Friday Thread: If Scotland vote YES will TWH have to leave?

rick_chasey

PBlakeney wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Not all of them are! How d'ya get in?

Enough of them have been in power for 4 years.
Long enough to act.
I always judge people not by what they say, but what they do.

You say politicians shouldn't promise.

So how does a politician get into power?

Simple question.

It's a gripe of mine. That everyone complains that politicians promise stuff to get into power that they can't always enact or choose later (in light of new evidence) not to. No-one has a crystal ball and stuff changes, so of course some promises won't be met.

That's the whole premise of being elected. You can't campaign without promising. It's just facile politician bashing.

YIMan

TailWindHome wrote:

YIMan wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

YIMan wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

See MkII - the community association where the assets are owned by the community. They cannot be readily split up and apportioned to individuals who off their own back decide they don't want to be part of it any more.

By "The English" , I presume you mean the UK which will still have English, Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish residing in it. Yes, the UK will want to trade with Scotland (which will also still have English, Scots, Welsh and Northern Irish residing in it).

The UK also wants to trade with France and Germany but that doesn't mean it will start handing over its assets to them.

Is that the plan "The UK will want to trade with Scotland so they'll be kind to us during negotiations"?


MkII is fundamentally flawed for the same reason highlighted

Yup. Same as if I said 'The French' in this context I'd mean all creeds, colours and nationalities in that country.
Yeah Northern Ireland will trade with Scotland - about 700mil a year - England is the dominant partner.

Not France or Germany as they are strong econcomies which don't need support. This isn't a new concept - GB loaned Ireland 10 Billion recently, not because they like Terry Wogan but because Ireland is a key customer for British goods. Customers going bust is bad for UK Plc.

Being kind is nothing to do with anything.

Then you have fundamentally misunderstood MKII if you think being owned by the community means you can start stripping the community's assets if you decide to leave it..

If the community association's liabilities exceeded their assets would you not expect the splinter group to pay a contribution? Why would assets be treated differently than liabilities?

Oh and Big Dave says it's his big screen TV - he's coming round for it tonight. What you gonna do?

The splinter group is getting a share of both assets (the ones near it in the geographic north of the village) and liabilities.

What the splinter is saying is "Ah well, the apple orchard is in our part of the village and we think we'll be better off keeping all the apples ourselves".

The splinter group believes it can have the best of both worlds and share the village assets when it suits them but keep assets to themselves when it suits them too. Understandably the rest of the people in the village are becoming somewhat peed off with this "I'm alright jock when it suits me" attitude.

It seems that you have accepted the basic principle that the assets and liabilities should be split. Your issue seems to be a distaste for the opening negotiating of the splinter group.

As for the orchard, it would be fair to say that you've had the benefit of the delicious apples for many years, some say you've had the best fruit off the tree. You've built a fine cider plant and a factory making a fine selection of pies crumbles and other yummy treats. The splinter group are more than happy to let you keep the factories and bakeries and provide you will a supply of apples for many years to come.

Apples are £2 per kg.

My issue is the splinter group wanting to both keep their apples to themselves and also wanting all the best bits of what being part of the wider community brings. A very selfish approach if you ask me.

The whole community has had the benefit of the apples. The position of the orchard in the village is a geographical accident and is not attributable to any virtue, quality, ethnicity or right of the people that just happen to live in the north of the village.

As it happens, the people in the north-east and north-west of the village aren't that happy with the status quo either, and feel rather insulted/let down that the people in the north are striking out on their own instead of joining like-minded forces. They used to be such good friends.

pblakeney

Rick Chasey wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

Not all of them are! How d'ya get in?

Enough of them have been in power for 4 years.
Long enough to act.
I always judge people not by what they say, but what they do.

You say politicians shouldn't promise.

So how does a politician get into power?

Simple question.

It's a gripe of mine. That everyone complains that politicians promise stuff to get into power that they can't always enact or choose later (in light of new evidence) not to. No-one has a crystal ball and stuff changes, so of course some promises won't be met.

That's the whole premise of being elected. You can't campaign without promising. It's just facile politician bashing.

