The Dirty Independence Question

[eFestivals]

The penny will drop, eventually, I think. Maybe when Gers are produced in Spring.

I'd say the penny is as likely to drop now as it was before the indyref - not very likely.

All of the same info existed back then, and 'no' pointed out the volatility of the oil price and how that adversely effects the Scottish economy, whether it was to go either up or down. Those people didn't want to listen then, and there's little reason why they would now.

To those people, despite all of the facts which are out there (including Salmond's own white paper), oil is "a bonus" and so it's all free and extra money. There's little that will change their thoughts short of going indy and finding out the reality.

[gary1979666]

What do you reckon would have happened if YES had won in the end and then the oil price started to crash. I mean once England had stopped laughing.

[eFestivals]

What do you reckon would have happened if YES had won in the end and then the oil price started to crash. I mean once England had stopped laughing.

Anything could have happened I reckon, and not much of it would have been nice for anyone Scottish.

[Comfy Bean]

What do you reckon would have happened if YES had won in the end and then the oil price started to crash. I mean once England had stopped laughing.

Laughing ? Oh dear

The oil price will in time reach $100+ again.

Scotland would not have been an Independent Country at this moment.

I have commented about the oil predictions before. The current low price is bad news for the UK treasury. Last thing we need.

[Comfy Bean]

I met my first Yes voter over the weekend who admitted had he known about the oil crash he wouldn't have voted that way. First (yes) person I've met who's conceded Scotland would have been in a precarious position if the vote had went their way.

The penny will drop, eventually, I think. Maybe when Gers are produced in Spring.

Sure there will be people on both sides that have pondered the rights and wrongs of their decision. Have the polls not shown more of a switch towards YES ? Not sure on that so will have a look.

If you don`t mind me asking MB, what were his reasons for voting YES in the first place ?

[gary1979666]

Laughing ? Oh dear

The oil price will in time reach $100+ again.

Scotland would not have been an Independent Country at this moment.

I have commented about the oil predictions before. The current low price is bad news for the UK treasury. Last thing we need.

I was more wondering what impact the price (i.e. a big chunk of Scotland's income) would have had on the bargaining between Team Scotland / rUK. Would Team Scotland be starting to panic a bit / would the impact have been minimal. Also attempts to join EU could be hindered, etc etc.

Wasn't just a cheap shop. But also a genuine question about the purely hypothetical situation.

Will it have an impact on future votes too.

[eFestivals]

Laughing ? Oh dear

The oil price will in time reach $100+ again.

Scotland would not have been an Independent Country at this moment.

I have commented about the oil predictions before. The current low price is bad news for the UK treasury. Last thing we need.

look, a squirrel, over there, Westminster.

iScotland would have been badly effected by the low price right now; it doesn't matter that it wouldn't yet be indy.

But anyway, what if the oil price stays low (as the industry now expects)? Are you prepared to acknowledge that would be very painful for iScotland, requiring big cuts or big tax rises?

Or do you have a squirrel for every occasion?

The point is that we should all be able to recognise that there's a not-small proportion of indy supporters who do not believe or expect an indy Scotland could be worse than now. If it turned out that it worse than now and by a big chunk, nearly all of those people would feel that they'd been scammed by the SNP. It wouldn't be pretty, from any angle, and the last thing a new state needs is huge internal discord.

[MichaelsBeard]

Sure there will be people on both sides that have pondered the rights and wrongs of their decision. Have the polls not shown more of a switch towards YES ? Not sure on that so will have a look.

If you don`t mind me asking MB, what were his reasons for voting YES in the first place ?

It was about the democracy of always having the government Scotland voted and an end to Tory rule forever.

Unfortunately it wasn't that straight forward was it? If it was purely about getting rid of the Tories I'd have voted yes in a heartbeat. However, I wasn't about to risk potentially bankrupting the country in order to achieve that aim.

There was a risk, a very plausible risk, that has been proven to be real with how the oil crisis has panned out. Had the media told you 6 months ago that oil would be at this price the rhetoric from your camp would have said it was utterly implausible and scaremongering.

