So you are saying 16 - 55 year olds are unable to form rational viewpoints based on the full range of evidence from all available sources of info. But pensioners who have formed their opinions over their complete lifetime via newspapers and TV news are somehow wise and oracle like!
You must be having a laugh!
When I was 16 I couldn't makea rational decision on my dinner.
I would argue that younger people are far better informed than older people. The internet sees to that.
Scotland's jobless total increased by 18,000 between June and August to stand at 170,000, according to official figures.
The rise contrasted with a fall of 79,000 in UK unemployment, to 1.7 million, over the same period.
The Scottish jobless rate stands at 6.1%, compared with 5.4% for the whole of the UK.
Hope things improve for Scotland soon.[TW]Fox;28683884 said:No, I'm saying as you get older you get more wise. It is a gradual process. It begins when you are young and finishes when you are old. Reading things on the internet can only get you so far.
There is plenty of evidence that the younger you are the less able you are rationalise consequences - you only need look at the road death statistics for a good example of that.
The problem with the Internet is the echo chamber effect where people seek out either sources that only reflect their views or they go to diametrically opposed sites to reinforce how right they are.
It should be an excellent source for seeing all angles but isn't used as such by far too many people.
Another interesting fact is that a majority of Scottish born people wanted Independence. If the vote was restricted to Scottish born people, YES would have won 53/47.
72% of non Scottish UK born voters voted against Independence. That works out to be approximately 300,000 votes from non Scottish UK born voters.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-34526958
It totally sucks that the economy in part of the UK is being mis-managed by a bunch of nationalist socialistsHope things improve for Scotland soon.

If people are resident somewhere they should have a say in what happens to that place, no?
That still doesn't make up for most pensioners being less informed than the younger generations.
Or, if equipped with a brain, you would think that she's a pretty horrible person who profits from the vulnerable and who could be looking at a jail sentence.For instance, if your only way of learning about current events was via the TV and newspapers, you would think that Michelle Thomson was a convicted criminal.
If you have access to the internet you gain the full facts which present a very different picture.
Sure that happens but you are still being exposed to opposing views versus the unionist controlled medias selective presenting of issues.
For instance, if your only way of learning about current events was via the TV and newspapers, you would think that Michelle Thomson was a convicted criminal. If you have access to the internet you gain the full facts which present a very different picture.
You know that this doesn't become true just because you keep repeating it?
Or, if equipped with a brain, you would think that she's a pretty horrible person who profits from the vulnerable and who could be looking at a jail sentence.
And you might also think that the SNP are pretty hopeless hypocrits given that they selected her.
What like Wings Over Bath which selectively picks out some numbers to make out that there was nothing wrong here beyond a conveyancing technicality?
You realise that the Electoral Commission are now investigating the SNP because some of the things that came out during the Michelle Thomson investigation rather suggest that Business For Scotland was a front for the SNP intended to circumvent funding rules.

Unfortunately you seem to be a good example of the echo chamber effect. You aren't really here to present a case for independence but to argue with those that you consider the enemy. Everything that doesn't match your viewpoint is automatically unionist propaganda. You are no better informed by the Internet, it just reinforces your bias.
This whole thread is a massive unionist echo chamber.
This whole thread is a massive unionist echo chamber.
I'm not a unionist...
I hope you one day work out what your grudges are actually against.
Well you are a minority on here!
No grudge. Just a desire to be free from Westminster rule.
I still don't understand why you waste so much time arguing about it on an overclocking forum, seems your efforts could be much more productive elsewhere. Or you could just be a troll who loves the attention.
Ha! Is this the part where I go "baa baa"?You are clearly an avid consumer of the MSM!![]()
What she has done is morally reprehensible. If this had been a Tory then the SNP would be all over her. But somehow it is different when it is one of their own. She quite possibly has committed an offence, but the scandal is how the SNP can say one thing while doing another.I thought the British legal system operated on a innocent until proven guilty basis. Last I heard Michelle Thomson is completely innocent. You wouldn't know that if you watch the TV news or read the newspapers.
I have read it. It's a pile of ****e.The MSM have been caught making up lies regarding this case:
http://wingsoverscotland.com/what-were-told-and-what-we-know/
Choose to read it or remain ignorant. It's up to you.
What she has done is morally reprehensible.
I have read it. It's a pile of ****e.
The MSM may sensationalist things,
but the eejit in Bath is selectively picking information and ignoring huge amounts of the judgement that is in the public domain

Personally, I find the idea of misleading people over the value of their homes and using their circumstances to pressure them to buy at knock down prices so that you can flip for a mighty profit reprehensible. Others might call it capitalism.What exactly has she done that is morally reprehensible?
Oh so there is a judgement out in the public domain stating that Michelle Thomson is guilty of a crime is there? Please let me have a link to it!![]()
You will never get to hear the other side of the story as was presented on Wings if you don't have access to the internet.
Vilifying Michelle Thomson based only on what he has heard from the MSM.
There is a judgement out there in the public domain. You know, the bit about her solicitor being struck off over these deals?
I've already highlighted that the Wings analysis is rather selective in the information that it uses, so the case presented is that of a conveyancing "quirk".
