The Dirty Independence Question

[LJS]

Two of my 3 children are entitled to vote in the referendum. My daughter will be 17 so this will be her first vote. Both are passionately pro independence. My oldest son being very active in the Yes campaign. It's their future & that has played no small part in my decision to vote yes.

[eFestivals]

Two of my 3 children are entitled to vote in the referendum. My daughter will be 17 so this will be her first vote. Both are passionately pro independence. My oldest son being very active in the Yes campaign. It's their future & that has played no small part in my decision to vote yes.

I dunno how I'd feel about things regarding my kid if in your position. If nothing else you're making their future more uncertain than it would otherwise be, but that uncertainty doesn't necessarily get to be a bad thing.

As for being "passionately pro independence", I don't doubt they are, but ... kids that age tend to be passionate about anything, anything from the most frivolous upwards.

And whether they truly grasp the magnitude of their choice is another thing entirely, but given that so many adults do such a bad job each and every time they vote I'm not sure I'd have things different from the 16+ voting age that's being used here.

In a way I'm quite pleased to be sat where I am, where I can sit back and watch how it pans out without it effecting me. And if you Scots have messed up, I'll be happy to enjoy the money.

[russycarps]

Two of my 3 children are entitled to vote in the referendum. My daughter will be 17 so this will be her first vote. Both are passionately pro independence. My oldest son being very active in the Yes campaign. It's their future & that has played no small part in my decision to vote yes.

what is their passion based on?

I find the whole thing very curious. It's a terrific experiment to observe.

[LJS]

what is their passion based on?

I find the whole thing very curious. It's a terrific experiment to observe.

my daughter is pretty much heart based - not happy with the fact Scotland's voice is not represented in the government in Westminster.

My son who is 27 & hence past the passion of youth phase has always been interested in & active in left wing politics. It can hardly be surprising that from that background he is less than satisfied with the current arrangements. He is also passionate about Scottish culture -plays Scottish folk music & would certainly see the strengthening of a Scottish cultural identity as an important gain post independence. He is not much motivated by money so although he would subscribe to the belief that economically Scotland can do at least as well as rUK, its not a game changer for him.

Just remember, because you guys have decided to believe those who say Independence will be an all round bad thing, does not make that a fact. There are authoritative informed voices stating different views.

& we were told some pretty bad things would happen if we voted for devolution... & guess what? ... they didn't.

I would also suggest that there are a number of things happening this year which could potentially boost the Yes vote:

The 700th Anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn

The World cup with the UK media relentlessly banging on about England

The Commonwealth games in Glasgow - if they are deemed a success - will the Scots experience a mini London 2012 feel good factor.

Possible uKIP success in the euro elections (we don't like them up here)

If each of these swing the vote by just 1% ... that could be interesting.

[LJS]

I think you let them watch Braveheart once too often

not possible!!!

The most factual & historically accurate movie ever to come out of Hollywood.

Incidentally,Mel Gibson stayed round the corner from me above the Kebab shop with a crazy guy who ran some Clan type thing & dressed in full highland gear all the time. This was to get him into the spirit of the thing.

[russycarps]

my daughter is pretty much heart based - not happy with the fact Scotland's voice is not represented in the government in Westminster.

My son who is 27 & hence past the passion of youth phase has always been interested in & active in left wing politics. It can hardly be surprising that from that background he is less than satisfied with the current arrangements. He is also passionate about Scottish culture -plays Scottish folk music & would certainly see the strengthening of a Scottish cultural identity as an important gain post independence. He is not much motivated by money so although he would subscribe to the belief that economically Scotland can do at least as well as rUK, its not a game changer for him.

Just remember, because you guys have decided to believe those who say Independence will be an all round bad thing, does not make that a fact. There are authoritative informed voices stating different views.

& we were told some pretty bad things would happen if we voted for devolution... & guess what? ... they didn't.

I would also suggest that there are a number of things happening this year which could potentially boost the Yes vote:

The 700th Anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn

The World cup with the UK media relentlessly banging on about England

The Commonwealth games in Glasgow - if they are deemed a success - will the Scots experience a mini London 2012 feel good factor.

Possible uKIP success in the euro elections (we don't like them up here)

If each of these swing the vote by just 1% ... that could be interesting.

Interesting, thanks for the explanation.

My belief that economically it will be a bad thing for scotland is just my opinion based on the facts I've read, rather than being persuaded by a politician of either side (I hope!). All things considered, I just cannot see how scotland can be anything other than economically mediocre at best, and that the standard of living will decline. I've spent quite a considerable and tedious part of my older life in a financial environment, so it will be interesting (for me) to see if I can predict the sequence of events after such an event correctly. But there is a very strong likelihood I will be wrong! And for the people of scotland I hope I am wrong in if the Yes vote wins. I do not wish ill on the scots!

