Scottish independence and devolution superthread

[reaths17]

 

 

 

I think this too. I have family and close friends in the No camp who I totally respect and they know the UK isn't working anywhere near to what they can justify as a compelling case for it. But they can't bring themselves to vote Yes. When then asked for what their proposals are to fix the bits that are broken, not much is ever proposed.

I will obviously keep promoting the case for a Yes to them......

 

what are the proposals to fix these broken bits with a yes vote? all we've been offered so far is a scot slavering the bull instead of someone from westminster. for all the bluster from yes they still offer nothing but a scot barking the orders, as in no change. there's a lot of wishful thinking that because it's a scot he will be totally different from an UK politician, this hasn't been born out by an facts, indeed the last scot to have a big seat in UK politics is generally held solely responsible for the collapse in the world economy.

 

this yes vote still has no substance, so whats the point?

[reaths17]

 

[deleted]

 

 

this has been happening a lot, trying to justify your position because the opposition don't have the answers, when the truth is you don't have a scooby either. this isn't gonna get you more votes and is just another condescending put down along with the "stupid and scared". if yes want more votes insulting people will not get it done, come out with the solutions that a "no" vote doesn't have

 

[AlphonseCapone]

 

 

this has been happening a lot, trying to justify your position because the opposition don't have the answers, when the truth is you don't have a scooby either. this isn't gonna get you more votes and is just another condescending put down along with the "stupid and scared". if yes want more votes insulting people will not get it done, come out with the solutions that a "no" vote doesn't have

 

Yes because you come across as a man open to change. You'd never vote for independence regardless of how good any proposed solutions they came out with. Which is fine by the way. Stop pretending you'd give it any thought though. It'd still be a Scottish face and accent proposing the solution and we know how much that upsets you.

 

[reaths17]

 

 

 

Yes because you come across as a man open to change. You'd never vote for independence regardless of how good any proposed solutions they came out with. Which is fine by the way. Stop pretending you'd give it any thought though. It'd still be a Scottish face and accent proposing the solution and we know how much that upsets you.

 

what upsets me is the bunch of er88ole politicians playing musical chairs when they've been given a once in a life time opportunity to make a real and lasting difference, it kinda makes me sick to be honest.

[Rand Paul's Ray Bans]

What is a "real and lasting difference" to you, reaths?

[Radio Ga Ga]

I will be voting no because I am extremely happy being part of the Union, I already have a great standard of living and benefit greatly from what being part of the United Kingdom brings.

 

Why would I vote to change that?

 

Remember if the electorate vote Yes (highly unlikely I know) then there is no going back, it's not like a General Election where you have a vote in five years to change things, we would be stuck with this if it turned out to be a disaster.

[Don Draper]

 

Remember if the electorate vote Yes (highly unlikely I know) then there is no going back, it's not like a General Election where you have a vote in five years to change things, we would be stuck with this if it turned out to be a disaster.

 

This always strikes me as an odd point to make, because 1) I'd be amazed if anyone out there views it in the same light as a General Election, and 2) as we've covered extensively on this thread, the list of countries who achieved independence and then regretted it is a very small one indeed.

[TheMaganator]

This always strikes me as an odd point to make, because 1) I'd be amazed if anyone out there views it in the same light as a General Election, and 2) as we've covered extensively on this thread, the list of countries who achieved independence and then regretted it is a very small one indeed.

Are there any countries that have voted for their indepence who are as inter-twined as we are with rUK?

 

That have had assets in just about every other country in the world that would require to be divvied - that share a military along with military equipment? That share a system of welfare etc.

 

I do not think there has been a comparable situation to ours.

 

And Reaths17 getting a hard time is harsh - there is a lot of truth in what he says. We are asked to take substantial risks and the reward is not some fantastacal new dawn. There will be very little reward that I can see. There is not one single party in Scotland offering substantial change at the moment - and I mean radical change worth votiong for - not just policy change like getting rid of the bedroom tax. It seems to me that the line we have been fed recently is that we are to vote Yes to keep a certain party out - rather than for anything significant.

 

This is an interesting read on the Yes line of 'we'll always get the government we voted for' http://chokkablog.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/we-should-decide-who-governs-us.html

[Seymour M Hersh]

This always strikes me as an odd point to make, because 1) I'd be amazed if anyone out there views it in the same light as a General Election, and 2) as we've covered extensively on this thread, the list of countries who achieved independence and then regretted it is a very small one indeed.

 

And you've polled the people of said countries to confirm this?

[Rand Paul's Ray Bans]

I will be voting no because I am extremely happy being part of the Union, I already have a great standard of living and benefit greatly from what being part of the United Kingdom brings.

 

Why would I vote to change that?