Edited February 2, 2015 by MichaelsBeard

[Comfy Bean]

It was about the democracy of always having the government Scotland voted and an end to Tory rule forever.

Unfortunately it wasn't that straight forward was it? If it was purely about getting rid of the Tories I'd have voted yes in a heartbeat. However, I wasn't about to risk potentially bankrupting the country in order to achieve that aim.

There was a risk, a very plausible risk, that has been proven to be real with how the oil crisis has panned out. Had the media told you 6 months ago that oil would be at this price the rhetoric from your camp would have said it was utterly implausible and scaremongering.

Thanks MB. If it was about never again having Tory rule ( for him ) then not sure why he changed his mind but I`m sure there was more to it than that for him. Your right in that it was certainly not as straight forward as that although of course that would have been a pretty good starting point.

Why does anyone think that Scotland only has 1 Tory MP ? Geographically we are obviously very close so why always Labour up here ( in the recent past ) but England voted in a Tory Govt and even in the current climate might vote them in again ? As we spoke about the other day, we know that Labour voters were on the move in our own election long before the Indy vote and now Labours Leader and deputy have walked claiming they were Londons branch office ?

Being serious here but in the past would we not have expected Labour to be taking the no more austerity no more Trident route. You guys on here are quick to blame the SNP and Salmond which is fair enough. Would anyone blame the Labour party for their currrent situation ? The SNP as we stand only have 6 MP`s !

Oh and I don`t really feel like I`m in any " camp ". I know what you mean though but just saying

Edited February 2, 2015 by comfortablynumb1910

[Comfy Bean]

What do you reckon would have happened if YES had won in the end and then the oil price started to crash. I mean once England had stopped laughing.

It was about the democracy of always having the government Scotland voted and an end to Tory rule forever.

Unfortunately it wasn't that straight forward was it? If it was purely about getting rid of the Tories I'd have voted yes in a heartbeat. However, I wasn't about to risk potentially bankrupting the country in order to achieve that aim.

There was a risk, a very plausible risk, that has been proven to be real with how the oil crisis has panned out. Had the media told you 6 months ago that oil would be at this price the rhetoric from your camp would have said it was utterly implausible and scaremongering.

Sorry to be the one to break this to you

http://www.debtbombshell.com/

Edited February 2, 2015 by comfortablynumb1910

[Comfy Bean]

Why do a lot of yes supporters believe 'the vow' wasn't carried out because they weren't given full home rule? At no point in the vow did it ever mention giving Scotland that. It merely said we'd be given new powers on a set timescale. So far it's being followed through word for word.

I agree that Brown's words suggested that Scotland would get more than Scotland is going to get from this process.

BUT ... what was *REALLY* on offer had been clearly laid out long before, so any Scot who went solely on Brown's words only has themselves to blame for not following the debate. It's not fair or right to blame others for their self-chosen ignorance of a very important process.

Hold onto your hats !

Just announced it`s " The Vow Plus ". Brown`s back and it`s " time to present more radical change ". Apparently.

So Brown`s back ? Ashcroft polls due out on Wednesday ? Murphy bounce will surely have tightened things up a bit ?

Here`s a snippet from the article on BBC tonight.......

Jimbo says "Only Labour can offer the change that people want to see: the ability with Home Rule to make distinctively Scottish decisions"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-31090242

Edited February 2, 2015 by comfortablynumb1910

[MichaelsBeard]

Thanks MB. If it was about never again having Tory rule ( for him ) then not sure why he changed his mind but I`m sure there was more to it than that for him. Your right in that it was certainly not as straight forward as that although of course that would have been a pretty good starting point.

The difference is that then when it was sold to you by Yes campaigners, it was sold to you as an end to Tory rule with absolutely zero risk. Anytime anybody at all presented concerns or quite plausible apprehension it was twisted as being 'scaremongering' by the Westminster fuelled media. If that's actually happened and we were told it was a nonsense what could have been next had we voted yes - the pound? The banks moving south? Things like the oil crisis make yes's claim that the risks were ridiculous (a 'conservative' $113 a barrel mind?) at best delusion and at worst pure lies.

