1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Poll: Scottish independence vote

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by Biohazard, Sep 23, 2013.

?

Scottish independence, yes or no?

  1. I'm Scottish and in favour of independence

    137 vote(s)
    10.9%
  2. I'm Scottish and against independence

    167 vote(s)
    13.3%
  3. I'm from another part of UK and in favour of Scottish independence

    273 vote(s)
    21.7%
  4. I'm from another part of UK and against Scottish independence

    682 vote(s)
    54.2%
  1. Castiel

    Capo Crimine

    Joined: Jun 26, 2010

    Posts: 63,651

    I think it is sad that less than 100 days from what is probably the most fundamental of votes in a generation for Scotland and all anyone can seem to do is attack each other rather than actually discuss the issue itself. It's all so flipping childish. :mad:
     
  2. Biohazard

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Aug 29, 2003

    Posts: 31,334

    It's actually a relatively positive piece in terms of what normally constitutes pro-union/anti-independence opinion. I don't agree with some of her assumptions, or those of the UK Government she is quoting but I guess that's quite normal.

    Of course she is entitled to make her opinions known, and nobody should be abused.

    Coherent intelligent argument is not the preserve of Unionists anymore than vile internet abuse is singularly the hobby of 'cybernats'.

    If anything, the only research done on the matter suggests that Yes supporters online are more likely to be abused than No. Irrespective, they are a small vocal minority who take things a bit too seriously and far on the internet.

    What should be of concern is the abuse in open plain sight from Unionist politicians towards Yes/Holyrood/Salmond/Scotland.
     
  3. Biohazard

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Aug 29, 2003

    Posts: 31,334

    The debate in Scotland is to be commended and is by far and large very interesting and stimulating, a small number of people in the larger scale of things that can't seem to behave.

    It has been the main Better Together (now rebadged 'No Thanks') strategy from the off, try their best to keep people disengaged, ignorant and do their best to taint the image of the debate.
     
  4. Biohazard

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Aug 29, 2003

    Posts: 31,334

    Clare Lally 'the ordinary mum' introduced Johann Lamont's Scottish Labour leadership bid in 2011. She is the carer's champion in Scottish Labour's Shadow Cabinet. She sits on Labour's national policy forum formulating political policy, and is the chairperson of a labour constituency party.

    Telling the truth about Clare isn't an attack on her personally. It isn't personal abuse. She isn't an ordinary mum and the feverpitch faux outrage is Better Together/No Thanks not liking being caught out misrepresenting hardcore political activists as people whisked off the street wanting to save the Union.

    Not unless Better Together have installed a switch in Clare that allows her to be political one minute and non-political the next.....

    The only smear here is against Yes people for having the audacity of pointing such nonsense out instead of just sitting there and being lectured threatened and lied to by 'Better Together'.

    No thanks.
     
  5. Biohazard

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Aug 29, 2003

    Posts: 31,334

    As for the Spad it does seem a bit strange in all honesty, I don't think it was smearing but perhaps not fitting of his role. He is an ex editor which may have played a part. I don't know what difference he expected it to make in any event.

    He's apologised but I wouldn't want to call for his sacking, I suspect that it will be referred by Labour in any event. As far as naughty things Spads have done I suspect it's a bit lower on the naughty list.
     
  6. Biohazard

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Aug 29, 2003

    Posts: 31,334

    Stuart done nothing of the sort.

    Pointing our her political credentials and demonstrating she is not simply 'an ordinary mum' is not a character assassination.

    So far nobody can really find anything that constitutes abuse, I can't discount there may by now be some comment on twitter or something but a small lunatic fringe does not make a nation of 5 million.
     
  7. Biohazard

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Aug 29, 2003

    Posts: 31,334

    Can you tell who paid for what building?

    As the UK Government has refused to pre-negotiate [unless it wants to threaten the loss of the Pound Sterling and so on] then it's subject to negotiation ultimately, but it would be amusing to see Whitehall mandarins coming up to Scotland to remove buildings brick by brick (given that very few of them are even publically owned anyway)!

    It is known that the Scottish Government would seek to obtain such 'reserved' Civil Service footprints like HMRC the Passport Agency and so forth.

