The Dirty Independence Question

[Comfy Bean]

13 hours ago, LJS said:

That's not my claim. You have moved the goalposts yet again.

http://i.makeagif.com/media/8-19-2015/D8sxR1.mp4

[eFestivals]

Just now, comfortablynumb1910 said:

http://i.makeagif.com/media/8-19-2015/D8sxR1.mp4

Moving goalposts is Scottish indy in it's entiity.  You want to believe you know what indy will deliver hen you can't even say what currency Scotland would have.

So you move the goalposts somewhere else until the somewhere else also has awkward facts, so then the goal posts will move yet again.

While "Project Fear" remains the exact same factual arguments all of the time with no moved goalposts, that scares Salmond so much he wishes to disallow facts and truth in the next indy campaign.

Because even the greatest proponents of indy know it can only be won on a lie.

But anyway, more than moving goalposts, this is much more appropriate for you....

 

[Comfy Bean]

13 hours ago, eFestivals said:

 

Now you need to ask yourselrf why no one actually seems that keen to fuck off, particularly the one who keeps on saying she wants to fuck off.

 

 

Maybe you are right or maybe you continue to present your opinion as fact.

Some would argue that within the past week or so Sturgeon has published the new referendum bill as promised and dispatched her 4 top media bods to the US to " shadow " ( 2 on each side )  the Clinton and Trump teams - specifically tasked to learn from their use of social media during the final stretch of the US election.

It could all just be part of her bluff of course  

[eFestivals]

14 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Maybe you are right or maybe you continue to present your opinion as fact.

Some would argue that within the past week or so Sturgeon has published the new referendum bill as promised and dispatched her 4 top media bods to the US to " shadow " ( 2 on each side )  the Clinton and Trump teams - specifically tasked to learn from their use of social media during the final stretch of the US election.

It could all just be part of her bluff of course  

She's published a referendum bill, but not as promised.

Her wording has changed from a ref being "highly likely if there's brexit" to "highly likely if Scotland is out of the single market".

Some of us actually listen to the leader of the SG, while those in Scotland make it up for themselves. Never mind, eh?

Meanwhile, she doesn't even have her own basis to back up that referendum bill. She says its necessary because of the economic impact onto Scotland  from loss of the single market, yet she doesn't have the economic basis to back that up.

In fact, she doesn't even have a plan via which Scotland might stay in the single market as yet.

And i'm not surprised that Sturgeon thinks there's a lot she can learn from Trump. Salmond's campaign of lies became Nigel's campaign of lies became Trump's campaign of lies and next will be Sturgeon's campaign of lies.

Because lies are all there is in favour of Scottish indy.

How well the lies work depends how stupid the electorate are. The only question left to answer is has the majority in Scotland become as thick as pigshit as the majority in England within the last two years?

In the words of Big Brother: you decide.

Edited October 28, 2016 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

PS: good news for Scottish govt revenues (if indy) via the fall of the pound - the value of oil has just increased by 18%, because it's traded in dollars.

That's probably worth 50% or more to the current value of oil revenues, which will take them all the way up to ... erm .... £90m a year.

More importantly, it does make oil extraction around the UK more economically viable, which should see fewer job losses in that sector than would have otherwise happened.

[Comfy Bean]

36 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

And i'm not surprised that Sturgeon thinks there's a lot she can learn from Trump. Salmond's campaign of lies became Nigel's campaign of lies became Trump's campaign of lies and next will be Sturgeon's campaign of lies.

 

I see you`ve slightly twisted what I said. 

For clarity, Sturgeon`s guys are looking at how both sides maximise advantages from social media techniques in the run up to the US election.

As I suggested, it`s almost as if she is preparing for something and publishing the bill last week is further " evidence " against your " opinion " that she is bluffing.

I haven`t changed my own view that Scotland should wait until after the Tory procession at the next GE. I can see how Sturgeon would think that the majority of Scots now accept that the Tories will win and so she may decide - why wait ?

