Jump to content

Scottish independence and devolution superthread


Happy Hearts

Recommended Posts

Sadly Boris most YES voters are not like yourself.

THey are voting on a hope and a prayer- a manifesto of higher benefits, better NHS, better pensions, more free childcare

NO trident, no austerity

 

Its a lie, all of it.

Brian Cox was correctas to where this will be won- ( if YES wins)- it will be won with the votes of the gullible, naiive and least switched on who cannot see through the sparkly rainbow mists being woven by the fantasist salmond

 

Again the insinuations that the people in the less well off areas of cities aren't smart enough to vote. It's getting ridiculous now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that is the case, then Jim Sillars retribution comments can be simply dismissed and irrelevant to the debate, as can Patrick Harvie's comments regards making an independent Scotland a republic. BUt these are still used by NO/BT to attack the YES camp.

 

So which is it? If it's all about the white paper, Sillar's and Harvie's comments are irrelevant.

 

Also, isn't the invitation to those negotiating on Scotland's behalf a lot wider than simply the SNP? The white paper is essentially what the SNP will stand on for the 2016 Scottish Parliamentary elections. I don't think that they will win a majority.

The retribution comments are nothing to do with the vision for independence, but about the behavior of individuals following a Yes. Totally unrelated. Harvie's comments were brought up solely to flag this point that he isn't going to get what he wants as his vision isn't on the table. So in that sense they are irrelevant, but I'm not sure that he or certain yes voters realise that. Of course, the role of the monarchy is something that could be revisited by the government of the day, should he ever get to power. As to the invitation that is the case. I am not talking about the pure political policy decisions as I said in my post, I'm talking about the more fundamental aspects of the White Paper which are not so easily changed with a change in government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where did you read that first part? Did they also enjoy the unpredictability of never knowing how many hours they might receive each day/week/month? You presumably enjoyed the flexibility as it fitted your university curriculum. Now that you have, presumably, graduated, have you considered applying for zero hours contracts or would you prefer stability? Zero hours contracts were maybe 'acceptable' in the darkest days of the recession, but companies and organisations have subsequently (ab)used them to make them a norm. Not a fan. :tiny:

 

Zero hours contracts are certainly not for everyone, but they have massive advantages to those who genuinely need flexibility, such as those with young families etc.

 

Don't get me wrong - I was very much against them until I got on one: I now see how it works well for both employer and employee. I guess some employers (and employees) can indeed abuse the principle though, but that works both ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

How is it anything like that? The referendum question is a simple one. It's nothing to do with the SNP, Salmond, the Tories, Cameron, Labour, anyone. It's not about any one single person or party. It's about Scotland, and whether or not Scotland should be an independent country or not. Simple as that.

 

Cameron wants the Union at any cost, but he's to be trusted? I'm ignoring what he's saying, because none of what he says has the sincere concern for Scotland's future. At least Salmond has that.

That being the case, why does every Salmond speech mention the Tories?

It's because he knows he can make political ground amongst the element of the electorate he needs to mobilise.

If the Tories and Cameron are fair game, so is Salmond.

I'll agree to disagreeing whether he has Scotland's best interests at heart.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again the insinuations that the people in the less well off areas of cities aren't smart enough to vote. It's getting ridiculous now.

 

Not at all.

Loving the "YES" style smear campaign though.

It is one of the easiest political tricks to pull

"soak the rich" "tax and spend" - call it what you will

PLaying to the masses

"let them eat cake"

it has always happened as long as history exists

Throw the poor some bread and they will follow you.

ITs the YES campaign that are treating them as fools with their stories, not me

It yet remains to be seen if they fall for it- though indications are they will

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That being the case, why does every Salmond speech mention the Tories?

It's because he knows he can make political ground amongst the element of the electorate he needs to mobilise.

If the Tories and Cameron are fair game, so is Salmond.

I'll agree to disagreeing whether he has Scotland's best interests at heart.

 

And is Nicola still playing the "We won't be ruled by Tory Toffs" card? The SNP have, from the very outset, made a point of going at the Tories backgrounds, as opposed to their policies. Playing the man and not the ball. So its fair game that some of that should come back to Salmond.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at all.

Loving the "YES" style smear campaign though.

It is one of the easiest political tricks to pull

"soak the rich" "tax and spend" - call it what you will

PLaying to the masses

"let them eat cake"

it has always happened as long as history exists

Throw the poor some bread and they will follow you.

ITs the YES campaign that are treating them as fools with their stories, not me

It yet remains to be seen if they fall for it- though indications are they will

 

Is it bread or cake? Please be specific since I don't eat much cake

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at all.

Loving the "YES" style smear campaign though.

It is one of the easiest political tricks to pull

"soak the rich" "tax and spend" - call it what you will

PLaying to the masses

"let them eat cake"

it has always happened as long as history exists

Throw the poor some bread and they will follow you.