 

Remember if the electorate vote Yes (highly unlikely I know) then there is no going back, it's not like a General Election where you have a vote in five years to change things, we would be stuck with this if it turned out to be a disaster.

 

Fair enough.

 

While indeed voting Yes would be irreversible, I would disagree that we would be stuck in a "disaster" if things went a bit pear-shaped post-independence. We could vote to change things in a Scottish general election.

 

And Reaths17 getting a hard time is harsh - there is a lot of truth in what he says. We are asked to take substantial risks and the reward is not some fantastacal new dawn. There will be very little reward that I can see. There is not one single party in Scotland offering substantial change at the moment - and I mean radical change worth votiong for - not just policy change like getting rid of the bedroom tax. It seems to me that the line we have been fed recently is that we are to vote Yes to keep a certain party out - rather than for anything significant.

 

He isn't really. Folk are engaging with points he's put forward.

 

Similar to the question I asked reaths: What constitutes "substantial change" to you?

 

I do agree that there is a worrying amount of Yes campaign lines that are solely based on current policy. It certainly isn't the strategy I would have. Independence is long-term, and should be viewed in that respect; of course, that means transcending current party politics, which both sides of the debate and all supporters of political parties should take heed of.

[TheMaganator]

 

 

Fair enough.

 

While indeed voting Yes would be irreversible, I would disagree that we would be stuck in a "disaster" if things went a bit pear-shaped post-independence. We could vote to change things in a Scottish general election.

 

 

 

He isn't really. Folk are engaging with points he's put forward.

 

Similar to the question I asked reaths: What constitutes "substantial change" to you?

 

I do agree that there is a worrying amount of Yes campaign lines that are solely based on current policy. It certainly isn't the strategy I would have. Independence is long-term, and should be viewed in that respect; of course, that means transcending current party politics, which both sides of the debate and all supporters of political parties should take heed of.

I honestly don't know what would constitute substantial change for me - I guess it'd be something that a change in political party could not introduce.

 

But I don't want substantial change. I'm quite happy with the current system - sure, there are changes id make but so what.

 

One of the many issues I have is I don't know what the reward is - in a risk/reward scenario why are we taking the risk?

 

To keep the Tories out? Please.

 

Always get the government we vote for? I've never had the government I voted for. But I see 'we' as being Britain & Britain always gets the Government we vote for even if I (or Edinburgh or Glasgow or Newcastle) don't individually.

 

Decisions that affect the people of Scotland always taken by the people of Scotland? The party negotiating the terms of our independence want us in a currency union - meaning almost exactly the opposite of making our own decisions and no party in Scotland is proposing an EU referendum.

 

What is the reward?

[jack D and coke]

 

 

Always get the government we vote for? I've never had the government I voted for.

I know it's none of my business who you vote for but really??? Do you vote for the Monster Raving Loony party or something? I've had governments I've voted for and tbh I think most people I can think of have had it a few times tbh.

 

Tbh this Tory bashing was started by Labour and IMO this entire thing (the referendum) is their fault. If they hadn't completely abondoned what it is they are supposed to be then try to and fro back and forward giving out totally contrasting signals I don't believe this would be happening at all. People have seen through them IMO and just looking at Milliband you can just tell he will NEVER be PM. Somehow the SNP have edged labour out become the party of the health service and looking after the working class or at least that's what they appear to be.

[The Comedian]

Sat through those No Borders adverts at the cinema tonight. Utter dross.

 

 

Has anyone seen them?

[JamboX2]

 

 

I know it's none of my business who you vote for but really??? Do you vote for the Monster Raving Loony party or something? I've had governments I've voted for and tbh I think most people I can think of have had it a few times tbh.

 

I fear you miss a key point in that not all governments people want is on offer. I vote Labour or Green or Liberal (depending on seat and form of voting system), and yet the only politician who has said things I believed had any semblance of reality and argued for the type of liberal centre left nation I believe in was Margo MacDonald. The parties I've voted for ha been those which mirror my beliefs in areas and allow me to compromise there in. I bet Maganator is the same.

 

 

Tbh this Tory bashing was started by Labour and IMO this entire thing (the referendum) is their fault. If they hadn't completely abondoned what it is they are supposed to be then try to and fro back and forward giving out totally contrasting signals I don't believe this would be happening at all. People have seen through them IMO and just looking at Milliband you can just tell he will NEVER be PM. Somehow the SNP have edged labour out become the party of the health service and looking after the working class or at least that's what they appear to be.

 

People said the same of Heath, Attlee, Thatcher, Blair, Cameron and Salmond. What Miliband says I have a lot of sympathy with. Rent controls, higher minimum wages, more control over the economy and more planning for the long term in politics all chime with me. More substance to him on alleviating social ills than the SNP.

