Scotland Indyref 2

Are we getting the usual mix of condescension and ignorance spiced with a tinge of racism from the usual suspects?

Yes, of course we are. Unfortunately xenophobia towards Scotland and Scots in general is perfectly acceptable to those running the forum. That’s the vibe I am picking up anyway. This place is toxic.

Too kind – still kept the bottle of Amarone company and graham nortons over now. Sleep well – looking forward to the new dreams

Km – everyone loves you guys that’s why we are desperate not to lose you

Great idea Bruce. From now on I will agree that politicians are working in my best interests. Honestly.

Wow this is fun…

Did someone tell you politicians are working in your best interests?

Normally someone has to tell you something before you can agree or not. That’s how it works, you see. Someone says something and if you agree you say, “Mm, yes, quite right” and if you don’t agree then you say, “Well actually, I think….”.

It helps if you can try to be polite. If you aren’t polite then sometimes people will get annoyed and verbally slap you around a bit.

Bruce relax. Forums are like politics (and the SNP). Should never be taken seriously. Still it’s been educational. Thanks

I didn’t realise you weren’t taking the forum seriously. Looking at how much time you spend posting I just assumed it was your job or something.

SOH aracer SOH

Amusingly playing the edinburgh defence
I think you liek to insult folk and them claim its humour when in reality you are just insulting folk
Why not just clearly explaining your view and insult folk. Its when its just insults , claiming to be humour, it gets a bit dull. You almost say nothing these days – well nothing of any real substance its just all scorn for almost everyone- in the last few bits with Bruce its completely baseless and just digs.

I’m assuming you’re not really aware of that,

I am assuming he is aware of it and its his main aim.If not he really is unlucky.

Its a shame as he does have a great depth of knowledge but he would rather be “humourous” than informative.

Perhaps we all* get to this point after long enough on here ?

* I mean me really as I can be just as guilty

Some real humour
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/snp-announces-second-instalment-of-independence-day-trilogy-20161014115378

maybe

But I still haven’t heard why we shouldn’t be independent.

All the problems raised are temporal, politicians, ideologies come and go, finances rise and fall, but why should we not be independent?

Why would the country that has given so much to the world in just about every field of endeavour be unable to run its own government? Our people are as capable as anyone else’s.

C’mon, what’s the reason?

One can argue that any nation, state, region, etc can be independent. Of course they can but that is not the question. The question is what structure maximises the benefits of its members.

The answer to that question is blindingly obvious hence the requirement for smokescreens and subterfuge of those pushing the opposite.

No one doubts the abilities of the Scottish people – after all most had the wisdom to vote remain and all but four voting categories (not sure of correct term) voted to stay “better together” – many, more convincingly than even the ardent nats of Dundee.

Why deny them their wishes and the benefits they currently enjoy.

The answer to that question is blindingly obvious hence the requirement for smokescreens and subterfuge of those pushing the opposite.

The problem with conservative types is that they struggle to envision scenarios that differ from the way things are at the moment.

The two main reason that people voted to remain was because they felt that the risk of the unknown was too great plus the fact that they were promised sweeping new powers. Now it turns out that staying in the union is proving to be a massive unknown and the sweeping powers that were promised never materialised.

I find it amusing when people talk about the result being decisive. When you consider the fact that when the referendum was announced it was 70/30 in favour of the union you have to wonder how you would even go about describing it if that had been the final result.

Considering the fact that we’re starting from a 50/50 split this time, there’s uncertainty with both options, we know better than to believe any promises of more powers or anything else from westminster, we’re looking at a Europe that will be much more accommodating than last time, plus the fact that this time we can expect the support from at least three of the major newspapers then its very conceivable we could win it this time around.

You seem to be totally missing the point. Both scenarios are being considered, and it is quite clear which scenario is actually better for people in their day to day lives. Does the warm glow of being governed from Edinburgh instead of Westminster make up for having less money in your pocket?

I wish Mrs Crankie would STFU about another referendum. You can’t keep having one till you get the result you want. She clearly doesn’t believe in democracy.

aracer – Member
Does the warm glow of being governed from Edinburgh instead of Westminster make up for having less money in your pocket?