I still believe that the majority of people living in Scotland want things to be different than they are currently and will continue to be under ongoing Tory governments. As you know, I regard the 32 councils voting to remain in the eu and the fact that we only returned 1 ( one ) Tory MP as clear evidence of this difference. 

[Comfy Bean]

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

PS: good news for Scottish govt revenues (if indy) via the fall of the pound - the value of oil has just increased by 18%, because it's traded in dollars.

That's probably worth 50% or more to the current value of oil revenues, which will take them all the way up to ... erm .... £90m a year.

More importantly, it does make oil extraction around the UK more economically viable, which should see fewer job losses in that sector than would have otherwise happened.

Where`s Russy ? I thought he had his eye on this 

Imagine that the price can go up as well as down. Who`d have thought it !

[eFestivals]

9 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

I see you`ve slightly twisted what I said. 

For clarity, Sturgeon`s guys are looking at how both sides maximise advantages from social media techniques in the run up to the US election.

As I suggested, it`s almost as if she is preparing for something and publishing the bill last week is further " evidence " against your " opinion " that she is bluffing.

I haven`t changed my own view that Scotland should wait until after the Tory procession at the next GE. I can see how Sturgeon would think that the majority of Scots now accept that the Tories will win and so she may decide - why wait ?

I still believe that the majority of people living in Scotland want things to be different than they are currently and will continue to be under ongoing Tory governments. As you know, I regard the 32 councils voting to remain in the eu and the fact that we only returned 1 ( one ) Tory MP as clear evidence of this difference. 

Social meee-ja is only effective in rounding up support if it's disseminating a message people will buy into.

The problem Scottish indy has is that "vote indy, vote yourself poorer" is not a message most people will buy into, which is precisely why Salmond lied about it last time.

Unfortunately for the SNP is that the fact of "vote indy, vote yourself poorer" is even clearer now to the Scottish population than it was 2 years ago.

Which is precisely why Salmond is now demanding that facts and truth are not allowed to be part of any coming indy campaign.

[eFestivals]

10 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Where`s Russy ? I thought he had his eye on this 

Imagine that the price can go up as well as down. Who`d have thought it !

If you're doing thinking - I'm surprised, cos it's not what you normally do - then perhaps think about how the rise still leaves the price half-way short of what it needs to be for break-even for the Scottish oil industry, and that the current oil gush is going to keep prices well below that break even point for a decade at least, and all the while the extraction costs off Scotland are rising.

Cos then you 'll be able to put the oil bunny back to bed.

And you'll have to find a new myth to try and support the laughable economics of indy.

Or just accept that indy will be like tory cuts on steroids, to welcome in the new tory age in Scotland, cos just as I asked yesterday which you ran away from: what do the socially conservative do when they can't pay the bills?

[Comfy Bean]

6 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Cos then you 'll be able to put the oil bunny back to bed.

 

As you know, I was never in bed with that particular bunny.

If it saves us all a bit of time here, we weren`t voting on the white paper as you know 

[gary1979666]

It funny watch this, as throughout the EU debate "Project Fear" was correct and the consequences of leaving were right (and for the most part, are right), but when the same group say the same thing about Indy, then NOOOOOO, that can't be right, you can't predict the future, blah, blah.

There is a lot of parity between the argument for/against Indy and Brexit - about wanting control back, not wanting to be governed by people you didn't vote for, strength in numbers, economic uncertainty, securing trade, local exceptionalism, etc.  Yet the Indy Remainers don't seem to see it.

[eFestivals]

1 hour ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

As you know, I was never in bed with that particular bunny.

If it saves us all a bit of time here, we weren`t voting on the white paper as you know 

Yep, just like brexiters weren't voting for boris or davis or fox but that's what they're getting.

Just as Scotland will get tory by its own choice once people like you wise up that you've voted for disaster.

[eFestivals]

39 minutes ago, gary1979666 said:

It funny watch this, as throughout the EU debate "Project Fear" was correct and the consequences of leaving were right (and for the most part, are right), but when the same group say the same thing about Indy, then NOOOOOO, that can't be right, you can't predict the future, blah, blah.

