Osbourne says no to currency union.

Was a ‘No’ to begin with (couple of years ago) – saw this as a Nationalist ego-trip

Then was a mibbes.

Now a definite Yes since I decided to pull my finger out my arse and look beyond what we are spoon-fed by the newspapers and tv news broadcasts and nothing will sway me against it. We already control so much of how our lives are run. Why is the sky going to fall down when we take 100%* control of our affairs?

*as much as any country can have 100% control of it’s own affairs in this day and age.

The UK seems to be moving more and more to the right. It feels to me like it is mirroring the US – where those just a rung or two up from the bottom of the heap seem to be the most vociferous in supporting those who would gladly keep them there.

A Yes vote is the only chance myself and my kids will have to move away from this.

It’s funny I just read UK OK exactly as you wrote it Piemonster 😉

Two or three months ago I was sure it would be a No vote however Better Together and Westminster politicans of all parties are the gift that keeps on giving to the Yes campaign.

Every time they open their mouths you’d think they were deliberately trying to self-sabotage their own campaign.

As for sending Danny Alexander up here soon to educate us on the virtues of the union………

The only reasoned Unionist voice i’ve heard so far is Charles Kennedy – and he is an example of what Westminster does to decent men

Pretty much agree 100% with you there.

Out of curiosity, has anybody encountered BT volunteers. So far I’ve only seen Yes folk out and about?

….if you lived up here and were privy to the constant negativity and sanctimony which has been pushed down everyone’s throat by the press and BBC Scotland then you’d perhaps understand why support for Yes is rising the closer we get to the vote.

It doesn’t really explain why despite less than 6 months to go there still isn’t overwhelming support for the Yes vote.

Why aren’t, I don’t know – 80% of Scots, backing the Yes camp ? What are they waiting for ?

Because there will be a core of support for both sides which will never change their minds regardless of what anyone says so it is the undecideds and the previous non-voting group that are ‘up for grabs’.

Also, there are swathes of the population that will accept whatever they are told in the news and the newspapers. Example being pro-Yes website Wings Over Scotland who paid for an advertisement on the Glasgow Underground. The wording of the ad went along the lines of ‘there are ..nr of newspapers in Scotland – none back independence. Isn’t it time you heard both sides of the story?”

Within 24-hours the ads were pulled by SPT.

Regardless, I doubt anything I write will change your opinion Ernie and i’d say anyone debating the matter on an internet forum will not, at this stage, have their minds changed so this is all a bit of a waste of our time, isn’t it? 😉

so what I was trying to convey in the above (not very well) is that unless you are prepared to dig out facts and varying opinions i.e. moderate/maybes or resounding yeses – then the information you are fed on a daily basis is predominantly negative or portrays independence as a risk rather than an opportunity. I read Wings Over Scotland and Bella Caledonia and, whilst keeping in mind they are hardly impartial, i’m increasingly finding they over a much less hysterical perspective than any other mainstream source of information.

I now see what Salmond admires about Putin, they both like threatening European countries. He is a dictator in the making, threatening to block EU countries from Scottish waters should Scotland lose it’s EU status. He is also still spouting on about a currency union with the UK, that hilariously the majority of Scots still think is on the table despite being told otherwise. Are people not embarrassed to have voted for the man?

I now see what Salmond admires about Putin, they both like threatening European countries. He is a dictator in the making,

Thank Christ there’s no chance he’ll get hold of nuclear weapons

No, hang on, erm….

Are people not embarrassed to have voted for the man?

Er… no

I read Wings Over Scotland and Bella Caledonia and, whilst keeping in mind they are hardly impartial, i’m increasingly finding they over a much less hysterical perspective than any other mainstream source of information.

GSOH required!

Regardless, I doubt anything I write will change your opinion Ernie and i’d say anyone debating the matter on an internet forum will not, at this stage, have their minds changed so this is all a bit of a waste of our time, isn’t it?

You’ve been trying to change peoples mind ? I’m impressed !