So lets get down to the nitty gritty. What’s the evidence for this?

poah – Member
till you get the result you want. She clearly doesn’t believe in democracy.

You can, you clearly don’t understand democracy.

An absolute fundamental factor of it is that people are allowed to change their mind. Nothing is set in stone forever.

For similar reasons that Brexit is bad for both the UK and the EU.

and it is quite clear which scenario is actually better for people in their day to day lives.

Indeed. In fact, if you had a blank sheet of paper the optimum scenario is always to have access/be a member of as wide as region as possible while mainting the highest level of devolved power/sovereignty.

The odd thing in both votes is that the status quo – rather than represent conservatism with a little c – was/is about as close to perfect as possible (given that it will never be 100%).

Why would you want to deviate from this – to avoid scrutiny of actual track record??? Avoid awkward questions over why you are unable to maximise, even use, the benefits of the status quo??? Not difficult to answer is it…..?

aracer – Member
For similar reasons that Brexit is bad for both the UK and the EU.

Lets get down to the numbers the real details. Show us the evidence?

You seem to be totally missing the point. Both scenarios are being considered, and it is quite clear which scenario is actually better for people in their day to day lives.

I think what you mean is that in your opinion it’s clear which scenario is actually better for people in their day to day lives.

Can you explain why?

Indeed. In fact, if you had a blank sheet of paper the optimum scenario is always to have access/be a member of as wide as region as possible while mainting the highest level of devolved power/sovereignty.

So for Scotland the optimum scenario would be to be independent while a member of the single market while the worst scenario would be to be a small part of a large country without access to the single market.

teamhurtmore – Member
and it is quite clear which scenario is actually better for people in their day to day lives.
Indeed. In fact, if you had a blank sheet of paper the optimum scenario is always to have access/be a member of as wide as region as possible while mainting the highest level of devolved power/sovereignty.

The odd thing in both votes is that the status quo – rather than represent conservatism with a little c – was/is about as close to perfect as possible (given that it will never be 100%).

Why would you want to deviate from this – to avoid scrutiny of actual track record??? Avoid awkward questions over why you are unable to maximise, even use, the benefits of the status quo??? Not difficult to answer is it…..?Like I said thm, it’s pretty clear which ever investments you have are based on the status quo, you dislike change for this reason.

A wee bit of honest disclosure would be nice here. Or you are in danger of looking a bit like, how would I put, the deceitful one. 😆 All bluster to further you’re own agenda!

Even though I voted Yes in IndyRef I was content enough to stay in the UK as part of the EU when we lost. I could have lived with that for any number of years until the case for independence could be convincingly won.

Since brexit and the way things are going now, the overall tone of things, I can’t get out of the UK fast enough. If this costs us money in the short and/or long term then so be it, a price worth paying to distance ourselves from what remains.

You can, you clearly don’t understand democracy.

An absolute fundamental factor of it is that people are allowed to change their mind. Nothing is set in stone forever.

so we just have referendums every year because one party didn’t like the result? Then once we get it do we have another one in 2 years time to see if we want back?

poah – Member
You can, you clearly don’t understand democracy.
An absolute fundamental factor of it is that people are allowed to change their mind. Nothing is set in stone forever.
so we just have referendums every year because one party didn’t like the result? Then once we get it do we have another one in 2 years time to see if we want back?

We could if we liked. yes.

btw I don’t favour an early ref. like I say 2030 is the timeframe I think people should be looking at. be honest about the obvious financial challenges that scotland has and in the meantime and openly fix them. I’d like to see an honest debate and action on that before another ref.

I think that’s how you convice the majority to vote for it. Not some opportunistic and overly simplistic bullshit about remaining in the EU being a redline.

(I actually think that an iscotland being in an EU that is hostile to RUK is a fairly complex situation, given scotlands largest trading partner is England.)

so we just have referendums every year because one party didn’t like the result? Then once we get it do we have another one in 2 years time to see if we want back?

If someone puts the idea forward and enough people vote for it then sure, why not.

km – businesses would love you!!

We could if we liked. yes.

