Scottish independence – hmm, a thought

teamhurtmore – Member
Sorry spell check going into overdrive druidh. I guess it doesn’t like the h. Sorry about the unintentional mis-spelling.

I actually though it was quite funny 🙂

It was but didn’t mean to case offence hence the apology not an edit of the original.

So excuse the infammatory words in my para (which don’t help!), do you not see the underlying point?

Well I was under the impression that if Scotland had been independent then it would be a purely Scottish affair when 2 rather large Edinburgh based companies went tits up, and needed bailing out? Can you explain to me why this wouldn’t have been the case?

last time I challenged you

As you said:

Ah more playground stuff from grown men EXCELLENT

Stupid is one thing I’m not. From your ability to type, and the speed at which you hurl insults at others, I’ll respectfully suggest that this doesn’t apply to you…

Binners – the RBS/HBOS issue’s been explained at more than one point on the previous thread.

I’ve just realised that this discussion reminds me of the time I told my mum I was moving out into my own flat – she came up with all sorts of reasons why it wasn’t a good idea, but at the end of the day what she was really saying was that she didn’t want the last of her family to move away. Perhaps we need to be a bit more sympathetic to the emotional needs of our English neighbours as they face the prospect of “empty nest syndrome”. We promise to write, phone and visit, and we’ll let you attend to our dirty washing so you still have a sense of purpose. 😆

Cheers DJ. I’ll have a look.

Anyway… If you go, you’ll leave us with a permanent Tory government. And of course, for that, we’ll never ever forgive you. Never left your mum with that I hope! 😉

Perhaps we need to be a bit more sympathetic to the emotional needs of our English neighbours as they face the prospect of “empty nest syndrome”.

You might be suprised to see how little your parents really want you 🙂

http://www.pressassociation.com/component/pafeeds/2012/01/10/54_of_scots_want_to_stay_in_uk

binners – Member

Well I was under the impression that if Scotland had been independent then it would be a purely Scottish affair when 2 rather large Edinburgh based companies went tits up, and needed bailing out? Can you explain to me why this wouldn’t have been the case?
Posted 11 minutes ago # Report-Post

Scotland wasn’t independent then so don’t see the point in your question?
Or what would the BEF have done on the retreat to Dunkirk without the 51st Highland?
As equally a fatuous question.
There are so many unknown variables that would have effected the outcome it would have depended if Scotland had been part of the EURO ,who was owed what by whom, what assets were held where and by whom,,could have let the companies fail and refund only Scottish investors or savers …it goes on

Perhaps we need to be a bit more sympathetic to the emotional needs of our English neighbours as they face the prospect of “empty nest syndrome”. We promise to write, phone and visit, and we’ll let you attend to our dirty washing so you still have a sense of purpose

Bless…….

…..what our Scottish neighbours seemingly fail to grasp (and it usually gets mentioned on every Freedom for Scotland thread) is that above and beyond a bit of humour and micky taking “We” really don’t give a flyer what you do or how/when/why you do it – just do it 😆

Hels-

Would anybody like to be sustainability manager?

Oh yes please – I like to get out 😉 can we meet weekly at the T Arms? Will my head hurt?

Will the Isle of Whithorn be able to claim independance from Dumfries & Galloway.

Teamhurtmore

SNP position ( as I understand it – correct me if I am wrong Druidh)

1) indicative / consultative referendum – if yes vote then
2) negotiation on the various issues raised such as bank, currency, defence and so on
3) once all the detail is known and the implications clear then another vote that would be binding on that detailed deal. This to take place over a significant period of time to allow proper informed debate

Camerons position

One vote that is binding to be taken soon. No detail will be available, implications will not be clear.

Which is a better way of making such an important decision? Is it better to make a decision when all the details are known and having had time to debate it or to make a decision when the implications are not clear?

So forgetting all that waffle, some Scots want independence cos they believe they will be individually wealthier, basically. That’s what it comes down to, is not it really, let’s face it.