I do think had everyone fully investigated the economics before voting the vote would have been a landslide for No - it's amazing how many people still believe things like 'oil is a bonus' etc and can't see figures that when presented to them, prove catergorically Scotland could not possibly create the things that were promised to them without major tax increases or cuts to public spending (and that's just on current figures - not even accounting for oil crashes and the like which in themself would have had Scotland in crisis ; 20% of our economy being solely dependent on it eg). People thought they were putting their yes vote to this new world of milk and honey. They used Norway as an example, neglecting to mention Norway has a huge surplus of money saved from years gone by. I even remember recieving a leaflet through the door with the headline 'An independent Scotland will be the richest nation in Europe' FFS.

Ultimately though, as Neil said earlier - to most yes voters the penny won't drop. They were given warnings then and dismissed them. Why would they start to listen now?

Edited February 2, 2015 by MichaelsBeard

[eFestivals]

Thanks MB. If it was about never again having Tory rule ( for him ) then not sure why he changed his mind but I`m sure there was more to it than that for him. Your right in that it was certainly not as straight forward as that although of course that would have been a pretty good starting point.

Why does anyone think that Scotland only has 1 Tory MP ? Geographically we are obviously very close so why always Labour up here ( in the recent past ) but England voted in a Tory Govt and even in the current climate might vote them in again ? As we spoke about the other day, we know that Labour voters were on the move in our own election long before the Indy vote and now Labours Leader and deputy have walked claiming they were Londons branch office ?

Being serious here but in the past would we not have expected Labour to be taking the no more austerity no more Trident route. You guys on here are quick to blame the SNP and Salmond which is fair enough. Would anyone blame the Labour party for their currrent situation ? The SNP as we stand only have 6 MP`s !

Oh and I don`t really feel like I`m in any " camp ". I know what you mean though but just saying

nothing there to address the point he made, about the yes rhetoric that claimed all criticism was "bullying", "lies", and "Project Fear".

It's now Project Fact. Can yes-ers face the facts? By the reply above, no they can't.

[eFestivals]

Sorry to be the one to break this to you

http://www.debtbombshell.com/

The UK had bad debts. Who knew?

The UK can cover its deficit and debts, tho it's taking a big reduction in public spending to do so.

Care to tell us how iScotland would cover its (proportionally similar) debts & (much bigger) deficit without a much bigger reduction in spending?

Swinney knows the Scottish deficit isn't sustainable, so how come so few SNP supporters do? Might it be because the SNP have allowed its supporters to believe false 'facts', so those people con themselves and Scotland is conned by the SNP?

Edited February 3, 2015 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

Hold onto your hats !

Just announced it`s " The Vow Plus ". Brown`s back and it`s " time to present more radical change ". Apparently.

So Brown`s back ? Ashcroft polls due out on Wednesday ? Murphy bounce will surely have tightened things up a bit ?

Here`s a snippet from the article on BBC tonight.......

Jimbo says "Only Labour can offer the change that people want to see: the ability with Home Rule to make distinctively Scottish decisions"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-31090242

Meanwhile, those who pay attention still know what's what.

Is Scotland paying attention to Scotland? Or is it diverted, trying to find Alex's magic money tree?

[LJS]

but we know that they will.

The SNP will be cheering the stupidity of their own voters, who will have done the SNP a favour but not themselves.

If you don't want a tory govt, you have to *positively* vote to stop their being a tory govt.

The SNP supporters say "there's blue tories and red tories, they're both the same" - but that's them displaying their political ignorance, cos they won't think an extra £5bn of cuts for Scotland is the same thing.

please outline a realistic scenario from current polling where a large SNP vote leads to a tory government.

