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

Sewinman

Genuine question to Scots.....will you miss us?

meanredspider

Broono83 wrote:

It's my opinion thatt Scotland could do a much better job running our own affairs.

Just spent a day in Edinburgh with one of its residents. If you consider the infrastructure of Edinburgh to illustrate what Scotland is capable of doing, it doesn't bode well. The whole farce of the tram system - in particular what it's done to cyclists (my mate is still recovering from his injuries from his off on the rails). Then there's the state of the roads. Shocking! Though, as my mate pointed out, it's a result of the utility companies digging them up and not reinstating them properly rather than weather damage. But shows lack control and management.

As I've said before - I understand the emotional need - practically, though, it would be a pretty stupid thing to do. And, remember, I live in Scotland: if I thought it would be better, I'd vote for it.

First.Aspect

The tram project is even worse when you consider that it replaces a 20 bus journey with a 15 minute tram journey and a five minute walk, yet they cancelled a light rail link to Glasgow airport, which is an absolute arse to get to. How about commissioning a replacement Forth Crossing just before learning that the old one is fine. Or building the most expensive road in the world. Or Borders rail. Good idea but they dithered for the best part of a decade, cocked up the tendering and managed to double the cost. How about the Scottish parliament building. Aside from being hideously out of place, they managed to let cost go 6 times over budget.

As I said earlier in the thread, the calibre of politicians up here is not good. I for one simply do not trust them with a whole country and, in effect, my financial security.

That's not dogma, which is insulting by the way, that is reasoned observation over the course of a decade.

Dogma is more about repeated assertions without anything to support them.

We would be better off. Why? We would be better able to run our own affairs? Why? Westminster politicians don't care about anything outside of London? Why? 75% of the uk economy is outside London, as is 80% of the population and 90% of parliamentary constituencies. Historically Scotland and scots have been over represented. The assertion is nonsense. Dogma, you might say.

Broono83

Absolutely. The whole tram situation in Edinburgh is a farce. Ran by the labour council there and opposed by the SNP at every turn. A monumental waste of money. Not really relevant though as it's a local council issue. Hopefully the people of Edinburgh will make their feelings clear at the local elections if they are unhappy.

Broono83

First Aspect wrote:

The tram project is even worse when you consider that it replaces a 20 bus journey with a 15 minute tram journey and a five minute walk, yet they cancelled a light rail link to Glasgow airport, which is an absolute ars* to get to. How about commissioning a replacement Forth Crossing just before learning that the old one is fine. Or building the most expensive road in the world. Or Borders rail. Good idea but they dithered for the best part of a decade, cocked up the tendering and managed to double the cost. How about the Scottish parliament building. Aside from being hideously out of place, they managed to let cost go 6 times over budget.

As I said earlier in the thread, the calibre of politicians up here is not good. I for one simply do not trust them with a whole country and, in effect, my financial security.

That's not dogma, which is insulting by the way, that is reasoned observation over the course of a decade.

Dogma is more about repeated assertions without anything to support them.

We would be better off. Why? We would be better able to run our own affairs? Why? Westminster politicians don't care about anything outside of London? Why? 75% of the uk economy is outside London, as is 80% of the population and 90% of parliamentary constituencies. Historically Scotland and scots have been over represented. The assertion is nonsense. Dogma, you might say.

Yes the previous labour government and current SNP one has made mistakes. You could equally pull out ridiculous overspends from Westminster ; millennium dome, wembley, the Olympics, soon to be the high speed rail and illegal wars all over the globe. Not to mention the entire MoD tendering process which seems nothing short of a cabal of embezzlement.

I'm not here to convince you or anyone else to vote yes. I will be because I believe we will be better served by politicians that the people of Scotland have voted for rather than ones we haven't.

If you want answers to your questions I suggest you do some research from independent sources and make up your own mind. If you feel you've already done that then fine, vote away.

UndercoverElephant

Well, I guess I'm still undecided.

As an Englishman, living in Scotland, I do get a vote, but I'm not sure of which way I'll vote. I agree that some of the large projects round here have been farcical with respect to overspends and delays, but I'm less sure about whether things wouldn't be tightened up if it was all Scottish control. It's not as though the current system attracts the best people to politics up here, so it's not just the people who are disenfranchised. There's no real choice as to who to represent, any more than there is to be represented by.