There is a lot of parity between the argument for/against Indy and Brexit - about wanting control back, not wanting to be governed by people you didn't vote for, strength in numbers, economic uncertainty, securing trade, local exceptionalism, etc.  Yet the Indy Remainers don't seem to see it.

yep, it's just about identical.

There is a difference tho, in that snippers are a bit madder than the kippers, because....

Kippers actually get what they want via brexit, while Scotland still ends up without an amount of sovereignty and tied into things it doesn't want because of it.

Like having to work to a 3% deficit, and the Euro, plus it exchanges it's "that's not what Scotland voted for" thing for 1% of the influence instead of it's current 10% of the influence.

[LJS]

2 hours ago, gary1979666 said:

It funny watch this, as throughout the EU debate "Project Fear" was correct and the consequences of leaving were right (and for the most part, are right), but when the same group say the same thing about Indy, then NOOOOOO, that can't be right, you can't predict the future, blah, blah.

There is a lot of parity between the argument for/against Indy and Brexit - about wanting control back, not wanting to be governed by people you didn't vote for, strength in numbers, economic uncertainty, securing trade, local exceptionalism, etc.  Yet the Indy Remainers don't seem to see it.

I  criticised the remain campaign during the eu campaign for exaggeration & scaremongering. I would suggest that post referendum events (so far) have proved me correct. The negative impacts of the vote for brexit have been nothing like as bad as we were told they would be. Even Neil now says there are some advantages to brexit, which I don't recall him saying before the vote. (If I have remembered wrongly, I know I can rely on him to correct me.)

Equally, any rational examination of some of the apocalyptic claims made by better together, would conclude they were guilty of similar hyperbole.

The suggestion that it is irrational to want out of one union whilst wanting to remain in another only works if the nature of the two unions is more or less identical.

It's like saying if I find marriage to Keira Knightley an attractive option , I should also find marriage to Katy Hopkins attractive because they are both unions!

[LJS]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

yep, it's just about identical.

There is a difference tho, in that snippers are a bit madder than the kippers, because....

Kippers actually get what they want via brexit,

Do they? According to you (pre vote) they were getting economic disaster which I'm fairly sure they didn't really want.

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

while Scotland still ends up without an amount of sovereignty and tied into things it doesn't want because of it.

Is that because we'll be in the EU? 

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

Like having to work to a 3% deficit, and the Euro, plus it exchanges it's "that's not what Scotland voted for" thing for 1% of the influence instead of it's current 10% of the influence.

I don't think the 10% influence thing was much bothered about  working for Scotland's interests. I'll go for 1 seat at the table as against no seats at the table.

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, LJS said:

I  criticised the remain campaign during the eu campaign for exaggeration & scaremongering. I would suggest that post referendum events (so far) have proved me correct.

Sorry, but would you like to say what's been proven as false so far...?

The only thing I can think of is "an emergency budget", tho the BoE has pumped £60Bn into the economy, and that has much the same effect as a budget might do ... and anyway, that claim was made by Gideon about what he'd do himself, and that ceased to have relevance as soon as he got the boot.

Currency will fall by up-to 20%: check

Nothing else has happened yet because we haven't even started the process of brexit yet.

You might as well claim "Project Fear" about indy a lie when you're just as rich when you wake up on victory day as you were when you went to bed.

[eFestivals]

10 minutes ago, LJS said:

Equally, any rational examination of some of the apocalyptic claims made by better together, would conclude they were guilty of similar hyperbole.

Same question: what are you claiming as that hyperbole?

Do be aware that I'll be off checking the real context of any words said, sob you won't get away with twisting.

"rUK might have to bomb Scottish airports" is about the most outrageous anyone can come up with, but within the context of how it wqas said it wasn't an unreasonable thing to say. If the island is being invaded thru a folded Scotland, what the feck do you think rUK is going do? It's going to bomb Scotland. Indy doesn't even make a difference with that.