[LJS]

Comfy genuine question because it puzzles me - people say Scottish Labour are out of touch with its constituents and no longer represent them however they walked the last GE up here. So, what has Scottish Labour done in the last 4 years to swing public opinion so much? Is it merely that they sided with the Tories on the Indy question (as they absolutely should have as the Labour Party is commited to the UK rather than just Scotland),

All I can think is that the people turning from Labour to SNP up here are not doing so because they no longer feel represented. They're doing so as a result of a petulant protest vote at not getting independence. A petulance that may well give them the Tories.

I think there are a number of issues here - there has been a "default" labour vote - where people have voted labour because their father & grandfather did - without giving much thought to it : suddenly the referendum has actually made them think & guess what...?

Edited February 3, 2015 by LJS

[LJS]

Meanwhile, those who pay attention still know what's what.

Is Scotland paying attention to Scotland? Or is it diverted, trying to find Alex's magic money tree?

I thought you were keen to debate the issues, Neil. Constant references to Squirrels & magic money trees really do you no favours.

You know I'm sure we could come up with Magic Murphrooms... but then, no one would believe us

seen the polls lately? we love punching ourselves up here in Jockland

Edited February 3, 2015 by LJS

[eFestivals]

please outline a realistic scenario from current polling where a large SNP vote leads to a tory government.

I've given it to you here many times already.

If you still can't see how reduced Labour seats can equal a tory govt, the issue is your grasp of the UK political system.

[eFestivals]

I thought you were keen to debate the issues, Neil. Constant references to Squirrels & magic money trees really do you no favours.

If separtists are going to keep pretending there's a magic money tree, I'm going to keep asking them to show it to me.

The proof that there's no magic money tree is in those numbers that Alex has provided, that you refuse to look at or think about - even when I constantly provide them to you at your request.

I notice that with your first post here since I did (again) provide them at your request, you've decided to ignore them. Why is that?

seen the polls lately? we love punching ourselves up here in Jockland

yep, the self-punching was outlined in an explicit statement by your glorious leader just about a year ago, and like everything he's said too many Scots take it literally and forget to think about what they're actually choosing to do.

[gary1979666]

Con 279

Lab 254

SNP 48 (per the poll yesterday)

LD 43

UKIP 4

Green 2

Others 20

Not impossible - would be another ConDem coalition. I know you can argue the ups and downs of likelihoods, but it's not a massive stretch if there's a few Milligaffes along the way.

[DomDom1984]

I'm not exactly fussed if voting SNP leads to a Tory government. Are Labour supposed to be some sort of brilliant alternative or something?

[eFestivals]

I'm not exactly fussed if voting SNP leads to a Tory government. Are Labour supposed to be some sort of brilliant alternative or something?

vote Scotland an extra £5Bn in cuts, why don't cha?

Perhaps read up on policies to find out why you would be?

Mind you, that's the mind version of tory cuts. If you get the SNP (new) dream of "full fiscal autonomy", you'll be voting yourself even bigger cuts than the tories will give you.

But they're all the same, yeah?

[gary1979666]

From an article in the Times about Ashcroft's latest poll. He looked at the 25 seat that either voted YES or were very tight - 24 would go to the SNP.

Ashcroft writes that Douglas Alexander (pictured above, left), Labour’s campaign manager, would lose his Paisley seat with a swing to the SNP of 25 per cent, Salmond would win a comfortable majority over the Lib Dems, and Danny Alexander (above right) would lose by 29 points.

[DomDom1984]

There's a difference between "all the same" and a good alternative. A massive difference.

On a Scottish level, the Labour party are a total joke. I don't trust them to take our interests seriously because they never have.

The problem with this whole "vote the SNP, get Tories" line is that it is quite blatantly pathetic scaremongering. Which might well work unfortunately. People are worried about the SNP getting some sort of influence on a national level.

The problem is now on the Tories. Because they'll no doubt be trying to make some sort of similar move, except this time, they can't stand by Labour with it. Labour have made the first move in that regard and it'll be very interesting to see how they respond on a Scottish level, or even if they will. If they concede defeat in Scotland, which is actually feasible given how little influence they appear to have here, Labour will probably nab more seats than people realise.