If I had to guess which way it will go, I would honestly say I think the yes vote will win.

Who knows though, it's an unprecendented event.

One thing I do know is that America does not want an independent scotland. And that government is very adept at fixing ballots. I wonder if the Yes vote has lost before it's even begun. If the presidential election can be rigged, you better believe this can be!

Edited April 11, 2014 by russycarps

[LJS]

Interesting, thanks for the explanation.

My belief that economically it will be a bad thing for scotland is just my opinion based on the facts I've read, rather than being persuaded by a politician of either side (I hope!). All things considered, I just cannot see how scotland can be anything other than economically mediocre at best, and that the standard of living will decline. I've spent quite a considerable and tedious part of my older life in a financial environment, so it will be interesting (for me) to see if I can predict the sequence of events after such an event correctly. But there is a very strong likelihood I will be wrong! And for the people of scotland I hope I am wrong in if the Yes vote wins. I do not wish ill on the scots!

If I had to guess which way it will go, I would honestly say I think the yes vote will win.

Who knows though, it's an unprecendented event.

One thing I do know is that America does not want an independent scotland. And that government is very adept at fixing ballots. I wonder if the Yes vote has lost before it's even begun. If the presidential election can be rigged, you better believe this can be!

Yeah, I think the only thing we can be certain is that there is not a lot we can be certain of! In a way I am glad I'm not making my decision on economic grounds because I have read much on both sides that is quite convincing. But then, what certainties are there in the Status Quo? (other than that thy will continue to wear denim & make a fortune from 1 song!!) - sorry couldn't resist.

I'm interested in your comments about the USA - I did read some stuff about Alistair Darling dropping pretty unsubtle hints about the Americans being on his side - but haven't seen anything that substantiates that.

Maybe Donald Trump is a secret CIA agent sent over to infiltrate Scotland!

I kind of hoped that the days of the USA fixing elections all over the world were gone - I suppose all the Snowdon stuff might suggest that is wishful thinking. Am I naive in thinking our (British!) democratic traditions are strong enough to resist that?

[LJS]

Will we still be allowed to watch classic comedy like this if we vote yes?

Or will it be denied to us like Dr. Who?

[eFestivals]

My son who is 27 & hence past the passion of youth phase has always been interested in & active in left wing politics.

can I ask why he's working for a neo-con party's campaign, then?

Just remember, because you guys have decided to believe those who say Independence will be an all round bad thing, does not make that a fact. There are authoritative informed voices stating different views.

what is it about an independence campaign that makes people unable to read?

I've said no such thing. I've merely been pointing out some of the more ridiculous things - from both sides!

Meanwhile there doesn't seem to be a single 'yes' voter who can read an HM Treasury statement in full. I've yet to see anyone from Scotland who has any knowledge of the following sentence to the one they like so very much, despite it having as much importance to the statement as that likable-to-yes-ers bit.

The treasury statement goes something like "all the debt is UK debt, and Scotland is responsible for its share as part of the UK". I do wish yes-ers would take note.

Next up for the Scottish, blowing away the idea that "there's not one single positive thing about the union". Oh yeah? You've not read the independence white paper, which lists of the good things and says Scotland wants to keep them. The English Welsh even know how to issue driving licences better than nationalists.

& we were told some pretty bad things would happen if we voted for devolution... & guess what? ... they didn't.

Oh do behave. There were some businesses that said depending what happens they might change what they do. That was it.

And just because not much happened and they didn't feel the need to change what they do doesn't get to mean that the same applies this time. It depends what happens.

The 700th Anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn

The World cup with the UK media relentlessly banging on about England

The Commonwealth games in Glasgow - if they are deemed a success - will the Scots experience a mini London 2012 feel good factor.

Possible uKIP success in the euro elections (we don't like them up here)

If each of these swing the vote by just 1% ... that could be interesting.

So, what you're saying is that to win, it requires glorying over one of the few military victories Scotland managed (against the English), and hating the English.

Yep, Scottish Nats are a different breed to UKIP. PMSL. :lol:

[eFestivals]

But then, what certainties are there in the Status Quo? (other than that thy will continue to wear denim & make a fortune from 1 song!!) - sorry couldn't resist.

See, you Scots even get the Quo wrong. They've made a fortune from many songs, but just three chords.

In all seriousness: you know what it is.

You can't have certainty in something that you've yet to find out what it is.