Sadly I have never considered that in my power of persuasion was such that people might abandon their formerly held opinions and replace them with mine.

I simply express my point of view and don’t expect anyone to agree with it unless they already did.

What’s your success rate – I imagine it involves a lot of disappointment ? 😉

Are people not embarrassed to have voted for the man?

I voted for him because he said the SNP would have a referendum on independence. We’re having the referendum. So no, not embarrassed at all – he’s delivered 100% on the reason I voted for him.

^ +1

Yup,another vote on the promise of a referendum,just out of interest,did that nice man in the rUK parliament not promise you all a ref on something as well…how’s that going? 😆

Clegg, as always, delivered massively on his pledge /promise/aspiration

Dont gloat you might get the same result 😛

Claggy, what’s he been up to?

Posting Steve bell on the internet??

Trying to work out what “Steve Bell” is rhyming slang for…

Googles “Steve Bell slang”

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/04/why-ukip-matters-in-the-scottish-independence-referendum/

…..an increasingly politicized sense of English identity.

What nonsense.

+ 1

“This increasingly politicized sense of English identity will be reflected in the massive turn out of voters for the Euro elections.” As nobody ever said.

Regardless, I doubt anything I write will change your opinion Ernie and i’d say anyone debating the matter on an internet forum will not, at this stage, have their minds changed so this is all a bit of a waste of our time, isn’t it?

I dunno, I used to be much more in favour of independence until I read some of the Yes arguments on here.

I read Wings Over Scotland and Bella Caledonia and, whilst keeping in mind they are hardly impartial, i’m increasingly finding they over a much less hysterical perspective than any other mainstream source of information.

GSOH required!

?? Or an interest in reading alternative points of view on what is a very important matter

Grum, what arguments have you read on here that have made you change your mind about it?

Ernie Lynch – it was a turn of phrase I suppose about people who are adamant at this stage that it is either a good or bad idea being unlikely to change their minds if they are going to the trouble to debate on a bike forum of all places.

However, I do hope undecided people can read opinions and balance up both sides and arrive at a Yes decision as that would mean there is more chance of the outcome I want. Is my opinion going to influence anyone? probably not and certainly not on here but I thought it might be of interest to people not living in Scotland as to the reasons why someone who does has gone from dismissing the idea of independence out of hand to being a strong advocate for it.

Well I started off highly sceptical of the benefits of Scotland going its own way, for both Scotland and the rest of the UK. I have always supported the continuation of the Union. I did however expect to hear some powerful and hard to refute arguments in favour and was prepared, if necessary, to reevaluate my opinion on the matter.

I am genuinely surprised at the lack of such arguments, and not just here but in the wider media. The whole thing appears to me to be an extremely badly and ill-thought out proposition, which wouldn’t be so serious if it wasn’t for its permanent and long lasting consequences.

IMO, as I have repeatedly stated, it all appears to be hinged on hope, faith, and wishful thinking. In place of compelling arguments which clearly state the real and tangible benefits there appears to be an appeal to petty meaningless nationalism and macho posturing. Which I guess goes some way in explaining why the proposition appears to have significantly less appeal to women than to men.

scotland will basically be the same as it is now but electing a government of its choosing.. self determination is often a compelling argument.

I am not sure what other benefit you want tbh as I assume most of accept it wont be a whole lot different in scotland afterwards [ whether yes or no]except for politically in some areas say tuition fees, bedroom tax, nukes etc.

I suspect if a “compelling argument” was put forward you would call it fanciful and wishful thinking or them making false promises of the land of milk and honey.
basically you either want its destiny to be one of it own making or one largely determined by the massive partner in the Union who like the Tories [ and UKIP] more than they do.

I am not sure advocating self determination is macho posturing nor do I think you will find any argument compelling.

Given you cannot say if the UK will stay in the EU you could argue the no vote is equally based on hope, faith, and wishful thinking.

Its very interesting that many who dislike the EU union like this one
I am not sure what that says about anything but it is interesting.