 

On that final point. Appearances can be deceiving look to Alex Neill's blatant failings to administer the NHS to the benefit of all but to keep a constituency promise. MacAskill is failing to maintain control on the one nation police force who are making policy themselves and we've seen ?1 billion cut from anti poverty funding. Labour's ineptitude as the primary opposition and the Greens timidity since joining Yes Scotland has been frankly shocking. Poor media coverage didn't help.

 

Sat through those No Borders adverts at the cinema tonight. Utter dross.

 

 

Has anyone seen them?

 

Was at the cinema last night. The No and Yes ads were both trite and frankly insulting in how they treated the audience. Really dreadful stuff from both groups.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

Starting to creep pretty close this.

 

Whatever happens, it's going to be fascinating. Politics is mostly dull as shit so it's genuinely a treat to be seeing this going on.

 

Just for the seismic change, I'd like to see the yes vote win, although I'd vote no if I had a vote (which I don't)

[19/5HMFC12]

YES

Edited May 20, 2014 by 19/5HMFC12

[Jambos_1874]

Although I intend to vote "No", I am astonished at how bad the Better Together campaign is. Everything from the lack of material (flyers, posters, billboards etc) compared to the Yes campaign, to the fairly unconvincing website they have, makes me think it is a rather half-arsed effort and that they've taken it for granted that they'll win the referendum. The Yes campaign on the other hand is actually very impressive and well thought out and, IMO, will have a significant impact on swaying undecided voters to their cause.

[Gizmo]

Are there any countries that have voted for their indepence who are as inter-twined as we are with rUK?

 

That have had assets in just about every other country in the world that would require to be divvied - that share a military along with military equipment? That share a system of welfare etc.

 

I do not think there has been a comparable situation to ours.

 

And Reaths17 getting a hard time is harsh - there is a lot of truth in what he says. We are asked to take substantial risks and the reward is not some fantastacal new dawn. There will be very little reward that I can see. There is not one single party in Scotland offering substantial change at the moment - and I mean radical change worth votiong for - not just policy change like getting rid of the bedroom tax. It seems to me that the line we have been fed recently is that we are to vote Yes to keep a certain party out - rather than for anything significant.

 

This is an interesting read on the Yes line of 'we'll always get the government we voted for' http://chokkablog.bl...governs-us.html

 

[modedit]

 

This "A Scottish face and accent on the same old bull" is ridiculous - what we have from Westminster is hitting the people of this country very hard indeed and the white paper at least aspires to something different than the neo-liberal corporate sponsored Westminster that does not give two thoughts to the people of this country. The banks collapse due to lax financial regulations and downright fraud, talking the economy worldwide with them - and it's the poor who have to suffer the austerity enforced because of this (and of course Westminster's shocking borrowing which has near bankrupted the UK).

 

Bedroom tax, crippling sanctions, food banks, atos sending people back to work who die due to their conditions, stealth privatisation of the NHS in England (ours is only safe for as long as it remains a reserved matter), cheap sell-offs of other national companies, waste of billions of pounds replacing Trident, councils in England being encouraged to charge private sector rents for social housing. I could go on, but people are seeing the erosion of rights and quality of life under this out of touch coalition. And I haven't even touched upon the cronyism, unelected House of Lords, bought peerages, house flipping, expenses scandals etc that show that Westminster is less about serving the people and more about serving oneself.

 

And we still have 60% of Osborne's "austerity cuts" to come. Guess who they are going to hurt? And the spectre of a hideous Tory/UKIP coalition still lingers - and one can imagine the damage they would inflict on us in the event of a NO vote (like happened in 1979) as they will, probably not far off the mark, view us as a soft touch to be trampled on.

 

Labour won't change things in the unlikely event they get in - they are responsible for atos in the first place and have done little to stop benefit sanctions, bedroom tax - and the Thatcher fan Milliband has already said they will stick to the Tories cuts if they get in.

 

I see no prospect no matter how we vote of reversing the damaging style of politics that dominates Westminster.

 

Will things be different simply because of a "Scottish face" - no. And to suggest so is utterly ridiculous - things will be different in the event of a YES win because their exists an appetite for a fairer, socially inclusive society and the Holyrood government already recognise this in some of their policy making and the white paper reflects these aspirations.

 

This is NOT about a "Scottish face" or any sense of superiority whatsoever - it is about seizing a chance for a radical change in the style of politics in this country - we already see that Holyrood is a far different, and in my opinion, far better beast than Westminster (less scandal, no unelected peers, few expenses scandals, a more representative voting system.for starters).

 

But it can be more given the chance. Much more.

 

[TheMaganator]

But you've just criticised what the Tories are doing.

 

There is plenty of scandal in Holyrood too btw.