For many people and I suspect he majority of nationalists its nothing to do with economics – its about the right to self determination. There are those who will be swayed by economic argument but the vast majority I believe are ideology driven and would want independence even if it meant impoverishment

Which is a better way of making such an important decision? Is it better to make a decision when all the details are known and having had time to debate it or to make a decision when the implications are not clear?

Jezza, jezza, Jezza…. you really are hopelessly naive

*adopts the mindset of a politician*

I don’t give a flying **** how you do it, what the question is or when you do it – just as long as I win it

Applicable to both sides

Jacobite succession, welcome the potential new King of Scotland

Franz Duke of Bavaria (on the left :D)

Jacobite succession? Can’t you just take our Greek bloke instead? His title says he should be up there. If you can’t afford him, you can have him as part of a loan deal. A sort of Racist Carlos Tevez

There’s been a Tory government in England Wales and the NI for the last 32 years.

No there hasn’t.

His lass has a bit of a gut on her – is she from Newcastle by any chance?

TJ/thm

As far as I understand it, the SNP position is that there should only be one referendum/one question. The “indicative” referendum is no more than a way of getting round some of the restrictions of the current Scotland Act.

As regards timing, the SNP are damned either way. Up until a few months ago, they were accused of having little in the way of answers to some of the more fundamental issues. When they subsequently appointed a civil servant to start working on these answers, they were accused of jumping the gun to independence.

Of course both sides want to hold the referendum when they think it will best suit their desired outcome. However, I believe that we (the voting public) still don’t have enough information on which to base a sensible decision. With a fair wind, and the co-operation of the civil service in London, the earliest I could see this all being available would be some time in 2013. Either way, it’s before 2015, which is when the next UK elections should be held.

Traditional hair colour mind, she’ll do as “First Lassie”

I liked that poll,they interviewed 2300 people on devolution, but less than 500 of them were from Scotland.

Bless…….

…..what our Scottish neighbours seemingly fail to grasp (and it usually gets mentioned on every Freedom for Scotland thread) is that above and beyond a bit of humour and micky taking “We” really don’t give a flyer what you do or how/when/why you do it – just do it

El Presidente-for-life Cameron would appear to feel differently…

Haven’t you Scots got bored watching Braveheart yet?

I liked that poll,they interviewed 2300 people on devolution, but less than 500 of them were from Scotland.

So about 300 more than if it had been a proportional cross-section of the UK population 🙂

In mitigation the poll wasn’t specifically on devolution (I was bored and looked it up on the ipsos-mori website yesterday), but a generic how UK state of the kingdom survey. Only Q10 was on independence.

TJ ( I am being serious today)

I (think) I understand the technical position. But my question remains a much simpler and broader one. The issue of independence is not new. Certainly not to the SNP. It is also as D_J points out an issue of fundamental right/choice for self determination. For that reason, it is above the petty techical issues over the legality of the various voting possibities.

The fundamental question – independence or not – is relatively straightforward. Delaying merely give the politicians time to muddy the waters with their self interests. I agree with D-J and you on this ie, it’s not simply an economic argument. That is why, and for that reason alone, I believe that the SNP are being spineless although I can understand their position based on my (apparently erroneous) belief that they were caught temporarily off guard.

Today we now have a debate over the extent to which a Scottish vote would be binding or not. The legal case versus a more moral/emotive case. Excuse me for being a cynic but this is simply a smokescreen poss for MM’s benefit more than anyone else (poor guy he had his trousers and pants down and must be steaming).

Having said that, I agree that the SNP are caught in a damned if you do/damned if you don’t position as Druidh describes. Hence I come back to my riginal point that in this case AS was caught napping.

FWIW I hope that the union remains as I think all parts will be stronger as a result. And of course the practicalities of independence would be extremely costly and of dubious benefit. But I respect your desire for a choice and so prickle when that opportunity is shirked for tactical reasons.