Given a clean slate, Scotland *could* become a vastly different, and probably better place. Having visited Iceland last year, and having seen first-hand how well a relatively small country can do with a more Scandinavian outlook (one of the proposed models for an independent Scotland), it was quite an eye-opener. The politicians seemed to be kept on a very short-leash and were very-much answerable to the people, and the people themselves seemed to feel much closer to politics than we do.

meanredspider

Broono83 wrote:

Absolutely. The whole tram situation in Edinburgh is a farce. Ran by the labour council there and opposed by the SNP at every turn. A monumental waste of money. Not really relevant though as it's a local council issue. Hopefully the people of Edinburgh will make their feelings clear at the local elections if they are unhappy.

Why on earth isn't this relevant? This is the capital of Scotland run entirely by Scottish politicians voted for entirely by Scottish voters - what could possibly be more relevant? Just because it is Labour and not SNP hardly matters does it - or is another pipe-dream premise of independence that Scotland will forever be ruled by the SNP - a party, btw, whose USP is independence which, if it's achieved, will vanish in a puff of smoke (a party, too, that is simply Alex Salmond - a bit like UKIP is Nigel Farage)?

As an aside, are there any big businesses that have come out in favour of independence? I haven't yet come across a single businessman who thinks it's a good idea. I was listening to two people on the radio this morning (both of which declared themselves entirely neutral) who were explaining the ramifications of independence in terms of business and banking - didn't sound good.

rolf_f

UndercoverElephant wrote:

Having visited Iceland last year, and having seen first-hand how well a relatively small country can do with a more Scandinavian outlook (one of the proposed models for an independent Scotland), it was quite an eye-opener. The politicians seemed to be kept on a very short-leash and were very-much answerable to the people, and the people themselves seemed to feel much closer to politics than we do.

Is that the Iceland of the recent economic catastrophe? The scales don't match anyway. Scotland might be relatively small (at 5 million population) but Iceland is only 320,000; barely more than half the population of Glasgow.

Of course, that might not happen in Scotland. But then neither would Scotland take a more Scandinavian outlook. Scotland isn't Scandinavia and the people aren't Scandinavian and I can't see it paying for the same sort of welfare state you get over there.

Broono83

meanredspider wrote:

Broono83 wrote:

Absolutely. The whole tram situation in Edinburgh is a farce. Ran by the labour council there and opposed by the SNP at every turn. A monumental waste of money. Not really relevant though as it's a local council issue. Hopefully the people of Edinburgh will make their feelings clear at the local elections if they are unhappy.

Why on earth isn't this relevant? This is the capital of Scotland run entirely by Scottish politicians voted for entirely by Scottish voters - what could possibly be more relevant? Just because it is Labour and not SNP hardly matters does it - or is another pipe-dream premise of independence that Scotland will forever be ruled by the SNP - a party, btw, whose USP is independence which, if it's achieved, will vanish in a puff of smoke (a party, too, that is simply Alex Salmond - a bit like UKIP is Nigel Farage)?

As an aside, are there any big businesses that have come out in favour of independence? I haven't yet come across a single businessman who thinks it's a good idea. I was listening to two people on the radio this morning (both of which declared themselves entirely neutral) who were explaining the ramifications of independence in terms of business and banking - didn't sound good.

Because whether Scotland is independent or isn't it won't stop a local council or even the elected government making a cock up of some civil project or other. And as I pointed out with the UK government examples it seems par for the course. In fact it would be much easier to make your point for the UK government being unfit for purpose for their overspending - bringing the Olympics in "on time and on budget"- a 6.5 billion pound overspend sold as a 300 odd million saving!

I've already said that I think the SNP would disband in the event of independence which I think would be good for Scottish politics. You may dislike Salmond as a man but he's probably the most able politician in Britain.Sturgeon is reasonably capable in her own right and Scotland probably suffers from the opposition here being led by ineptitude in Lamont. A split for the SNP would hopefully provide some decent options for voters who can only see labour and lib dems morphing into Tories.

I realize you probably think I'm a die hard SNP supporter and I'm genuinely not but I do support Yes for Scotland and the SNP party most closely represents my views at the moment.

meanredspider

I'm confused by your position B83. There's this view that Scotland would be better governed by Scots with no evidence to support the view. In fact, the UK was disproportionately represented by Scots in the previous Labour governments and they made a right mess. I've respect for Salmond's skills but Sturgeon is terrible - and that's it - after 8 years living in Scotland, I can't name a 3rd government official.

Any business names supporting independence?

Broono83

I didn't say that. I said Scotland should be governed by the politicians who the people of Scotland voted for. Those politicians could be from Timbuktu it doesn't matter about their nationality.