 

The banks collapsed due to lack of financial regulation - that lack of regulation was supported & encouraged by labour, the Tories & the SNP. Why would it have been different in an independent Scotland? It wouldn't have IMO & if we vote Yes we'll need to encourage investment immediately - do you think that'll be done by imposing more regulation (stricter taxes etc) or lighter? I think we both know the answer to that.

 

The only way I see us getting this (shitey & utterly bonkers) currency union is by agreeing to keep Trident at Faslane.

 

There is no party or movement promoting the radical change you speak of. There is no desire for it. The White Paper is uncosted drivel that is trying to be all things to all men.

 

So Reaths17 is right in a lot of respects - we'll still have the same political self-serving types in charge.

 

All parties (including the SNP) were at it on expenses (including Salmond iirc) btw. Politicians will always have their noses in the trough. There will always be shady goings on (look at the recent actions of McAlpine & Neil under Holyrood's watch).

 

I get that you want change & that's fine but I'm not sure you'll get what you seek through independence.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

 

 

[modedit]

 

This "A Scottish face and accent on the same old bull" is ridiculous - what we have from Westminster is hitting the people of this country very hard indeed and the white paper at least aspires to something different than the neo-liberal corporate sponsored Westminster that does not give two thoughts to the people of this country. The banks collapse due to lax financial regulations and downright fraud, talking the economy worldwide with them - and it's the poor who have to suffer the austerity enforced because of this (and of course Westminster's shocking borrowing which has near bankrupted the UK).

 

Bedroom tax, crippling sanctions, food banks, atos sending people back to work who die due to their conditions, stealth privatisation of the NHS in England (ours is only safe for as long as it remains a reserved matter), cheap sell-offs of other national companies, waste of billions of pounds replacing Trident, councils in England being encouraged to charge private sector rents for social housing. I could go on, but people are seeing the erosion of rights and quality of life under this out of touch coalition. And I haven't even touched upon the cronyism, unelected House of Lords, bought peerages, house flipping, expenses scandals etc that show that Westminster is less about serving the people and more about serving oneself.

 

And we still have 60% of Osborne's "austerity cuts" to come. Guess who they are going to hurt? And the spectre of a hideous Tory/UKIP coalition still lingers - and one can imagine the damage they would inflict on us in the event of a NO vote (like happened in 1979) as they will, probably not far off the mark, view us as a soft touch to be trampled on.

 

Labour won't change things in the unlikely event they get in - they are responsible for atos in the first place and have done little to stop benefit sanctions, bedroom tax - and the Thatcher fan Milliband has already said they will stick to the Tories cuts if they get in.

 

I see no prospect no matter how we vote of reversing the damaging style of politics that dominates Westminster.

 

Will things be different simply because of a "Scottish face" - no. And to suggest so is utterly ridiculous - things will be different in the event of a YES win because their exists an appetite for a fairer, socially inclusive society and the Holyrood government already recognise this in some of their policy making and the white paper reflects these aspirations.

 

This is NOT about a "Scottish face" or any sense of superiority whatsoever - it is about seizing a chance for a radical change in the style of politics in this country - we already see that Holyrood is a far different, and in my opinion, far better beast than Westminster (less scandal, no unelected peers, few expenses scandals, a more representative voting system.for starters).

 

But it can be more given the chance. Much more.

Just one question - if there is a currency union, how will Scotland avoid austerity measures?

 

[TheMaganator]

http://m.stv.tv/news/politics/275934-health-secretary-alex-neil-faces-motion-of-no-confidence-at-holyrood/

 

Neil now facing Motion of no confidence. It'll be interesting to see how the SNP respond.

 

I think we all know though - they'll put their constitutional agenda ahead of what is right & embarrass us all as having elected this mob in the process.

 

Where do I sign up to always get the government I vote for?

[TheMaganator]

Bit of a gaff from the nationalists/Yes camp here.

Ones a SNP PPB & the other a Yes Scotland ad

 

[JamboX2]

 

 

 

[modedit]

 

This "A Scottish face and accent on the same old bull" is ridiculous - what we have from Westminster is hitting the people of this country very hard indeed and the white paper at least aspires to something different than the neo-liberal corporate sponsored Westminster that does not give two thoughts to the people of this country. The banks collapse due to lax financial regulations and downright fraud, talking the economy worldwide with them - and it's the poor who have to suffer the austerity enforced because of this (and of course Westminster's shocking borrowing which has near bankrupted the UK).

 

Bedroom tax, crippling sanctions, food banks, atos sending people back to work who die due to their conditions, stealth privatisation of the NHS in England (ours is only safe for as long as it remains a reserved matter), cheap sell-offs of other national companies, waste of billions of pounds replacing Trident, councils in England being encouraged to charge private sector rents for social housing. I could go on, but people are seeing the erosion of rights and quality of life under this out of touch coalition. And I haven't even touched upon the cronyism, unelected House of Lords, bought peerages, house flipping, expenses scandals etc that show that Westminster is less about serving the people and more about serving oneself.