So, can I please have a list of supposed hyperbole please, just to prove the hyperbole is not your own...? Thank you.

[eFestivals]

38 minutes ago, LJS said:

The suggestion that it is irrational to want out of one union whilst wanting to remain in another only works if the nature of the two unions is more or less identical.

They're both Unions where Scotland has to follow the lead of the majority which is elsewhere, guaranteeing that Scotland will not always get its own wishes.

However, in one union Scotland is far more-minor partner than it is in the UK.

And those who support being that more-minor partner are the same ones currently screaming "Scotland is an equal partner in the Union".

If someone had invented that sort of idiocy as the plotline of a book, it would n't be believed.

Also, one partner showers Scotland with money. The other one will say "give us yer money" even tho you'll already have shitloads less than currently.

And of course, the best benefit of all of the EU is how Scotland can't even be a member unless it first becomes like tories on steroids, cutting public services to shreds.

Is it those worse-than-tory-cuts that the EU will impose on Scotland which makes the EU the better proposition? Just wondering, like.

Cos it seems more than a little brain dead to say you want out because of some (comparatively) small cuts only to ensure you have far bigger ones.

Edited October 28, 2016 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

20 minutes ago, LJS said:

It's like saying if I find marriage to Keira Knightley an attractive option , I should also find marriage to Katy Hopkins attractive because they are both unions!

Nope, it's like a millionaire saying he's happy to give up his wealth to marry the skint girl while complaining that random people in the world haven't randomly made the skint girl a millionaire cos he's going to miss his millions.

[eFestivals]

20 minutes ago, LJS said:

Is that because we'll be in the EU? 

either.

You currently complain about the things Westminster "forces" onto Scotland, like cuts.

The EU will also force things onto Scotland, like MUCH bigger cuts.

And the Euro, and your own currency for a number of years before the Euro.

And perhaps hard borders with rUK (depending on what rUK & EU does, and fuck all to do with any choice of Scotland's).

Those are in the treaties you'd be agreeing too, don't forget.

Some of those are new things Scotland can enjoy being forced on it, tho one is just much bigger and much worse than anything Westminster does.

You seem to keep forgetting, too, that these are the big issues where the SNP have no satisfactory answers and the lack of satisfactory answers was what had indy fail last time.

You might think Scotland has got more stupid and susceptible to lies since 2014 tho it's not what I'm seeing from people in Scotland.

[eFestivals]

28 minutes ago, LJS said:

I don't think the 10% influence thing was much bothered about  working for Scotland's interests. I'll go for 1 seat at the table as against no seats at the table.

there's 59 Scottish seats at the table right now. FFS.

Outnumbered is always outnumbered.

And have you heard of qualified majority voting? It's what it's called when you have to do what Germany and France say, and what you think doesn't matter a fuck.

[gary1979666]

51 minutes ago, LJS said:

It's like saying if I find marriage to Keira Knightley an attractive option , I should also find marriage to Katy Hopkins attractive because they are both unions!

It's more like saying you don't want to marry Kiera, as she once laughed at Bernard Manning joke but then jumping straight in bed with Hopkins and asking her to talk dirty to you!! 

[eFestivals]

34 minutes ago, gary1979666 said:

It's more like saying you don't want to marry Kiera, as she once laughed at Bernard Manning joke but then jumping straight in bed with Hopkins and asking her to talk dirty to you!! 

- more accurate and much better than mine.

[Comfy Bean]

1 hour ago, LJS said:

The suggestion that it is irrational to want out of one union whilst wanting to remain in another only works if the nature of the two unions is more or less identical.

 

Correct. 

Genuinely surprised that Gaz brought this up earlier and that he doesn`t follow how it can be logical to wish to be independent politically from rUK while wishing to remain part of the european union.

Of course plenty of folk want to remain rule brittania while turning away from europe. Takes all sorts I suppose 

[Comfy Bean]

Should probably have highlighted the Irish in the South that last post.............