I kind of hoped that the days of the USA fixing elections all over the world were gone

hey, don't worry, the yanks have kept that as a favour to the4 SNP, so they've got a further excuse lined up if they lose, so they don't look like a bunch of racists who blame just one lot of 'them over there' for everything that happens around them.

[eFestivals]

Or will it be denied to us like Dr. Who?

there's little that rUK will deny a going-rate-paying Scotland, but perhaps you won't want to pay the going rate?

[LJS]

can I ask why he's working for a neo-con party's campaign, then?

glad to see you responding to Buff124 reminding us the thread is just for Laughs

I take the SNP are neocons? That's a new one on me. I think you may have previously desrcribed them as left-leaning. so they are left leaning neocons. Sounds painful to me.

Anyway he is not working for the SNP. If he is working for anyone it is Yes Scotland which is not the SNP.

Oh do behave. There were some businesses that said depending what happens they might change what they do. That was it.

Really? Here's what Mrs Thatcher had to say...

Indeed, it is hard to imagine how Scotland could conceivably benefit from what is proposed. Will there be more firms and jobs in Scotland after devolution than before it? Hardly. It is the excellent education, entrepreneurial flair and hard work of the Scots—along with low inflation and competitive tax rates—which have brought business success and more employment in recent years. But the prospect of more political interference, regulation and taxation—particularly at a time when global not local competition is what increasingly counts—can only deter foreign investors and drive talent south of the Border or beyond our shores.

The adverse consequences of the "tartan tax", which a Scottish parliament would have the power to impose, have already been criticised by businessmen, and the Scottish people would do well to listen. Nor should they be beguiled by the Labour Party's undertaking that it will not, in fact, raise tax.

Let's remember some home truths. Powers are given in order to be used; politicians love to spend, and, in the end, they have to tax; all that ever deters them is the unpopularity of taxation. But, in this case, with the vast majority of the budget still coming from general Exchequer taxation, Scottish politicians will be able to shift the blame to Westminster for all that goes wrong.

So much for the gloomy jobs prospect under devolution. But would the Scots at least have a better deal on public spending? Almost certainly not. Public expenditure per head in Scotland is already substantially higher than in England, and this arrangement has continued unchallenged for many years. It is, though, doubtful whether it would last if the whole financial relationship were subject to fundamental re-examination on the basis of proven need.

And, of course, the opportunities for conflict between Westminster and the Scottish parliament are legion. I have already mentioned some of the predictable and potentially destablising clashes over spending and taxation. But what if, say, the Scottish parliament, which would have control over training, runs up against Westminster, which has control over social security benefits? How can these two aspects of labour market policy be disengaged? Or again, what if the Scots, who would have control over industry policy, wanted to bail out a firm against the general policy guidelines, which would still be set by Westminster? Whose judgment would prevail?

Still more seriously, what if the Scottish parliament refused to have nuclear weapons in Scotland, while the Westminster government was determined to keep our nuclear capability there? The agitators would have a field day.

Not dissimilar to a lot of what BT are saying now. So forgive us if some of us take it with a pinch of salt.

So, what you're saying is that to win, it requires glorying over one of the few military victories Scotland managed (against the English), and hating the English.

No I didn't say that - I simply listed a series of events that MIGHT have an influence on the outcome. Bannockburn, like it or not, does hold significance for many Scots. And, yes there are Anti-English elements in Scotland.

My personal opinion is that too many Scots have a "chip on their shoulders" about England. You won't find any anti-English sentiment in any of my posts.

Now, I know you can perfectly easily argue this from the other side, but I would hope Independence would enable Scotland to have a more sensible grown up relationship with England.

[LJS]

It seems to be widely accepted on all sides that the better together campaign has been somewhat negative & this hasn't been working. It has been widely reported they would be more positive in the future.

So how do they respond to Alex salmond's keynote speech to the SNP conference?

Let's see...

However, Better Together's campaign director, Blair McDougall, said of Mr Salmond's attack: "There's something deeply ironic about someone being quite so negative in complaining about negativity, but I can't think of anything more negative than risking people's pensions, people's jobs, people's mortgages, which is exactly what Alex Salmond has done today.

You couldn't make it up!

[eFestivals]

I take the SNP are neocons? That's a new one on me. I think you may have previously desrcribed them as left-leaning. so they are left leaning neocons.

as left-leaning as neo-cons get, yeah. Which as the Labour Party proves, is to the right.

A left leaning party doesn't make their one and only financial policy commitment to be tax cuts for the richest. Just in case that's passed you by - or rather, because it has passed you by.

Anyway he is not working for the SNP. If he is working for anyone it is Yes Scotland which is not the SNP.