 

And we still have 60% of Osborne's "austerity cuts" to come. Guess who they are going to hurt? And the spectre of a hideous Tory/UKIP coalition still lingers - and one can imagine the damage they would inflict on us in the event of a NO vote (like happened in 1979) as they will, probably not far off the mark, view us as a soft touch to be trampled on.

 

Labour won't change things in the unlikely event they get in - they are responsible for atos in the first place and have done little to stop benefit sanctions, bedroom tax - and the Thatcher fan Milliband has already said they will stick to the Tories cuts if they get in.

 

I see no prospect no matter how we vote of reversing the damaging style of politics that dominates Westminster.

 

Will things be different simply because of a "Scottish face" - no. And to suggest so is utterly ridiculous - things will be different in the event of a YES win because their exists an appetite for a fairer, socially inclusive society and the Holyrood government already recognise this in some of their policy making and the white paper reflects these aspirations.

 

This is NOT about a "Scottish face" or any sense of superiority whatsoever - it is about seizing a chance for a radical change in the style of politics in this country - we already see that Holyrood is a far different, and in my opinion, far better beast than Westminster (less scandal, no unelected peers, few expenses scandals, a more representative voting system.for starters).

 

But it can be more given the chance. Much more.

 

Based on how Scottish politicians currently act - be it MacAskill and his BT plot against him when he's mishandling police Scotland and corroboration reform, Alex Neil and his blatant inability to separate his ministerial role from his constituency one, the Labour Party in Glasgow and it's shamed leader before the 2012 local elections and the like - and the blatant negativity from both sides in any campaign and the fact that they can't even talk to each other constructively or take any form of criticism lightly, where is the culture change you say is coming after a Yes vote?

 

The political class here is now worse or better than the ones in Westminster.

 

[Boris]

Based on how Scottish politicians currently act - be it MacAskill and his BT plot against him when he's mishandling police Scotland and corroboration reform, Alex Neil and his blatant inability to separate his ministerial role from his constituency one, the Labour Party in Glasgow and it's shamed leader before the 2012 local elections and the like - and the blatant negativity from both sides in any campaign and the fact that they can't even talk to each other constructively or take any form of criticism lightly, where is the culture change you say is coming after a Yes vote?

 

The political class here is now worse or better than the ones in Westminster.

 

So that's a reason for not having independence?

 

The political classes across the whole of the West are shysters. Would independence introduce a new political class? Initially, probably not, HOWEVER what independence has going for it is a more democratically accountable political system, in complete contrast to Westminster. It's not perfect, but a damn sight more so than Westminster which, given the deep rootedness of the political establishment in UK terms, is never going to change to actually offer government for the people by the people.

 

An independent Scottish parliament could deliver this a lot quicker, imho. It's up to the electorate to demand it though and, again, more likely in an independent Scotland than UK wide.

[TheMaganator]

http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-tax-plans-could-cost-3-25bn-1-3416681

ICAS think the cost to set up a new tax regime could cost ?3.25bn

 

I await the boycott of accounts

[jambos are go!]

In this terrible week for the YES campaign why is Big Eck not rallying the troops big time?

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

 

 

So that's a reason for not having independence?

 

The political classes across the whole of the West are shysters. Would independence introduce a new political class? Initially, probably not, HOWEVER what independence has going for it is a more democratically accountable political system, in complete contrast to Westminster. It's not perfect, but a damn sight more so than Westminster which, given the deep rootedness of the political establishment in UK terms, is never going to change to actually offer government for the people by the people.

 

An independent Scottish parliament could deliver this a lot quicker, imho. It's up to the electorate to demand it though and, again, more likely in an independent Scotland than UK wide.

If this is your driving force for your vote, I'm intrigued to know why you thought federalism could deliver similar outcomes?

[Gizmo]

Just one question - if there is a currency union, how will Scotland avoid austerity measures?

 

Because we will still be able to allocate our resources where we see the need. Wasting billions shoring up the US's interests in the middle east, for example? Wasting billions on what is basically a US controlled imperial phallic symbol? We will also, within the EU, have the opportunity to seek subsidies and allocate them properly where needed.

 

Incidentally since a few posts have addressed this - I don't expect the Scottish parliament to be free of sleaze. But it is far better than Westminster in this respect and will not have the added costs of the House of Lords, either.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

 

 

Because we will still be able to allocate our resources where we see the need. Wasting billions shoring up the US's interests in the middle east, for example? Wasting billions on what is basically a US controlled imperial phallic symbol? We will also, within the EU, have the opportunity to seek subsidies and allocate them properly where needed.

