whatever and you knew where everyone on the march or on the movement stood. Too many ideas and too many people for that now.

And some of it [i]is[/i] more positive- the "what can we do to make it work next time", the "we wanted X from independence so let's work now to get it within the UK", the crossovers into CND and the Greens from the people who were anti-trident, that sort of thing. Maybe that can come through, and be more longlived than the stampy feet.

(cynical old me, I bet just about every news story you ever hear on the subject will be all about the bellends.)

Oh, one of the reasons people fail to respect democracy is that they don't think it's worthy of respect. The referendum campaign showed some really worrying lack of trust in the government, on both sides, it's a bad state of affairs.

And you want to tell that person they can't have a smoke or a drink? I couldn't care less where my contributions go. I'm not buying their life. If it helps someone get through the week then fine.

Having been a volunteer working with special needs kids and throughout my kids schooling I am aware of the issues and predicaments some people find themselves in. Having kids and a house during the years when interest rates were 15% I've been close as have my kids now that they are house owners and parents.
I could relate more stories.
I also contribute, clothes bagged up ready to go atm...
The Salvation Army have been around as have churches doing this kind of work for many a year. The difference now is the number of so called "3rd sector" agencies jumping on the bandwagon vying for council contributions to keep them alive.

Social media did still have a large voice though.

The main problem with it is that there's millions of people all shouting at the same time. That's fine if you want to look at the big picture and it can be a great tool, but it's too often used to cherry pick comments or views which are then cast onto everyone else, no matter how outlandish or left field.

I'm really conflicted on this 45 thing.
...

And some of it is more positive

Is any of the positive stuff actually exclusive to the "45"? Surely you can get on with that without having anything to do with the nutters and their conspiracy theories?

BTW what are NWOs?

Just to clarify how Food Banks operate, I hear reports of our local one every few months so I have a limited knowledge of how the Trussell Trust ones operate.

(1) You can't walk off the street, you need to be referred and take vouchers with you.

(2) Vouchers are provided by certain organisations, churchs can give out one voucher generally, CABs, doctors etc can give out three.

(3) They exist primarily to meet the needs of people who are suffering a delay to receiving benefits and other short term problems - they are not designed to supplement benefits long term - you can only receive nine vouchers a year.

Has anyone mentioned yet that Alex Salmond is now saying there doesn't even need to be apositive referendum vote for Scotland to gain independence?

I assumed we were all ignoring him. Which is strange as we normally take the piss when people flounce.

aracer - Member

Is any of the positive stuff actually exclusive to the "45"?

No, but there are strong shared interests and it has the potential to be a loud and positive voice. So basically what it comes down to is, do you want to write off the whole deal because of a (possibly fairly high) percentage of cockholsters. Considering that a lot of people who seem to be engaging with this are the generally unengaged, personally I don't want to do that. Or at least I'm reserving judgement.

The precedent for 45 rebellions isn't that great though

I saw a release today saying that since Thursday, membership of the Scottish Greens has gone up by about 40%. It's (IMO) part of the same thing, people who've been focused on the referendum looking at "what's next".

NWO- New World Orders. I watched a couple of the vote fixing videos, mostly they reckon it's all part of Teh Global Conspiracy, and delivered in the portentous tones of a 40 year old virgin. "Here... someone... is... putting... yes... votes... in... the... no... pile". Maybe they are, maybe they're not, but unless there was 200000 votes in that pile...

Even the polling companies admitted they had no idea if their models were correct and they could of been wildly off.

That's not true. You don't successfully sell a product by claiming that you have no confidence in it. YouGov were particularly confident of their poll findings.

grum - Member

Has anyone mentioned yet that Alex Salmond is now saying there doesn't even need to be a positive referendum vote for Scotland to gain independence?

Specifically, he's said that if you reach a point where you're independent in all but name, you might as well just be independent. But he's also said that a referendum is the best way.

Can it be true that the newspapers misrepresented what he said

I cannot believe that to be the case

They were so impartial 😉

[quote=grum ]Has anyone mentioned yet that Alex Salmond is now saying there doesn't even need to be a positive referendum vote for Scotland to gain independence? How's that for respecting democracy.
The idea that Scottish independence might be gained through a simple majority of SNP MPs goes back to at least 1968 and was put forward by one Douglas Hurd (now Baron Hurd of Westwell) in his novel [i]Scotch on the Rocks[/i] so it's hardly new.

you're one step away from making your own tinfoil hat and guy fawkes mask)

You rang me'lord

Great post btw Scotroutes

Specifically, he's said that if you reach a point where you're independent in all but name, you might as well just be independent.

So what he's saying is don't give us too many powers? 😈

Of course being independent in all but name would presumably involve having your own currency and central bank 😉

Global sales of Scotch whisky suffered one of their worst falls in recent decades, slumping by 11% for the first half of the year and wiping £220m off overall sales.

probably heavily influenced by the new Chinese premier banning "gifting"

another example of a global conspiracy 😉

so what was that rogue poll.

I feel that poll was a ploy by the media to change the outcome of the referendum

The referendum campaign showed some really worrying lack of trust in the government

I think that was one of the best things about the referendum. People were thinking seriously for themselves, instead of just accepting what politicians were telling them (on both sides of the debate).

I didn't believe the SNP's suggestion that independence would make Scotland a wealthy, oil fuelled utopia, but I still decided that Yes was the best way to vote.

Oh, one of the reasons people fail to respect democracy is that they don't think it's worthy of respect

What a crock. We have just seen how much respect democracy is given. Instead of anarchy and violence we had a largely peaceful process where people were able to express views freely (at least on the yS side!), no resorting to violence, little evidence of electoral malpractice and a high turnout. There can only be one conclusion from that - the vast majority have a great deal of respect for democracy and wish for this to be the process used for political debate and change. The yS excuses are getting ridiculous now.

The referendum campaign showed some really worrying lack of trust in the government, on both sides, it's a bad state of affairs.

And yet this was a vote all about government. This was not a vote about shrinking government or replacing it. Some people were even prepared to trust the author of the book of dreams and even Gordon Brown. That is taking trust to the extreme.

But granted, why folk trust politicians has always been a little beyond me.

The YouGov poll was the only one putting Yes ahead. Guardian analysed all the polls a day or two before vote and it was going to be a No. We know from previous independence referendum that the polls over predict the Yes vote. I guess that's why that chap was happy sticking £900k on a No vote.

probably heavily influenced by the new Chinese premier banning "gifting"

another example of a global conspiracy

Well, seeing as a large part of that ban was a result of (what is loosely known as) the UK Bribery Act, then once again, it's those ******ing **ers in Westminster destroying everything in Scotland. How very dare they?

😉

Interesting to see this crop up, actually. Many industries are feeling the pinch of the recently found drive for a less corrupt state in China.

The YouGov poll was the only one putting Yes ahead.

YouGov put the Noes well ahead and Peter Kellner of YouGov publicly stated on TV within half an hour of the polls closing that he was 99% certain that the Noes were going to win.