PMSL. :lol:

Can you please show me the independence3 white papers which haven't been commissioned by the SNP?

No? Why's that then?

Really? Here's what Mrs Thatcher had to say...

Yeah, really.

What Thatcher had to say is as accurate as what you're saying. Ignoring reality makes a person a fantasist, it doesn't make them right.

Not dissimilar to a lot of what BT are saying now. So forgive us if some of us take it with a pinch of salt.

Why aren't you able to distinguish between a campaign that didn't choose its own existence, and a business reacting to govt policy?

Those who say that "anyone who disagrees with the yes campaign is a liar" is merely displaying their own massive intellectual flaws, prejudices &/or racism.

No I didn't say that - I simply listed a series of events that MIGHT have an influence on the outcome.

and if they do? That's an outcome where racism wins the day.

That'll be a victory Scotland can be proud of, eh?

My personal opinion is that too many Scots have a "chip on their shoulders" about England. You won't find any anti-English sentiment in any of my posts.

well, apart from the parts where anything which might be positive for England and not the yes campaign becomes a lie, of course. As it did a few lines above.

Now, I know you can perfectly easily argue this from the other side, but I would hope Independence would enable Scotland to have a more sensible grown up relationship with England.

yep, cos throwing your toys out of the pram, stamping your feet and saying "it's just not fair" is proper adult stuff. P

The only logic to any of this is the logic that ends up in the Bedroom Republic.

[eFestivals]

It seems to be widely accepted on all sides that the better together campaign has been somewhat negative

It's hard to be positive when pointing out the lies of another. Anyone who hasn't grasped that hasn't grasped anything of either side.

You couldn't make it up!

You're right, I couldn't.

But the SNP? That's all they do, make it up.

[Buff124]

Despite the leaked IPCC report being of greater exponential magnitude, I find myself back on the carousel that is the 'dirty independence' thread. Some fairground music might be more apt, but I can't help thinking of this song when reading Neil's comments about Scotland's secret Tory army, and the SNP neo-cons who provide universal free prescriptions

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bWYAWULLHA

[eFestivals]

It's great to see such deep consideration of everything. I'm sure Scotland has the rosy future that the SNP promise.

the SNP neo-cons who provide universal free prescriptions

And who have promised a massive tax cut to the richest people in Scotland on independence.

What they promised everyone else? Nothing at all on any fiorm basis, but lots of wishy-washy "iScotland will be fantastic" stuff that's often contrary to solid facts.

Those are the facts.

Free prescriptions are a fact of non-independence, not independence. That appears to be passing you by.

Has it never occurred to you that politicians throw crumbs from the table while they eat their gourmet dinner, and that the crumbs buy the votes of the stupid?

Edited April 13, 2014 by eFestivals

[LJS]

It's hard to be positive when pointing out the lies of another. Anyone who hasn't grasped that hasn't grasped anything of either side.

I know its hard ... Its always easier to attack the opposition than to make a positive case for your own position. My point is it doesn't appear to be working & this seems to be widely accepted on the "no" side as well.

Maybe its too difficult to paint a rosy future as part of the UK?

Personhally if they want to carry on being relentlessly negative, it suits me as, if anything it seems ro increase the Yes vote

[LJS]

And who have promised a massive tax cut to the richest people in Scotland on independence.

..

that'll be this i take it.

"a pre-announced reduction in corporation tax of up to three percentage points"

I think you may be exaggerating a wee bit here. & it does seem a rather flimsy peg on which to hang the neocon tag. As far as I can see you are the first person to accuse the SNP of being neocons - congratulations.

Free prescriptions are a fact of non-independence, not independence. That appears to be passing you by.

You are right they are a fact of non-independence introduced by devolved governments in Wales Northern Ireland & Scotland. Not a policy many neocons would espouse.

A policy we have got in spite of Westminster not because of it.

[eFestivals]

I know its hard ... Its always easier to attack the opposition than to make a positive case for your own position. My point is it doesn't appear to be working & this seems to be widely accepted on the "no" side as well.

there's solid reason why, but you won't want to hear it and you certainbly won't want to agree with it.

But one day you'll have to recognise it f0or yourself.

Maybe its too difficult to paint a rosy future as part of the UK?

It's the changers who have to make their case for change.

A case they're failing to successfully make so far, in case it's passing you by.

Personhally if they want to carry on being relentlessly negative, it suits me as, if anything it seems ro increase the Yes vote

A smarter man would see the dangers in that.

[eFestivals]

My brain can't have kicked in yesterday morning. Was I really typing neocon when I was thinking neoliberal?