In terms of big business, many seem to be staying neutral. Disconcerting stories about businesses being pressurized by Better Together came out last week but Rbs the other day saying they would carry on as normal, the shock of an international bank working internationally was considerable.

Here's a balanced link I just googled

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/201 ... dependence

meanredspider

Broono83 wrote:

Rbs the other day saying they would carry on as normal, the shock of an international bank working internationally was considerable.

The people on R4 agreed today that RBS would be headquartered out of London. I've no idea where their headquarters are currently (just closed my account with them because they were hopeless - worse even than Lloyds).

I'd say many might be staying neutral but many (most) would prefer it didn't happen. As I've said before, it will only make mobility of labour even harder - certainly in this part of the world, that would be a Bad Thing.

pblakeney

I was reminded of something whilst reading all these posts and I found it using Google, although it took a while to find it in a report that was not pro-SNP.
I ask myself, would I trust anyone if I was voting on the subject after reading this?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/th ... 18697.html
To my mind the calibre of the current MPs falls way below those in the past so my mind boggles.
I wouldn't trust any MP as far as I could throw Mr. Salmond so I pity those with a vote.

Broono83

meanredspider wrote:

Broono83 wrote:

Rbs the other day saying they would carry on as normal, the shock of an international bank working internationally was considerable.

The people on R4 agreed today that RBS would be headquartered out of London. I've no idea where their headquarters are currently (just closed my account with them because they were hopeless - worse even than Lloyds).

They have an enormous purpose built complex on the outskirts of Edinburgh which won't be going anywhere no matter what a talking head on R4 says.

Broono83

PBlakeney wrote:

I was reminded of something whilst reading all these posts and I found it using Google, although it took a while to find it in a report that was not pro-SNP.
I ask myself, would I trust anyone if I was voting on the subject after reading this:-
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/th ... 18697.html
To my mind the calibre of the current MPs falls way below those in the past so my mind boggles.
I wouldn't trust any MP as far as I could throw Mr. Salmond so I pity those with a vote.

Incredible to believe this sort of thing goes on in the UK. Still a lot of resentment among my parents age group about this and the 1979 referendum issues.

meanredspider

Broono83 wrote:

meanredspider wrote:

Broono83 wrote:

Rbs the other day saying they would carry on as normal, the shock of an international bank working internationally was considerable.

The people on R4 agreed today that RBS would be headquartered out of London. I've no idea where their headquarters are currently (just closed my account with them because they were hopeless - worse even than Lloyds).

They have an enormous purpose built complex on the outskirts of Edinburgh which won't be going anywhere no matter what a talking head on R4 says.

Let's wait and see, shall we

UndercoverElephant

Rolf F wrote:

Is that the Iceland of the recent economic catastrophe?

Yes, though I did walk past one of the local supermarkets too.

Their response to the financial crisis was the complete opposite to ours, they let the banks fail - and provided support to the homeowners and businesses instead. In fact, the bankers responsible for the crisis, rather than getting their gilt-edged bonuses, went to jail.

And you know what? They're doing really very well again now, in fact they're running the country at a surplus this year.

rolf_f

UndercoverElephant wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Is that the Iceland of the recent economic catastrophe?

Yes, though I did walk past one of the local supermarkets too.

Their response to the financial crisis was the complete opposite to ours, they let the banks fail - and provided support to the homeowners and businesses instead. In fact, the bankers responsible for the crisis, rather than getting their gilt-edged bonuses, went to jail.

And you know what? They're doing really very well again now, in fact they're running the country at a surplus this year.

That's still at the creditors expense and Iceland has a lot of resource in proportion to the population size. Either way, that circumstance applied to Scotland it is certainly a very good reason for England and Wales to refuse Scotland the pound.

greg66_tri_v2.0

So, according to Barroso this morning, an independent Scotland isn't going to be joining the EU anytime soon, and that means no Euro.

And no using the GBP, unless it's on the Panama/we're too crap to have our own currency model.

Which leaves the plan that (AFAIK) has never been part of the SNP's independence plans: its won currency and its own central bank.

Were I a Scot, I would be very worried that the SNP's plans are completely ill-thought out on basic and fundamental issues, yet they want to run a country, and their response to anyone who isn't rolling out a red carpet covered in rose petals is "you're a big bully".