ITs the YES campaign that are treating them as fools with their stories, not me

It yet remains to be seen if they fall for it- though indications are they will

 

Whilst I don't disagree with your premise that politicians are never slow to adopt a populist line in an attempt to gain power, I'd argue that the current system has to an extent disenfranchised a lot of people who have felt let down and isolated by current political practice across the UK, including Holyrood!

 

However, a 97% (I think?) level of voter registration suggests that these lost voices are prepared to vote on this issue - it may be to protect the Union as much as dissolve it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where did you read that first part? Did they also enjoy the unpredictability of never knowing how many hours they might receive each day/week/month? You presumably enjoyed the flexibility as it fitted your university curriculum. Now that you have, presumably, graduated, have you considered applying for zero hours contracts or would you prefer stability? Zero hours contracts were maybe 'acceptable' in the darkest days of the recession, but companies and organisations have subsequently (ab)used them to make them a norm. Not a fan. :tiny:

No, I wouldn't apply for a zero hours contact because I know what they mean and need the steady income. But why should someone who wants that flexibility not have the option? Plenty of reading on zero hours contracts, including http://www.cipd.co.u...yth-reality.pdf and http://www.cipd.co.u...s_2014-dbis.pdf . Only 27% are unsatisfied with having zero guaranteed hours. I fully accept that they have been abused in places, my point is that an outright ban (as proposed by Labour) would be ridiculous, they can have huge benefits for both employer and employee, and have been demonized somewhat ridiculously. Some stronger guidance, regulation/code of practice would be sufficient (the banning of exclusivity contracts earlier this year was a good piece of legislation).

Edited by jambo1185
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it bread or cake? Please be specific since I don't eat much cake

 

French aristocracy= cake

Imperial Roman threw bread in the arenas

Same principle, different era

Buying popularity by treating the people as fools

ENsure compliance using bribery

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dusk_Till_Dawn

When exactly did this government receive a mandate from the UK electorate to give Scotland devo max? Who says any of us in England support that?

 

Scotland - either vote for independence or shut the **** up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

French aristocracy= cake

Imperial Roman threw bread in the arenas

Same principle, different era

Buying popularity by treating the people as fools

ENsure compliance using bribery

 

Sounds as if Cameron Milliband etc. are doing just that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I wouldn't apply for a zero hours contact because I know what they mean and need the steady income. But why should someone who wants that flexibility not have the option? Plenty of reading on zero hours contracts, including http://www.cipd.co.u...yth-reality.pdf and http://www.cipd.co.u...s_2014-dbis.pdf . Only 27% are unsatisfied with having zero guaranteed hours. I fully accept that they have been abused in places, my point is that an outright ban (as proposed by Labour) would be ridiculous, they can have huge benefits for both employer and employee, and have been demonized somewhat ridiculously. Some stronger guidance, regulation/code of practice would be sufficient (the banning of exclusivity contracts earlier this year was a good piece of legislation).

 

As one who works on zero-hours, as well as my son - we both very strongly value the principle, which is flexibility on the part of both parties. They have a legitimate place in peoples options and they add value in many cases. Where I work there are about 40 staff, all on zero hours. Working mums, students, semi-retired people, and some who like to have more than one job, i.e. they work part-time in my place and part time for others. Not a single complaint.

 

Please don't slag off zero hours. Its not for everyone but its not evil either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Caspian Primrose

When exactly did this government receive a mandate from the UK electorate to give Scotland devo max? Who says any of us in England support that?

 

Scotland - either vote for independence or shut the **** up.

 

:thumbsup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I wouldn't apply for a zero hours contact because I know what they mean and need the steady income. But why should someone who wants that flexibility not have the option? Plenty of reading on zero hours contracts, including http://www.cipd.co.u...yth-reality.pdf and http://www.cipd.co.u...s_2014-dbis.pdf . Only 27% are unsatisfied with having zero guaranteed hours. I fully accept that they have been abused in places, my point is that an outright ban (as proposed by Labour) would be ridiculous, they can have huge benefits for both employer and employee, and have been demonized somewhat ridiculously. Some stronger guidance, regulation/code of practice would be sufficient (the banning of exclusivity contracts earlier this year was a good piece of legislation).

 

I agree with your last sentence, but I think there is also scope for a greater degree of flexibility somewhere in the middle and not with zero hours contracts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds as if Cameron Milliband etc. are doing just that!

 

As are Salmond & Sturgeon. You think that Sun front page is directed at the educated electorate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds as if Cameron Milliband etc. are doing just that!

 

Indeed, though the "status Quo" side are at least being more upfront re austerity, currency, EU.

Salmond has given a square answer to nothing at all.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geoff Kilpatrick

 

 

As are Salmond & Sturgeon. You think that Sun front page is directed at the educated electorate?