Apologies for my stupidity.

My words below address any use of 'neocon' as being 'neoliberal' (and yes, I'm aware that very possibly takes your words wrongly).

that'll be this i take it.

"a pre-announced reduction in corporation tax of up to three percentage points"

If iScotland is to be left-leaning, care to tell me why the one and only solid policy in advance of an iScotland is to enrich the wealthiest?

I think you may be exaggerating a wee bit here. & it does seem a rather flimsy peg on which to hang the neocon tag. As far as I can see you are the first person to accuse the SNP of being neocons - congratulations.

Criticisms of the yes campaign are lies, comments on their stated policies are exaggerations. OK.

The SNP are no less a neo-liberal party as the major three. In all seriousness, if people like you in Scotland who will vote yes don't think they are, then an iScotland is going to be in big big trouble.

You are right they are a fact of non-independence introduced by devolved governments in Wales Northern Ireland & Scotland. Not a policy many neocons would espouse.

A policy we have got in spite of Westminster not because of it.

I must have missed the bit in politics class which told me that neo-liberals don't throw any crumbs from the table.

A policy you got because of Westminster, and not because of Scotland. You know, when that evil bunch of toffs in Westminster started paying towards the people in Scotland at a greater rate than other UK citizens. And that's called 'punishment by the English' in Scotland.

When benefiting the few at the expense of the many is taking the high moral ground, there is only a lowly ignorant swamp.

Edited April 14, 2014 by eFestivals

[russycarps]

I was at a dinner party this weekend for work-related reasons and was sat with 4 "rich banker" types, all white, english, home-counties dwellers. Very much not the sort of people I usually mix with.

I was surprised at the level of anger from them about the possibility of scottish independence. They seemed angry, upset, hurt and humiliated by the prospect. They clearly took it as an insult towards the english. They made derisory jokes about the scots, the sort of childish stereotypes I hadnt heard in years and years.

I asked them why they were so bothered, and the main reason given was to do with our shared history, eg the wars we had fought together and the fact we had built an empire together. All of them thought the uk would remain strong without scotland, but that scotland would be massively weakened.

It was an interesting perspective. I suspect this is the majority view held among the english.

They were 4 tory pricks though.

I'm going to wales for easter, I am going to try and gauge the opinion of the welsh when I'm there, see how it compares.

[eFestivals]

I'm going to wales for easter, I am going to try and gauge the opinion of the welsh when I'm there, see how it compares.

it doesn't. There's around 5% support for independence in Wales.

It was an interesting perspective. I suspect this is the majority view held among the english.

it's not at all.

A very recent poll showed that 53% of rUK people think that "iScotland shouldn't use the pound".

That's a dreadful question tho. There's no way of know why exactly those people are saying that, and on what basis. And of course at its base level, rUK can't stop iScotland using the pound (but can stop a CU).

What we do know tho is that iScotland is saying it has a 'right' to CU and is demanding some of the sovereignty of rUK via that as a 'right' of Scotland (as ridiculous as it gets from a country demanding its own sovereignty). There'll be an awful lot of people saying 'no' to that, because why should one country underwrite the debts of another via blackmail, as the yes campaign is attempting to make happen?

And as we've seen from Scots posting here and can be seen elsewhere, a huge proportion of Scots don't understand what a currency is so don't understand what they're asking, or have warped views of history and think Scotland is asking for nothing that's not been done before. Instead of realising that they're asking for the outrageous in the way they're asking for it.

But it's parr for the course. There's little intelligence being applied, as gets demonstrated by continual repeats of "it's the UK's debt and not Scotland's", and what there is instead is selfishness and blind hatred of anything English. It's the only basis the SNP can win on.

And these are the same guys who like to say how evil UKIP is, when they're doing all the same things but with a different target for their hatred. It's laughable beyond belief.

[russycarps]

yeh I suppose I should have said " I suspect this is the majority view held among the surrey dwelling right wing english"

But the SNP whipping up anti-English feeling will cause more and more people to move from apathy to dislike towards the scots. It's very unpleasant to see.

As has been said before, what happens to the (say) 45% of scots who didnt vote want independence in the event of a win for the yes vote, when the economic reality bites.

It's not like it's like the falklands where 99% of people voted to stay british (or crimea).

Bad times lie ahead I suspect.

[LJS]

Today's nonsense from better together

"SOME of the worlds poorest people would suffer from a Yes vote, Westminsters International Development Secretary has claimed.

Justine Greening said the contribution of Scottish charities, universities and institutions are at the heart of the UKs international efforts and these have a far more positive impact as part of the Union."

Vote no or the African baby gets it!