If someone puts the idea forward and enough people vote for it then sure, why not.

and the effect that would have on the country?

poah – Member
We could if we liked. yes.
If someone puts the idea forward and enough people vote for it then sure, why not.
and the effect that would have on the country?

People would get what the majority for(you know democracy). If one referendum gives a result, it should be able to withstand another. If not, then the initial result was suspect.

Precisely the reason why we should have another EU ref, imo. If 52% is a convincing majority, it should be able to withstand another referendum.

Why this simple argument isn’t in the public domain is indication of a stitchup regarding the EU ref.

I have no particular interest in business. Whatever the situation, as long as there is money to be made there will be businesses there and willing to make it. It is no concern or objective of mine to ensure that they make ever increasing amounts of money. Sure they will complain if they don’t get to do so, good for them, let them, I don’t give a shit. If it’s not enough money for one business, it will be for another. Believe it or not, not everyone lives their life being a slave to money, there are many other parts of life.

If everything was equal regarding Scotland’s trade with rUK and the EU – but it’s not, it does far more trade with rUK. I’m basing my opinion (which is all anybody has on here, I’m not sure why that needs pointing out) on the basis that access to rUK markets is far, far more important. Clearly if Scotland managed to have cake and eat it, become independent and part of the EU then it faces the same issues that Germany does in terms of access to post Brexit UK markets – except that the rUK is a rather more significant market for Scotland than it is for Germany. We have done all this argument already on the Brexit thread.

If a party says they’re going to have a referendum in their manifesto and people elect them then, yes, they can call a referendum every year if they like. The solution is to get people to vote for parties that say they won’t have a referendum.

Even though I voted Yes in IndyRef I was content enough to stay in the UK as part of the EU when we lost. I could have lived with that for any number of years until the case for independence could be convincingly won.

Since brexit and the way things are going now, the overall tone of things, I can’t get out of the UK fast enough. If this costs us money in the short and/or long term then so be it, a price worth paying to distance ourselves from what remains.

This is exactly my feeling too. Even though I campaigned for Yes last time, there was a sense after we lost that things would just stay the same really, back to the day job. There was even, I’ll admit, perhaps a little relief that we hadn’t leaped into the unknown – though also a lot of sadness that we hadn’t.

Now, with the way the UK is going, a leap into the unknown is looking pretty good.

Like I said thm, it’s pretty clear which ever investments you have are based on the status quo, you dislike change for this reason.

I am not sure where you get that from – but feel free to believe it if you want. As Bruce noted last night that is a much better path to happiness.

But returning to cold hard truths. Brexshit is bad for all of us. We know that and as I noted earlier its obviously more galling for Scots given the vote. But, that doesn’t mean that a second knee-jerk bad decision is the correct way forward. This is not a maths exercise where tow minuses make a plus. This is real life.

As usual, the Narcissitic one is stirring up trouble, giving false hope to the gullible, and avoiding scrutiny of her track record. Cue talk of setting up rep offices/”embassies” – was meeting junior Germans in a restaurant that big a dent to the ego?

How about focusing on the tasks at hand, fully utilising the tools already at her disposal, tackling issues such as educational inequality, poor health standards; weaker economic performance. Or is just muddying the waters an easier option.

Like her or loathe her at least Theresa is getting on with the job at hand.

People would get what the majority for(you know democracy).

Remind what that was?

If one referendum gives a result, it should be able to withstand another. If not, then the initial result was suspect.

Oh I see.

Here’s an idea like cumpulsory re-selection we can have rolling independence referendums. When the sun is shining vote out, when it rains vote in and blame the Westminsters.

Why has no one else though of that?

If everything was equal regarding Scotland’s trade with rUK and the EU – but it’s not, it does far more trade with rUK. I’m basing my opinion (which is all anybody has on here, I’m not sure why that needs pointing out) on the basis that access to rUK markets is far, far more important.

Yes but aracer these are the same facts that In posted a few pages back and they are inconvenient for the narrative. Like experts they really are not helpful.

If everything was equal regarding Scotland’s trade with rUK and the EU – but it’s not, it does far more trade with rUK.