 

Incidentally since a few posts have addressed this - I don't expect the Scottish parliament to be free of sleaze. But it is far better than Westminster in this respect and will not have the added costs of the House of Lords, either.

Hold on! The UK is a net contributor to the EU. Why would Scotland get handouts?

 

And you think a defence dividend will offset all spending cuts?

[Gizmo]

Hold on! The UK is a net contributor to the EU. Why would Scotland get handouts?

 

And you think a defence dividend will offset all spending cuts?

 

Like the agricultural subsidy that the UK received based on the needs of Scottish farmers that Westminster pocketed? Who says we cannot - using MEPs who actually represent Scotland - obtain a better deal within the EU apparatus?

 

What do we get back - about 3/5ths of revenue raised here, with the rest spent by Westminster "on our behalf". There is clearly going to be room to budget and allocate funds in a far different manner once we have complete control - and equally as important - complete retention of our finances. Sure that doesn't mean we will have trees that grow money but perhaps we will have a strategy for controlled growth and not put all our eggs into a shaky, government propped up mini housing boom just so Osborne can pretend that his austerity budget is working.

 

An interesting report dropped this morning from Professor David Simpson, a leading economist and former Standard Life advisor, who submitted his report to the parliament.

 

According to Prof Simpson, despite the UK Labour government "underwriting" the "reckless behaviour" of banks that precipitated the financial crisis, it has been the Coalition government that, he writes, "is going to double the national debt in cash terms in just one parliament".

 

No politician or civil servant in the Treasury or the Bank of England has accepted responsibility for these mistakes. Instead, it is ordinary people who have been punished.

 

Better together, indeed.

 

Link: http://www.newsnetsc...ading-economist

Edited May 21, 2014 by Gizmo

[smallfaces]

Because we will still be able to allocate our resources where we see the need. Wasting billions shoring up the US's interests in the middle east, for example? Wasting billions on what is basically a US controlled imperial phallic symbol? We will also, within the EU, have the opportunity to seek subsidies and allocate them properly where needed.

 

Incidentally since a few posts have addressed this - I don't expect the Scottish parliament to be free of sleaze. But it is far better than Westminster in this respect and will not have the added costs of the House of Lords, either.

 

As Geoff has replied - the oil-rich, green energy affluent, independent Scotland will be a net contributor to the EU (I believe Mr Salmond said as such in his recent speech in Europe) - any subsidies we receive will be as a result of the net contribution we make.

 

As for defence spending cuts, what is Scotlands proportional contribution? How much of this has been earmarked for independent defence spending?

 

This article in the Herald seems to lay to waste the assertion that we Scots are so fundamentally different from the rest of the UK and are all for building a fairer, more equal society. http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/seven-out-of-ten-scots-back-ukip-policy-on-immigration.24278719

[Boris]

If this is your driving force for your vote, I'm intrigued to know why you thought federalism could deliver similar outcomes?

 

Federalism could, if better democratic procedures and systems were put in place.

 

Re-engage the electorate and let them dictate policy (to a greater extent) rather than the hoodwinking that goes on under the current system. However as the media and the political class have the same ends i.e. power & profit, they are hardly going to give it away to the people! Instead they set the agenda and use fear to rabble rouse. Hence the recent surge in UKIP. A Frankenstein's Monster that has now gotten out of control.

 

Immigration, benefit "scroungers", Muslamics...all topics used to motivate through fear and no party is willing to debate these issues properly and in context. Instead in a vain attempt to be "popular" the political parties act as a sop to them.

 

Gordon Brown was bang on in his disgust of that woman's comments re immigrants but instead he was vilified for it.

 

We need someone to say, hang on, if companies and individuals paid their proper dues in tax then the country would be in a better place.

 

If immigrants are taking "our" jobs, who is it that is employing them? Oh, that'll be the Great British entrepreneur. Nothing stands in the way of profit, eh?

 

So those lumpen proles who fear that their jobs are being taken...would they actually do those jobs for such exploitative pay in the first place?

 

UKIP isn't worried about UK sovereignty....they just want to rip up the many employee rights enshrined in EU legislation. Mask it with immigration and loss of sovereignty/culture if they want, but ultimately they just want to make their class richer at the expense of the working people of the UK.

 

IMO.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Like the agricultural subsidy that the UK received based on the needs of Scottish farmers that Westminster pocketed? Who says we cannot - using MEPs who actually represent Scotland - obtain a better deal within the EU apparatus?

 

What do we get back - about 3/5ths of revenue raised here, with the rest spent by Westminster "on our behalf". There is clearly going to be room to budget and allocate funds in a far different manner once we have complete control - and equally as important - complete retention of our finances. Sure that doesn't mean we will have trees that grow money but perhaps we will have a strategy for controlled growth and not put all our eggs into a shaky, government propped up mini housing boom just so Osborne can pretend that his austerity budget is working.