Define educated please? You may sneer at people not seeing things how you see them but that is democracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As are Salmond & Sturgeon. You think that Sun front page is directed at the educated electorate?

 

Don't tell me you hate and disrespect the poor too, FFS stealing my thunder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As are Salmond & Sturgeon. You think that Sun front page is directed at the educated electorate?

 

Don't think Salmond or Sturgeon write the Sun's front page!!

It's Osborne/Cameron/Milliband/Brown who are now making up policies on the back of a fag packet and trying to bribe the electorate.

They cannot guarantee any of what they are now saying and they shouldn't be introducing new policy at this stage in any case

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Define educated please? You may sneer at people not seeing things how you see them but that is democracy.

 

OK I'll try it another way - some buy the Sun, and others read the broadsheets. I can't imagine the broadsheets selling well in the areas Brian Cox explicitly mentioned. But I do expect that the Sun probably sells well there. And as it is my opinion that the its the Sun Front Page that is treating people as stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed, though the "status Quo" side are at least being more upfront re austerity, currency, EU.

Salmond has given a square answer to nothing at all.....

 

Up front?

The No side have offered nothing but lies and fear and now meaningless bribes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Up front?

The No side have offered nothing but lies and fear and now meaningless bribes.

 

So you are happy that Yes are clear on how we will handle EU reapplication? Just thinking "it won't happen" is naive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Up front?

The No side have offered nothing but lies and fear and now meaningless bribes.

 

The fears are true though, the consequences may be horrific.

Salmond has guaranteed nothing- its all bribes based on opinion polls

- keep pound- check (cannot guarantee)

- keep queen- check (eh? clue is in United KINGDOM)

-keep EU- check (not guaranted0

-stay in NATO - check (not guaranteed)

- keep current spending levels- check (cannot guarantee as no idea what is coming in)

-stay out of Euro- check (cannot guarantee the UK opt outs)

 

And ask yourself who is treating who as stupid?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sadly Boris most YES voters are not like yourself.

THey are voting on a hope and a prayer- a manifesto of higher benefits, better NHS, better pensions, more free childcare

NO trident, no austerity

 

Its a lie, all of it.

Brian Cox was correctas to where this will be won- ( if YES wins)- it will be won with the votes of the gullible, naiive and least switched on who cannot see through the sparkly rainbow mists being woven by the fantasist salmond

 

But at the very least 'they' get their win. A win is important once in a while. It gives you confidence, it gives you hope. That is important.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geoff Kilpatrick

 

 

OK I'll try it another way - some buy the Sun, and others read the broadsheets. I can't imagine the broadsheets selling well in the areas Brian Cox explicitly mentioned. But I do expect that the Sun probably sells well there. And as it is my opinion that the its the Sun Front Page that is treating people as stupid.

What about people who read both?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BoJack Horseman

No voters...

 

Why do you think there is a referendum? Why do you think that on Thursday we will have the opportunity to vote for the future of Scotland? Why do you think half the country wants Independence? Why has Salmond pushed for it? Why did we push for it in the 70s? Why has Westminster let it happen? Why is it even up for debate?

 

If you think all of the above because AS has an ego trip about him, then you're very deluded.

 

We're at this point in our history because it is a viable, realistic, and desired option. To insinuate that one man is up-heaving an entire country for his own agenda is insane. To then insinuate that half the country is in agreement with him because we're blind and ignorant is just plain insulting.

 

Remember, we're not just talking about this. It's happening. On Thursday. Because it is wanted by the people of Scotland. It is being directed by Alex Salmond because we, Scotland, voted that man into power. WE chose to have him as First Minister. He wasn't forced on us. We're at this cross roads because we chose to be.

 

I just can't get my head around the fact that people genuinely believe that we'd get to the point of having a referendum at our doorstep without it being a viable and realistic option. I've no problem with wanting to stay with the Union. Either side of the debate is fine. But to claim that independence is a laughable option, when the facts clearly show that it's almost about to happen, just makes no sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The educated/non-educated chat is pretty chronic guys. Peoples circumstances are not always defined by intellect. There are plenty of very clever people voting yes and very stupid people voting no (and vice versa). It is fair to say that people in certain locations/situations may be more inclined to vote a certain way (which is what Cox was getting at with his campaign deliberately targeting the 'schemes' for a yes vote) but that shouldn't be directly correlated with the education or intelligence of the people in those areas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BoJack Horseman

As one who works on zero-hours, as well as my son - we both very strongly value the principle, which is flexibility on the part of both parties. They have a legitimate place in peoples options and they add value in many cases. Where I work there are about 40 staff, all on zero hours. Working mums, students, semi-retired people, and some who like to have more than one job, i.e. they work part-time in my place and part time for others. Not a single complaint.

 

Please don't slag off zero hours. Its not for everyone but its not evil either.