    Shell precursor departments have been established in some cases for further planned devolution such as the new Scottish equivalent to HMRC, Revenue Scotland. Much of the footprint here would, if transferred, provide most of the service we currently enjoy.

    What would require new groundwork would be those departments and jobs that Scotland has been historically excluded from such as the Treasury, Foreign Office and so forth.

    Although it isn't going to cost the several billions of pounds that the UK Government claimed it is, as the professor who they wholly misrepresented has cried fowl publically saying it would be in the lower hundreds of millions in entirety.
     
  8. Biohazard

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Aug 29, 2003

    Posts: 31,334

    We partly own them, and it's unlikely we'll have to replace any of it depending on if you think there is much there in the first place.

    Physically buildings can't be moved, and the staff aren't likely to be going anywhere. In the harsh light of day everything from the buildings, computers office equipment and half the staff are rented (at hugely inflated prices:- bar the temp staff that is) anyway.

    We could probably do much cheaper from scratch but I guess that isn't likely given the division of assets and liabilities. Given the awful contract procurement in Whitehall I'd be quite concerned about inheriting any legacy of that. See PFI/PPP etc.
     
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2014
  9. Biohazard

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Aug 29, 2003

    Posts: 31,334

    I like the no asset position myself, no debt either.

    Sounds like win/win to me, and that's what the UK has been threatening Scotland with.
     
  10. Biohazard

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Aug 29, 2003

    Posts: 31,334

    The point I was making is that in the Devolution Debates in the '79 and '97 both times big play was made of 'Business uncertainty' and many of the same businesses coming out for No now were coming out for No and No/No then, we were told it would be 'Bad for business in Scotland' and both times it turned out to be a complete lie.

    As were the assertion by the Tories and Better Together that this 'naval gazing excercise' was damaging investment in Scotland.

    Investment in Scotland is now at a 16 year high.

    Polls then and now show that impact of 'business concern' is not a primary concern in the demographic I cited, not now and not then. Or if it is, it's bottom of the list. Big play is made of these interventions, and other than often acting as a distraction for the latest Better Together disaster it isn't having the impact they wish, and certainty not in the working class. Broader than that, their whole strategy is failing as they have continually shed their substantial polling advantage to the point where there is evidence that it could be so close that it could be hard to call.



    Yes, I'm sure I've covered this before. Nobody should have to prioritise food over medicine, or heating over medicine. Free prescriptions and care at the point of access is the quintessential cornerstone of a fair social health care system.

    These policies will benefit some apparently more than others, but it is vital if you believe in universal services.

    Something the Better Together cohorts do not.
     
  11. Biohazard

    PermaBanned

    Joined: Aug 29, 2003

    Posts: 31,334

    "The voting age for the Scottish referendum has been lowered to 16 from the normal UK voting age of 18, to let teenagers have a say in their country's future. If independence goes wrong, a youthful yes vote could prove a big mistake."

    Voting No could be an even greater one. Ultimately I believe that Scotland can manage itself just as well if not better than so many of our neighbours, and that our future does not look set to improve as a society in the UK.

    The idea that Scotland would crumble within a generation or two is a bit of an improvement than the sudden over-night implosion of apocalypse I guess..
     
  12. xs2man

    Mobster

    Joined: Jul 21, 2008

    Posts: 4,686

    So. Not an actual politician then. Just a person willing to go out and put the time in for her beliefs. As I said before, smearing politicians is one thing as they are paid handsomely for it.

    No asset / default on debt scenario would be the worst thing for Scotland. No "typical APR" without a credit score, or a very poor credit score on account of debt default.

    If there is independence after the voting, then the best possible outcome would be a fair and representative division of both assets and debt. I strongly suspect this would result in a net debt scenario. But not insurmountable.

    The problem being that this debt will need serviced. Back to the rUK no doubt as they will take on the debt in full, and then come up with a payment structure for us to pay it back. Hows that for a kick in the knackers for the Yes campaign? Leave the rUK, freedom at last, and here are the monthly repayments for it. Right back to the Tory government you're all trying to avoid.