Based on the situation we have now with Scotland part of the UK and the UK part of the EU. Unless you’re an ardent Brexit fan you have to admit that the economy of the UK is going to suffer, thus reducing the level of trade with the UK.

Another thing is that trade between an independent Scotland and rUK won’t cease but will be impacted. What I’m saying is that the the benefits of trade with the UK will not disappear completely.

An independent Scotland in the single market will have at least that part of it’s trade protected which is more than can be said for her if she is part of a UK that has left the EU.

Also, Scotland is a small country with a population roughly a tenth of the UK. Some businesses will relocate to Scotland. How many it’s impossible to say but that will increase our trade with the EU.

It’s not as simple as saying that because things are this way with Scotland part of the UK which is part of the EU that they’re going to stay the same with Scotland outside the UK but part of the single market.

teamhurtmore – Member
People would get what the majority for(you know democracy).
Remind what that was?

If one referendum gives a result, it should be able to withstand another. If not, then the initial result was suspect.
Oh I see.

Here’s an idea like cumpulsory re-selection we can have rolling independence referendums. When the sun is shining vote out, when it rains vote in and blame the Westminsters.

Why has no one else though of that?I favour super majorities for such fundamental votes.

So I think the Scottish ref and current status quo is correct, the result is valid and should be followed, which it is. That should not exclude another ref sometime down the future, if the will is there within the scottish people to have one. That time is not now. But Scotland is definied as a nation within the UK, so it’s a question only the people of Scotland can decide or not decide to have. Youse can waffle on, from south of the border, about once in a lifetime all you like. Simple fact is you don’t get to decide that.

I think exiting the EU based on 52% is highly suspect. There should be another ref on what the vision of exiting the EU is, before the button is pressed.

So for Scotland the optimum scenario would be to be independent while a member of the single market while the worst scenario would be to be a small part of a large country without access to the single market.

The optimum solution was the one you reject for being overly cautious ie, membership of UK and EU (under UK priviliged terms). But I accept that has gone now (possible future fudges aside). But perhaps you misunderstand what being part of the single market would involve ie giving up independence of fiscal and monetary policy and less sovereignty? The worst scenario would be a small country (having to fulfill entry criteria ouch!) being a member of a broken economic structure. As before that is the upmost folly.

Good job, your leader only has that “in mind” 🙂

teamhurtmore – Member
Like I said thm, it’s pretty clear which ever investments you have are based on the status quo, you dislike change for this reason.
I am not sure where you get that from – but feel free to believe it if you want. As Bruce noted last night that is a much better path to happiness.

But returning to cold hard truths. Brexshit is bad for all of us. We know that and as I noted earlier its obviously more galling for Scots given the vote. But, that doesn’t mean that a second knee-jerk bad decision is the correct way forward. This is not a maths exercise where tow minuses make a plus. This is real life.

As usual, the Narcissitic one is stirring up trouble, giving false hope to the gullible, and avoiding scrutiny of her track record. Cue talk of setting up rep offices/”embassies” – was meeting junior Germans in a restaurant that big a dent to the ego?

How about focusing on the tasks at hand, fully utilising the tools already at her disposal, tackling issues such as educational inequality, poor health standards; weaker economic performance. Or is just muddying the waters an easier option.

Like her or loathe her at least Theresa is getting on with the job at hand.

Agreed a kneejerk reaction is wrong. My thoughts of 2030 and fixing scotlands problems(Ie making scotland financially self sustainable before another ref) isn’t a kneejery reaction though.

I favour super majorities for such fundamental votes.

So do I.

Jo you are obviously far more sensible that your representatives who, in stark contrast, are jerking their knees faster than a reeling party goer

So we agree. Time for Nicola to STFU and concentrate on the job at hand until 2030. Stop the smokescreens and start delivering on your promises. That’s what “the interests of the Scottish people” is all about not pointless grandstanding.

Like Theresa she has v weak oppo, but unlike her a much stronger majority. So no more excuses. Time for results. Scotland deserves better. See you for the 2030 referendum!!

Me too – I’m not sure if that makes us all conservative (small c).