I base their credibility on past performance.
No current politicians have any credibility based on their performance in my opinion therefore I do not trust any of their future promises.
It does indeed make voting very difficult. 2015 should be interesting but I do not hold much hope for improvement.

pblakeney

YIMan wrote:

The whole community has had the benefit of the apples. The position of the orchard in the village is a geographical accident and is not attributable to any virtue, quality, ethnicity or right of the people that just happen to live in the north of the village.

By apples, I assume you mean oil?
This has already been internationally agreed as to how it would be divided. It is along the median line.
Scotland gets north of the median line. The UK gets south of the median line.
Any further analogies or debates are redundant.

YIMan

PBlakeney wrote:

YIMan wrote:

The whole community has had the benefit of the apples. The position of the orchard in the village is a geographical accident and is not attributable to any virtue, quality, ethnicity or right of the people that just happen to live in the north of the village.

By apples, I assume you mean oil?
This has already been internationally agreed as to how it would be divided. It is along the median line.
Scotland gets north of the median line. The UK gets south of the median line.
Any further analogies or debates are redundant.

But YES Scotland wants loads of other stuff "constitutionally south of the median line", which is where the debate is. I.e. "We don't want to be in the UK, but we want all the best bits of the UK without getting the bad bits, without actually being in the UK any more".

pblakeney

YIMan wrote:

But YES Scotland wants loads of other stuff "constitutionally south of the median line", which is where the debate is. I.e. "We don't want to be in the UK, but we want all the best bits of the UK without getting the bad bits, without actually being in the UK any more".

If you want to debate then it would be worthwhile giving the specifics.
Quite frankly I think it is a waste of time (quite an interesting diversion, but a waste none the less) as they will vote no anyway.

rolf_f

Rick Chasey wrote:

No-one has a crystal ball and stuff changes, so of course some promises won't be met.That's the whole premise of being elected. You can't campaign without promising. It's just facile politician bashing.

That assumes that the politicians necessarily ever had the slightest intention of delivering on their promises. A promise is a promise. If you can't promise something, maybe you should "endeavour to do something - taking circumstances into account and covering the whatifs blah blah etc". Of course, unless everyone does it, the politicians sticking to the dishonest promises would gain unfair advantage as Mr Salmond well knows. And if everyone did do it, then the idiots wouldn't have a clue what anyone was on about so how would they decide?

Don't you think it is a little facile to believe that the reason politicians don't deliver on promises is because of things changing?

tailwindhome

YIMan wrote:

My issue is the splinter group wanting to both keep their apples to themselves and also wanting all the best bits of what being part of the wider community brings. A very selfish approach if you ask me.

Again, it's their opening negotiating position you have an issue with.
Which is fair enough.

anonymousblackfg

PBlakeney wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

Here's a question.

Should agreement not be reached over the orchard. What happens next? War? Is there a Court of Arbitration for new countries?

Why should war be the first response?
That is a worrying outlook.

In our scenario has the splinter group taken only a pea shooter it found in the corner of the church hall? The rest of the village have taken the contents of the shed which contains the axe, a claw hammer and a chainsaw, (but one chainsaw was left in the corner of the splinter groups turf with them shouting that they don't want it).

Maybe the village can just walk in and take the apples?

tailwindhome

anonymousblackfg wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

Here's a question.

Should agreement not be reached over the orchard. What happens next? War? Is there a Court of Arbitration for new countries?

Why should war be the first response?
That is a worrying outlook.

In our scenario has the splinter group taken only a pea shooter it found in the corner of the church hall? The rest of the village have taken the contents of the shed which contains the axe, a claw hammer and a chainsaw, (but one chainsaw was left in the corner of the splinter groups turf with them shouting that they don't want it).

Maybe the village can just walk in and take the apples?

Maybe that's how this all started

bompington

TailWindHome wrote:

anonymousblackfg wrote:

PBlakeney wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

Here's a question.

Should agreement not be reached over the orchard. What happens next? War? Is there a Court of Arbitration for new countries?

Why should war be the first response?
That is a worrying outlook.