As an Englishman, my biggest worry is how long it will take after a "no" vote for the divisions Salmond has opened up to heal. Without wishing to sound melodramatic, I could see a paramilitary wing of the SNP starting up within a generation, using bombs and guns to convey its message.

greg66_tri_v2.0

UndercoverElephant wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Is that the Iceland of the recent economic catastrophe?

Yes, though I did walk past one of the local supermarkets too.

Their response to the financial crisis was the complete opposite to ours, they let the banks fail - and provided support to the homeowners and businesses instead. In fact, the bankers responsible for the crisis, rather than getting their gilt-edged bonuses, went to jail.

And you know what? They're doing really very well again now, in fact they're running the country at a surplus this year.

I haven't the willpower to look this up, but I thought Iceland dealt with part of its problem by simply defaulting on foreign debt - savings of foreigners held by Icelandic banks which went bust - leaving foreign Govts (us, the Netherlands) to bail out those savers and then or pursue the Icelandic govt for reimbursement. How has Iceland dealt with those claims, and does the surplus take that liability into account?

itboffin

Trust me not everyone was bailed out, my father-in-law wont stop moaning about the money he lost or says he's lost.

yawn! greed karma or something :roll:

aberdeen_lune

Greg66 Tri v2.0 wrote:

So, according to Barroso this morning, an independent Scotland isn't going to be joining the EU anytime soon, and that means no Euro.

And no using the GBP, unless it's on the Panama/we're too crap to have our own currency model.

Which leaves the plan that (AFAIK) has never been part of the SNP's independence plans: its won currency and its own central bank.

Were I a Scot, I would be very worried that the SNP's plans are completely ill-thought out on basic and fundamental issues, yet they want to run a country, and their response to anyone who isn't rolling out a red carpet covered in rose petals is "you're a big bully".

As an Englishman, my biggest worry is how long it will take after a "no" vote for the divisions Salmond has opened up to heal. Without wishing to sound melodramatic, I could see a paramilitary wing of the SNP starting up within a generation, using bombs and guns to convey its message.

We may be crap as you have suggested but why do you want us to stay in the UK then?

There's no chance of a paramilitary backlash if there's a no vote. If it's a no then that's what the majority want. We will get over the disappointment and plod on.

Broono83

Greg66 Tri v2.0 wrote:

So, according to Barroso this morning, an independent Scotland isn't going to be joining the EU anytime soon, and that means no Euro.

And no using the GBP, unless it's on the Panama/we're too crap to have our own currency model.

As an Englishman, my biggest worry is how long it will take after a "no" vote for the divisions Salmond has opened up to heal. Without wishing to sound melodramatic, I could see a paramilitary wing of the SNP starting up within a generation, using bombs and guns to convey its message.

Glad to see you swallowed today's scare story without even blinking. The claim has already been rubbished by a former EC judge. Even Spain, who are furiously trying to hold on to the Catalans who are desperate for independence, indicate they would have no opposition.

If you think Scotland wouldn't be accepted in then what of the rest of the UK!? Out on its bum too? Maybe that's Cameron's plan actually ...

And while you're slandering away, I'm sure you're aware that Panamas economy is the one of, if not the fastest growing in south America.

Finally, if there was ever going to be a paramilitary wing of the SNP I'm sure it would have happened already especially considering the Independent link posted above.

BelgianBeerGeek

It's already been said. Salmond is a very canny bloke, and I think he knows what he's doing. Most politicians would think it career suicide to hold a referendum they couldn't win (Cameron on Euro/EU). I think Salmond will lose the vote, but use it as his "Devo-max" springboard. A big gamble, but it could work for him.

BTW fairly sure most of us southerners really could not give a toss which way you go.

greg66_tri_v2.0

Aberdeen_lune wrote:

Greg66 Tri v2.0 wrote:

So, according to Barroso this morning, an independent Scotland isn't going to be joining the EU anytime soon, and that means no Euro.

And no using the GBP, unless it's on the Panama/we're too crap to have our own currency model.

Which leaves the plan that (AFAIK) has never been part of the SNP's independence plans: its won currency and its own central bank.

Were I a Scot, I would be very worried that the SNP's plans are completely ill-thought out on basic and fundamental issues, yet they want to run a country, and their response to anyone who isn't rolling out a red carpet covered in rose petals is "you're a big bully".

As an Englishman, my biggest worry is how long it will take after a "no" vote for the divisions Salmond has opened up to heal. Without wishing to sound melodramatic, I could see a paramilitary wing of the SNP starting up within a generation, using bombs and guns to convey its message.

We may be crap as you have suggested but why do you want us to stay in the UK then?