 

So Scotland, unsure of its exact EU status in a post-independence world, will be in a position to get a better deal? Good luck with that one.

An interesting report dropped this morning from Professor David Simpson, a leading economist and former Standard Life advisor, who submitted his report to the parliament.

 

According to Prof Simpson, despite the UK Labour government "underwriting" the "reckless behaviour" of banks that precipitated the financial crisis, it has been the Coalition government that, he writes, "is going to double the national debt in cash terms in just one parliament".

 

 

 

Better together, indeed.

 

Link: http://www.newsnetsc...ading-economist

 

That I have no argument with. The banks should have been left to rot with the government underwriting the deposit scheme. Shitty banks need to go bust.

 

However, if the Coalition are so nasty etc., how does that square with doubling the national debt? It actually shows that a lot of the austerity rhetoric has been complete shite. I'm not sure how that exactly boosts the independence case, other than to say Westminster is a bit shit (no change there then).

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

 

 

Federalism could, if better democratic procedures and systems were put in place.

 

Re-engage the electorate and let them dictate policy (to a greater extent) rather than the hoodwinking that goes on under the current system. However as the media and the political class have the same ends i.e. power & profit, they are hardly going to give it away to the people! Instead they set the agenda and use fear to rabble rouse. Hence the recent surge in UKIP. A Frankenstein's Monster that has now gotten out of control.

 

Immigration, benefit "scroungers", Muslamics...all topics used to motivate through fear and no party is willing to debate these issues properly and in context. Instead in a vain attempt to be "popular" the political parties act as a sop to them.

 

Gordon Brown was bang on in his disgust of that woman's comments re immigrants but instead he was vilified for it.

 

We need someone to say, hang on, if companies and individuals paid their proper dues in tax then the country would be in a better place.

 

If immigrants are taking "our" jobs, who is it that is employing them? Oh, that'll be the Great British entrepreneur. Nothing stands in the way of profit, eh?

 

So those lumpen proles who fear that their jobs are being taken...would they actually do those jobs for such exploitative pay in the first place?

 

UKIP isn't worried about UK sovereignty....they just want to rip up the many employee rights enshrined in EU legislation. Mask it with immigration and loss of sovereignty/culture if they want, but ultimately they just want to make their class richer at the expense of the working people of the UK.

 

IMO.

Leaving aside your Commie rhetoric, the US and Australia both have federal systems. Neither of these match up to that idyll you hold.

[Boris]

Leaving aside your Commie rhetoric, the US and Australia both have federal systems. Neither of these match up to that idyll you hold.

 

I did say that responsibility lies with the electorate to dictate the agenda. I suspect that Australia and the US have a similar style of media and elite manipulation of the electorate and that political disengagement is high too. IIRC just over 50% of the electorate vote in the US Presidential elections, for example. While voting is compulsory in Australia, is there any proof of political engagement?

 

If "left & "right" are essentially the same, why should anything change?

 

I'd also say that my rhetoric isn't particularly "commie" imo. Merely a cry for democracy and responsibility by the people, for the people and for our elected representatives to show humility and respect to those whose interests they are supposed to be representing and protecting. Hardly revolutionary!

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

 

 

I did say that responsibility lies with the electorate to dictate the agenda. I suspect that Australia and the US have a similar style of media and elite manipulation of the electorate and that political disengagement is high too. IIRC just over 50% of the electorate vote in the US Presidential elections, for example. While voting is compulsory in Australia, is there any proof of political engagement?

 

If "left & "right" are essentially the same, why should anything change?

 

I'd also say that my rhetoric isn't particularly "commie" imo. Merely a cry for democracy and responsibility by the people, for the people and for our elected representatives to show humility and respect to those whose interests they are supposed to be representing and protecting. Hardly revolutionary!

It was said in jest.

 

And the biggest problem here is the AV electoral system, IMO.

[Boris]

It was said in jest.

 

And the biggest problem here is the AV electoral system, IMO.

 

Haha...I suspected as much.

 

AV may well be part of the problem. As is FPTP here for Westminster. The problem is that for the system to change, the people who benefit from the current system have to vote against it. Turkeys and Christmas and all that!

[GrimUpNorth]

"Seven out of Ten Scots 'back UKIP policy on immigration'"

 

 

makes a mockery of several posts above about a "fairer, socially inclusive society"

 

several parts of this poll are interesting

 

"There is a striking level of support for UKIP policies among Scottish Conservative and SNP voters"

 

"while four out of 10 said new immigrants should be denied access to state education, social housing, and - except in emergencies - the NHS for five years after settling in Scotland"

 

http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/seven-out-of-ten-scots-back-ukip-policy-on-immigration.24278719.