    The problem is though that it will need serviced, at the same time as running the country. And current Scottish taxation sees HMRC estimating there
    are just over 2.6m income taxpayers in Scotland, but the Scottish population is over 6m. But with an ever ageing population, the burden of paying could land on fewer and fewer shoulders.

    My main concern, is the level of taxation levied against those who pay taxes. In other words, everyone.

    We could model ourselves on Norway, for example. An ideal suggested many a time by the Yes campaign (at least parts of it). However, the full truth has rarely been told.

    As far as income related taxes go, from (roughly) £4k to £72k it's a flat 36%. It is more complicated than that though, of course, Add on 8.2% for National insurance, and another 9% for anything earned over £52k, and you are quickly up to 53%. VAT comes in at 25%, and if you buy anything imported, that could be subject to massive taxation too (German motors, for example, are almost double the price here).

    Housing is also very expensive, roughly twice as much as here.

    Obviously wages reflect part of this. A hairdresser, for example, would make around £30k. But taking of income related taxes, she is quickly down to £16200, or £1350 per month. Not a huge amount really when everything is at least 5% more expensive, and rent up to twice as much.

    That's just an extreme example of course. But one taken from some Yes suggestions. So my worry is increased taxation. I'm sure an iScotland is capable of looking after itself, and not failing. But at what cost to the residents? I am fairly confident I would personally be worse off in iScotland.
     
  13. Castiel

    Capo Crimine

    Joined: Jun 26, 2010

    Posts: 63,651

    You obviously have far lower standards and expectations than I it would appear. In fact your post is indicative of exactly what I was speaking about.
     
  14. katinacooker

    Gangster

    Joined: Aug 20, 2013

    Posts: 455

    Location: Glasgow

    Oh, and now the UK Government is paying £720,000 for a booklet to be delivered to Scottish households with their view on the referendum. Except because its the UK Government and not Better Together, it doesn't come out of the approved spending limits (which, btw would be just under 50% of the entire budget)

    http://www.heraldscotland.com/polit...ry-household-with-booklet-on-facts.1402590417

    (Private/Incognito window if you get hit by the paywall)
     
  15. xs2man

    Mobster

    Joined: Jul 21, 2008

    Posts: 4,686

    Probably more slow government rather than a blatant attempt at "bending" the rules there though.

    However, your point is valid. It should have been delivered already. In fact, it really should have been a retort the the wishlist that is the white paper.
     
  16. grumpysculler

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Nov 23, 2009

    Posts: 1,195

    You can hardly complain that the UK government is operating within the spending limits that were agreed. The same restrictions/benefits apply to Scottish govt spending. The two governments could have been included in the main regulated period, but they aren't. By agreement.

    "It's not fair - they are playing by the rules!"

    Scotland's Future cost £800k out of government funds. Why isn't that unacceptable to you? What I find more worrying is that apparently only 60k copies have been ordered and only 60k downloads. I hope that there are far more downloads from untracked sources otherwise it suggests that only 120,000 people have read it!
     
  17. Mr Jack

    Capodecina

    Joined: May 19, 2004

    Posts: 17,987

    Location: Kiel, Germany

    My main worry is that the campaign is going to stir up enough bitterness on both sides that it simply doesn't die down afterwards. It's pretty clear now that this isn't going to be a landslide on either side.
     
  18. Superficial

    Mobster

    Joined: Oct 29, 2002

    Posts: 4,010

    Location: London

    Mine too but not just between, primarily, the English and Scots - also between the Yes and No's in Scotland.
     
  19. grumpysculler

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Nov 23, 2009

    Posts: 1,195

    It is the No voters who are branded as #traitor and who MSPs call Quislings and so forth. It is No voters who are to be "first against the wall when we get independence"

    The English are just the English (expletives not included).

    My concern isn't that this divide might happen - my worry is that it has already happened.

    The standard of debate has not been high, there has been very little. Yes has done Yes things, BT have done No things, there has been a great deal of damage done between the two sides.
     
  20. Tefal

    Capo Crimine

    Joined: Jun 30, 2007

    Posts: 66,519

    Location: Wales

    I'm curious how someones political lean makes them "not a normal mum" ?


    or someones career for that matter.

    whats the criteria for "normal mum"