 

That's all fine and dandy when you're getting the hours you want, and can reduce them when you need them. But what about when you need your hours and your employer tells you to bolt, because there aren't any, and he isn't contracted to give you any.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about people who read both?

 

Of course there are always exceptions, but its th eexceptions that prove the rule - I expect there will be a small percentage of voters who read both but that wont be common. There will be far more people who read one or the other and the readership of each will be, in general, from different portions of the electorate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's all fine and dandy when you're getting the hours you want, and can reduce them when you need them. But what about when you need your hours and your employer tells you to bolt, because there aren't any, and he isn't contracted to give you any.

 

Then a Zero-hours Contract is not for you! I have repeatedly stated that its not for everyone. It is for a certain group of workers. If you don't like the flexibility or risk of lower income, dont go on one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BoJack Horseman

Then a Zero-hours Contract is not for you! I have repeatedly stated that its not for everyone. It is for a certain group of workers. If you don't like the flexibility or risk of lower income, dont go on one.

 

Seriously? We now get to pick our contracts do we?

 

I'd love to accept your offer of employment sir, but it says here I only get 30 minutes for lunch, and I require a minimum of 1 hour, paid. If you could amend that, that would be great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But at the very least 'they' get their win. A win is important once in a while. It gives you confidence, it gives you hope. That is important.

 

NOt if the win turns out to be a loss after all.

The whole campaign has been a victory- it has wrung concessions from the NO side that will change the politics of the UK forever ( though it remains to be seen if that is in a good way)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously? We now get to pick our contracts do we?

 

I'd love to accept your offer of employment sir, but it says here I only get 30 minutes for lunch, and I require a minimum of 1 hour, paid. If you could amend that, that would be great.

 

Of course you are at liberty to apply for, or not apply for, or resign from, any job you want. Zero-hours Contracts are not for you obviously, thats fine, you can choose not to apply for one. but don't think others share your views - we have 40 staff on zero hours where I work and everone is very happy with that. You don't like that then good for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NOt if the win turns out to be a loss after all.

The whole campaign has been a victory- it has wrung concessions from the NO side that will change the politics of the UK forever ( though it remains to be seen if that is in a good way)

 

You just don't get it do you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When exactly did this government receive a mandate from the UK electorate to give Scotland devo max? Who says any of us in England support that?

 

Scotland - either vote for independence or shut the **** up.

 

Have to say say I agree.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fears are true though, the consequences may be horrific.

Salmond has guaranteed nothing- its all bribes based on opinion polls

- keep pound- check (cannot guarantee)

 

Negotiating positions have been set out by both sides. Compromise will be reached to ensure a level of stabilty for both iScotland and rUK

 

- keep queen- check (eh? clue is in United KINGDOM)

 

The Queen is head of state for many countries all around the world, none of which are part of the United Kindom

 

-keep EU- check (not guaranted0

 

Legal opinion differs but there are just as many European voices advocating pragmatic compromise as there are doom and gloom

 

-stay in NATO - check (not guaranteed)

 

As above

 

- keep current spending levels- check (cannot guarantee as no idea what is coming in)

 

More than currently comes in

 

-stay out of Euro- check (cannot guarantee the UK opt outs)

 

Euro requires ERM first which is voluntary. Again pragmatism and compromise will prevail

 

And ask yourself who is treating who as stupid?

 

Easy. The UK establishment must think we all zip up the back

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brian Whittaker's Tache

@Krishnan Guru-Murthy

 

 

If its Yes and sterling plunges as UK govt has refused to agree currency union in advance isn't it George Osborne who needs a plan B?

Edited by Brian Whittakers Tache
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geoff Kilpatrick

 

 

Of course there are always exceptions, but its th eexceptions that prove the rule - I expect there will be a small percentage of voters who read both but that wont be common. There will be far more people who read one or the other and the readership of each will be, in general, from different portions of the electorate.

I guarantee that politicians read all the papers for starters!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You just don't get it do you.

 

The light at the end of the tunnel may be an on-coming train, yes, I get it

My eyes are wide open

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BoJack Horseman

Of course you are at liberty to apply for, or not apply for, or resign from, any job you want. Zero-hours Contracts are not for you obviously, thats fine, you can choose not to apply for one. but don't think others share your views - we have 40 staff on zero hours where I work and everone is very happy with that. You don't like that then good for you.

 

Wow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dusk_Till_Dawn

aNOW1iS.jpg

 

"If you don't know, vote no"

 

Really?

 

What she's really saying is

 

"If the Yes campaign haven't answered your questions, vote no" which sounds very sensible to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Geoff Kilpatrick

@Krishnan Guru-Murthy

 

 

If its Yes and sterling plunges as UK govt has refused to agree currency union in advance isn't it George Osborne who needs a plan B?

Er, no. It probably isn't a bad thing if it takes a plunge anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...