In our scenario has the splinter group taken only a pea shooter it found in the corner of the church hall? The rest of the village have taken the contents of the shed which contains the axe, a claw hammer and a chainsaw, (but one chainsaw was left in the corner of the splinter groups turf with them shouting that they don't want it).

Maybe the village can just walk in and take the apples?

Maybe that's how this all started

Errr, no. It all started with England coming in to bail out a bankrupt country and its failed banks...

ShandyH

Do we get approximately 90% of the costs of drilling back (pro-rated by approximate population)?

pblakeney

anonymousblackfg wrote:

In our scenario has the splinter group taken only a pea shooter it found in the corner of the church hall? The rest of the village have taken the contents of the shed which contains the axe, a claw hammer and a chainsaw, (but one chainsaw was left in the corner of the splinter groups turf with them shouting that they don't want it).

Maybe the village can just walk in and take the apples?

Tying in nicely with YIMan.
Why the rush to fight?
I thought the days of colonisation were long gone. The atlas is no longer pink.

meanredspider

I've been up half the night listening to results coming in. Seems reasonably clear at this point with Edinburgh and Glasgow still to declare. SNP are already talking about the negotiation position after a No result. Exciting stuff :shock:

pblakeney

It is all over now.

Let the new British politics begin!
I hope that this has affected the way that Westminster sees the Country outside of it's little bubble.

meanredspider

Typical that the Highlands vote is delayed by a big accident in the A9. Hopefully the vote will stop the Scottish government only thinking about the central belt bubble!!! The majority in Glasgow was small when contrasted with Edinburgh and Aberdeen too - yet a lot of fuss is being made of it. Hopefully a good day for British politics

UndercoverElephant

Shame that. I voted for a brighter tomorrow, but the weather's still as bad as it was yesterday.

Let's see what these 'new powers' are. I'm hoping for invisibility.

meanredspider

UndercoverElephant wrote:

Shame that. I voted for a brighter tomorrow

For some reason I have an image of a turkey and Xmas in my head

YIMan

meanredspider wrote:

Typical that the Highlands vote is delayed by a big accident in the A9. Hopefully the vote will stop the Scottish government only thinking about the central belt bubble!!! The majority in Glasgow was small when contrasted with Edinburgh and Aberdeen too - yet a lot of fuss is being made of it. Hopefully a good day for British politics

Maybe the non-central belt bubble should strike for independence to escape the evil government in the south-east!

tailwindhome

Scotland. I'm embarrassed for you.

tailwindhome

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/ ... 4091990824

veronese68

TailWindHome wrote:

Scotland. I'm embarrassed for you.

I guess this means you're allowed to stay then. ;-)

tailwindhome

Veronese68 wrote:

TailWindHome wrote:

Scotland. I'm embarrassed for you.

I guess this means you're allowed to stay then. ;-)

The people have indeed spoken.

surrey_commuter

now the fun will really start!!! fwiw my thought is that Salmond will see this as Day 1 of the next campaign... he can negotiate hard as if no agreement is reached he can blame Westminster and rush to another Poll. Cameron will not be able to deliver on his vague promises without buying off his own backbenchers and if he slips in the polls they will want rid of him.

DonDaddyD

TWH, I am really happy that your Country saw sense and you are able to say and commute by bike in the UK.

I'm chuffed for you mate!

rjsterry

Just to remind you, DDD

TailWindHome wrote:

The purple bit is were I am.

DDD you're in the red bit.

It's the pale blue bit which seeks independence.

Hope that clarifies.

pblakeney

No wonder DDD gets confused.
That map would have made much more sense had -
England been white.
Wales been red.
Ireland been green.

Flags colours before anyone gets even more confused and outraged.

tailwindhome

PBlakeney wrote:

No wonder DDD gets confused.
That map would have made much more sense had -
England been white.
Wales been red.
Ireland been green.

Flags colours before anyone gets even more confused and outraged.

What colour would Northern Ireland be?


Edit to add

pblakeney

TailWindHome wrote:

What colour would Northern Ireland be?


Edit to add

Red and white. With a bit of green to keep some happy. I will also give you a