[AlphonseCapone]

In this terrible week for the YES campaign why is Big Eck not rallying the troops big time?

 

Probably because it is mostly all in your head.

[jack D and coke]

I follow Max Keiser on Twitter he's been having an interesting conversation this morning and I must add Max has had several shows on independence and he's very pro indy but anyway here we are....

[TheMaganator]

I follow Max Keiser on Twitter he's been having an interesting conversation this morning and I must add Max has had several shows on independence and he's very pro indy but anyway here we are....

 

I didnt realise it was quite this bad but oil has always been an issue. And that's not the perennial myth peddled by some Yes voters that Unionists think that oil is a liability - that's nonsense and has never been said (as far as I am aware).

 

But oil is a finite resource and is volitile - we shouldn't be basing our hopes on it. We'll need other economic resources - like banking & finance (but many Yes voters seem to want to regulate that to the hilt and if that reflects the majority view I am not really sure where that leaves us)

 

In answer to your question earlier - I have always voted for one of the main 3 parties

[BudgeUp]

Are there any countries that have voted for their indepence who are as inter-twined as we are with rUK?

 

That have had assets in just about every other country in the world that would require to be divvied - that share a military along with military equipment? That share a system of welfare etc.

 

I do not think there has been a comparable situation to ours.

 

And Reaths17 getting a hard time is harsh - there is a lot of truth in what he says. We are asked to take substantial risks and the reward is not some fantastacal new dawn. There will be very little reward that I can see. There is not one single party in Scotland offering substantial change at the moment - and I mean radical change worth votiong for - not just policy change like getting rid of the bedroom tax. It seems to me that the line we have been fed recently is that we are to vote Yes to keep a certain party out - rather than for anything significant.

 

This is an interesting read on the Yes line of 'we'll always get the government we voted for' http://chokkablog.bl...governs-us.html

 

Serbia/Montenegro.

 

Czech Republic/Slovakia.

[Don Draper]

Probably because it is mostly all in your head.

 

You beat me to it.

 

Serbia/Montenegro.

 

Czech Republic/Slovakia.

 

I suspect this will be met with some prepared spiel about how these cases were completely different and can't ever be compared to the Scotland/UK situation, because that's "unique in world history". And the fact that no Slovakian or Montenegrin would ever dream about voting to rejoin or recreate the entity they left behind will be conveniently ignored...

[BudgeUp]

You beat me to it.

 

 

 

I suspect this will be met with some prepared spiel about how these cases were completely different and can't ever be compared to the Scotland/UK situation, because that's "unique in world history". And the fact that no Slovakian or Montenegrin would ever dream about voting to rejoin or recreate the entity they left behind will be conveniently ignored...

 

Thing with those two cases is that because their history was so interwined and they had a special relationship with the other half... Independence was relatively easy and straight forward.

[TheMaganator]

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/05/scotching-a-myth-scotland-is-not-as-left-wing-as-you-think-it-is/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=scotching-a-myth-scotland-is-not-as-left-wing-as-you-think-it-is

 

Interesting poll (and article) which will not fill the lefties with glee - SNP supporters and the Tories have plenty in common.

 

It also dispels the myth that Scots are much more left wing than the rest of the UK. Scotland is a small 'c' conservative country.

 

Also more Yes supporters than No supporters want to leave the EU

 

It is only one poll, mind you, but those dreaming of an independent lefty utopia may have to dream again...

[JamboX2]

 

 

So that's a reason for not having independence?

 

The political classes across the whole of the West are shysters. Would independence introduce a new political class? Initially, probably not, HOWEVER what independence has going for it is a more democratically accountable political system, in complete contrast to Westminster. It's not perfect, but a damn sight more so than Westminster which, given the deep rootedness of the political establishment in UK terms, is never going to change to actually offer government for the people by the people.

 

An independent Scottish parliament could deliver this a lot quicker, imho. It's up to the electorate to demand it though and, again, more likely in an independent Scotland than UK wide.

 

All true and I agree with. It was a point against hyperbole and talk of the shining city on the hill we'll be on only a few weeks.

 

As ever Boris, what you've wrote I cant really fault. But imo people want it now. Its not being offered. Thats the issue.

[Felix Lighter]

edit.

Edited May 21, 2014 by Felix Lighter

[TheMaganator]

http://m.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/mystery-over-holyrood-park-vote-no-indy-message-1-3417902

It wuzny me.

 

Edited May 21, 2014 by TheMaganator

[JamboX2]

Alex Neil saved by the SNP majority.

[jack D and coke]

http://m.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/mystery-over-holyrood-park-vote-no-indy-message-1-3417902

It wuzny me.

 

Is that funny this time? Is that not vandalism in your eyes? Remember the stickering scum from Ian Murray's office? Funny thing perspective eh