There's no chance of a paramilitary backlash if there's a no vote. If it's a no then that's what the majority want. We will get over the disappointment and plod on.

Who is "we"? Are you doing the old trick of equating the SNP with the entire population of Scotland?

greg66_tri_v2.0

Broono83 wrote:

Greg66 Tri v2.0 wrote:

So, according to Barroso this morning, an independent Scotland isn't going to be joining the EU anytime soon, and that means no Euro.

And no using the GBP, unless it's on the Panama/we're too crap to have our own currency model.

As an Englishman, my biggest worry is how long it will take after a "no" vote for the divisions Salmond has opened up to heal. Without wishing to sound melodramatic, I could see a paramilitary wing of the SNP starting up within a generation, using bombs and guns to convey its message.

Glad to see you swallowed today's scare story without even blinking. The claim has already been rubbished by a former EC judge. Even Spain, who are furiously trying to hold on to the Catalans who are desperate for independence, indicate they would have no opposition.

If you think Scotland wouldn't be accepted in then what of the rest of the UK!? Out on its bum too? Maybe that's Cameron's plan actually ...

And while you're slandering away, I'm sure you're aware that Panamas economy is the one of, if not the fastest growing in south America.

Finally, if there was ever going to be a paramilitary wing of the SNP I'm sure it would have happened already especially considering the Independent link posted above.

Would that Judge be Sir David Edward? The minority voice amongst lawyers asked to give their views?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-s ... s-25856657

I can't be bothered with the rest of your post. It just gets worse from a bad start.

Broono83

Greg66 Tri v2.0 wrote:

Broono83 wrote:

Greg66 Tri v2.0 wrote:

So, according to Barroso this morning, an independent Scotland isn't going to be joining the EU anytime soon, and that means no Euro.

And no using the GBP, unless it's on the Panama/we're too crap to have our own currency model.

As an Englishman, my biggest worry is how long it will take after a "no" vote for the divisions Salmond has opened up to heal. Without wishing to sound melodramatic, I could see a paramilitary wing of the SNP starting up within a generation, using bombs and guns to convey its message.

Glad to see you swallowed today's scare story without even blinking. The claim has already been rubbished by a former EC judge. Even Spain, who are furiously trying to hold on to the Catalans who are desperate for independence, indicate they would have no opposition.

If you think Scotland wouldn't be accepted in then what of the rest of the UK!? Out on its bum too? Maybe that's Cameron's plan actually ...

And while you're slandering away, I'm sure you're aware that Panamas economy is the one of, if not the fastest growing in south America.

Finally, if there was ever going to be a paramilitary wing of the SNP I'm sure it would have happened already especially considering the Independent link posted above.

Would that Judge be Sir David Edward? The minority voice amongst lawyers asked to give their views?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-s ... s-25856657

I can't be bothered with the rest of your post. It just gets worse from a bad start.

None of whom have said that Scotland wouldn't get in the EU.

Your last sentence sums up your attitude. Not much point in us continuing this back and forth.

YIMan

Greg66 Tri v2.0 wrote:

As an Englishman, my biggest worry is how long it will take after a "no" vote for the divisions Salmond has opened up to heal. Without wishing to sound melodramatic, I could see a paramilitary wing of the SNP starting up within a generation, using bombs and guns to convey its message.

That should be quite interesting....disgruntled pro-independence English and Welsh people living in Scotland committing terrorism against Scottish people living in England and Wales.

rolf_f

Broono83 wrote:

And while you're slandering away, I'm sure you're aware that Panamas economy is the one of, if not the fastest growing in south America.

'Fastest growing' is a relative term - it means nothing without the absolutes. Probably it means that Panamas economy was the most screwed to start with. It's easy to be fastest growing when you are at the bottom. Lets face it, Germany is never going to have the fastest growing economy.

greg66_tri_v2.0

Rolf F wrote:

Broono83 wrote:

And while you're slandering away, I'm sure you're aware that Panamas economy is the one of, if not the fastest growing in south America.

'Fastest growing' is a relative term - it means nothing without the absolutes. Probably it means that Panamas economy was the most screwed to start with. It's easy to be fastest growing when you are at the bottom. Lets face it, Germany is never going to have the fastest growing economy.

Psst - one reason it is growing fast is a huge building project to expand the Panama Canal. A route to growth that can easily be exported to any other country, as long as it is Egypt. When I saw that line, I thought "Celtic tiger argument", because that worked out well. And quite what it has to do with not having a currency or central bank remains to be seen...