You might be suprised to see how little your parents really want you

well, they buggered off to Oman for the next 10 years, so I guess that tells me what I need to know 😆

Funny how two of the busiest threads on Singletrack since Cam the Bam’s intervention have been on a subject that people claim not to care about – you say you won’t care when we leave, but your posts tell a different tale 🙄

El Presidente-for-life Cameron would appear to feel differently…

Yes you’ll probably right. Maybe not so for Osborne though.

Cameron’s attachment to the Union shows his romantic side. Osborne, on the other hand, is no romantic. Could he have spotted the electoral benefits for the Tories if Scotland leaves the UK? The Tories would be in power for a generation if Labour lost its substantial chunk of Scottish seats at Westminster.

Osborne probably believes he has embarked on a win win strategy. He either wins by being remembered as the man who kept the UK together. Or he wins by being remembered as the man who kept the Tories in power for a generation.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/wintour-and-watt/2012/jan/10/georgeosborne-alexsalmond

ditch_jockey – Member
you say you won’t care when we leave, but your posts tell a different tale

We don’t care, but the banter is amusing – keep it up chaps 😆

IanMunro – Member
The Tories would be in power for a generation if Labour lost its substantial chunk of Scottish seats at Westminster.

I’ve seen this mentioned a few times, but has there ever been a UK Parliament where Labour were in power only because of the Scottish vote?

I respect your desire for a choice and so prickle when that opportunity is shirked for tactical reasons

of course we’re all on shaky ground on this particular aspect of the debate, as we’re all second guessing Alex Salmond’s motives and responses. On that basis, I’m comfortable with the notion that Alex Salmond wants to win the independence referendum and, on that basis, wants to give the maximum time for the issues to be discussed and for people to make a decision based on information, not ignorance and fear. Neither David Cameron, George Osborne nor Michael ‘toom tabard’ Moore have come up with any compelling facts and figures to support their opposition to independence, just vague prophecies of doom.

For my own part, my support for independence is philosophical (or ideological if you prefer) rather than being based on the economic exigencies of this, or any other, point in history. More broadly, I happen to think that it might also provide the opportunity for a healthy English patriotism to flourish, rather than the version represented by groups like the EDL and UKIP. England has a lot in her heritage to be proud of, that could serve as an inspiration for the future; it’s a shame that it risks being co-opted by destructive morons who belittle their country.

If Scotland does become independant, will that mean the end of the Union Jack?

don simon – Member
If Scotland does become independant, will that mean the end of the Union Jack?

You’d have to ask the navy.

For many people and I suspect he majority of nationalists its nothing to do with economics – its about the right to self determination. There are those who will be swayed by economic argument but the vast majority I believe are ideology driven and would want independence even if it meant impoverishment

Don’t be daft.

You’d have to ask the navy.

Why?

The Flag Institute, the vexillological organisation for the United Kingdom, stated that the term Union Flag is a “relatively recent idea”. Jack was a word previously used to denote any flag

PMSL

I think i might demand the removal of the blue.

The real issue is will we start charging non Scot Nationals for using our lovely MTB trails.

What about £10 a go, and we use the money to build a scot only trail centre.

elphin,

you underestimate the memories of battles won and lost.

I’ve not read all this thread, or the other recent one, but has anyone mentioned the £182bn of Royal Bank of Scotland toxic debt held by the Treasury?

“The Scottish Neverendum” – looks like DC is on a bit of a roll here.

you underestimate the memories of battles won and lost.

Particularly if you only ever won the one. Think England and 1966 Fred 😀

but has anyone mentioned the £182bn of Royal Bank of Scotland toxic debt held by the Treasury?

I did, but I got shouted at 🙁

CaptJon – Member
I’ve not read all this thread, or the other recent one, but has anyone mentioned the £182bn of Royal Bank of Scotland toxic debt held by the Treasury?

Posted 6 minutes ago # Report-Post

Yes; along with the amount held by the rest of the English banks that needed bailing out. Only a page back,don’t be lazy.

“The Scottish Neverendum” – looks like DC is on a bit of a roll here.

Hardly original though