It may also be true that those who support devolution of this union are more pro the EU one.
I am not sure we could describe either as fully consistent or compelling and I suspect we could describe either as emotive or macho posturing

+1 – I’m actually a lot more open minded than a lot of people on here seem to think (and have even had my mind changed on some subjects). If anything I was initially rather less sceptical than ernie about independence, not being all that bothered either way (clearly I don’t have a vote). The more I read though, the more clear it is that whilst both sides might be dishonest, the Yes side have a huge lead on dishonestly wishful thinking.

Though the Yes camp do keep trying to claim all these other intangible benefits as well.

The thing is, it is wishful thinking to suggest that there won’t be a range of disadvantages to independence – such things have after all been discussed ad nauseum extensively on this thread (those pro-independence might try and dismiss them as unimportant, but that doesn’t mean they don’t exist). The question is whether on balance self-determination on its own is enough of an advantage to outweigh them – which depends on how much weight you place on self-determination as an abstract concept.

ernie_lynch – Member
The whole thing appears to me to be an extremely badly and ill-thought out proposition, which wouldn’t be so serious if it wasn’t for its permanent and long lasting consequences.

+1 in fact it would be comical if it were not so serious. The fact that such serious issues can be dismissed with such disdain is an abject illustration of the modern political bankcruptcy.

The last example of a “political” lie being sold on such a grand scale resulted in predictable consequences. I expect this to be the same. Still it presents lots of opportunities for those who can foresee what will happen….

Politics can outweigh economics and common sense in the short to medium term, but in the end the latter always prevail. You cannot buck economic truisms. History shows this clearly…

like boom and bust history shows that to be an economic truism ?

the Yes side have a huge lead on dishonestly wishful thinking.

I dont think they do. Yes sell a dream the Uk sells project fear [ very honest eh ] and a largely negative campaign * Neither can actually predict the future of say UK EU membership or which outcome will actually be best economically or politically so both are wishful thinking.

it is wishful thinking to suggest that there won’t be a range of disadvantages to independence

As it is to say there wont be some advantages and it would be biased to only state one side.
A decent A level standard essay on the risks and benefits would be a welcome distraction but all we have is polemics from either side. Your own view then says which lot are **** /dishonest/BS /selling fear/ whatever

* IMHO the negativity of the no – George robertson outbursts for example is just as outlandish as some of the it will all be awesome afterwards claims. Really anyone want to defend it? I cannot see a lot of difference between them in terms of realism tbh.

To economics and common sense I would add logic.

If it is not economically viable for Scotland to govern itself then this can only mean it is reliant on the rest of the UK to subsidise our current way of life?

Common sense would then dictate that it would be in the rest of the UK’s best interests to happily let Scotland leave the union if we are a drain on the resources of the whole.

It is therefore illogical for the three main parties to be so vociferous against the idea.

Ask why Devo Max was taken off the agenda? to save all the silly natives from themselves? I don’t think so.

the Uk sells project fear [ very honest eh ] and a largely negative campaign

I think most people would agree that there are two opinions concerning Scotland independence.

One opinion suggests that independence would be good for Scotland, and the other that independence would be bad for Scotland.

In other words one opinion suggests that independence would have positive consequences for Scotland, and the other that independence would negative consequences for Scotland.

So is it therefore quite ridiculous for the No campaign (notice the use of the negative term “no”) to be castigated for pointing out and focusing on the negative consequences of so-called independence.

In fact to do so is clearly negative campaigning …… concentrate on explaining all the positive benefits of “independence”, if it’s such a **** good idea.

Only of course you can’t, so you have to rely on negative campaigning and attempting to scare people with endless talk of the Tories remaining in power for eternity.

Hypocrisy at its finest 🙂

Devo Max would have killed independence stone dead.

The No campaign is actually called Better Together ernie.

the positive benefit is a more representative government

And btw there is no such thing as “economic truisms”, only economic preferences.

The No campaign is actually called Better Together ernie.

You would hardly expect them to call themselves “No Scotland” would you ?

But the ballot paper will require a straight yes or no answer.