The Dirty Independence Question

[viberunner]

absolutely correct - so it gets a bit boring to hear some accuse Cameron of having denied them that option. It's Scotland that have denied Scotland the chance to vote for devo max.

I'm merely pointing out that he grandly says "the people are sovereign" but then he gives the people no say beyond voting to endorse his White Paper - the very thing so many yes voters say they're not voting in support of.

actually it's likely that most start-up costs money will go to contractors and not govt employees - and if Scotland is being a good EU member there's low chance of that going to Scottish companies because it will have to be open-tendered.

It might surprise you to know that I've yet to meet an Englishman who regards himself as the subserviant you regard yourself as.

I haven't accused Cameron of that so it's not for me to justify that. It's a bit silly to say "Scotland has denied Scotland" that choice, certainly the Unionist Scottish parties - who want an alternative to Independence - have denied the Scottish people that choice, but then again they'd be insane to annoy their English lords & masters.

Yes, the people are sovereign and they get a vote. Lots of votes actually. Makes sense to me.

Contractors still located in Scotland. I was a government contractor for a short while in London, I paid rent in London, bought goods in London, etc., and that's with transitory contractors. Local contractors will be paying mortgages, etc.

I know I am not in the least intellectually or emotionally subservient to the English establishment, but if you are any other of the 99% of people in England do not consider yourselves economically and politically subservient then you're bewilderingly bewildered. Recall your troubles with the spooks, you think you'd have gotten that if your daddy was a Lord Montagu?

you've already decided that you want to reject the UK.

So now your job as a citizen is about holding your own leaders to account - so why not start doing it?

You've yet to wake up to the fact that Salmond is leading you down Salmond's path, and that "the people are sovereign" is worthless guff.

iScotland will only work better than what you have if you hold your politicians to account - and you're giving Salmond a free pass instead from the very first moment.

Wake up, FFS.

You're wanting me to hold my politicians to account for crimes you've imagined but I don't believe in.

I'll hold Salmond to account my way, you hold Cameron and Clegg to account your way.

But if you're happy to walk blindfolded by Alex's fantasy then you really should put that chip away. Or at least get a job in the vinegar factory so it doesn't taste so bitter.

I'd rather live in Alex's fantasy than the Cameron/Clegg/Weirdopede/Farage nightmare.

[LJS]

"15,000 bees attach hive to Scottish Parliament"

http://m.scotsman.com/news/environment/15-000-bees-attach-hive-to-scottish-parliament-1-3461442

That's the honey sorted out.

Now for the milk!

[eFestivals]

You care enough to have devoted pages and pages and pages of posts to it.

I don't care if you choose to be independent or not (the consequernces aren't mine), what I do care about is whether what's being proposed is viable or not.

You know, like every voter should be but so few are. If you were smarter than you are, this should concern you far FAR more as you'll be living the consequences.

That only changes if you address the realities rather than keep swallowing Salmond's bullshit whole.

Saying "we don't support the SNP, we get to vote the shape of our independence in May 2016" is laughable. By that point the SNP will have already shaped your independence.

More worryingly, the only part of it which the people of Scotland get a say about - you know, in the country where "the people are sovereign" - is whether to be independent.

Your currency is chosen for you without any public say.

Your international memberships are chosen for you without any public say,

Your defence structure is chosen for you without any public say.

And to top it all, iScotland will have been deemed untrustworthy as a result of Salmond's words, and that's going to cost YOU personally quite dearly in hard cash.

But you just keep on sucking up Alex and denigrating the fair comment that SNP racism tells you is bullying, and iScotland will be great.

But I was a bit mean, I'll address your maaaaany points later on when I have the time.

I've been waiting with baited breath for months for the first yes-ers to do so.

Go on, be brave.

Edited July 1, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

I haven't accused Cameron of that so it's not for me to justify that. It's a bit silly to say "Scotland has denied Scotland" that choice, certainly the Unionist Scottish parties - who want an alternative to Independence - have denied the Scottish people that choice, but then again they'd be insane to annoy their English lords & masters.

It might not be you, but it's something that's been said by yes-ers more than once in this thread.

Meanwhile, in your wonderful grassroots democracy, you absolve yourself of your own democratic responsibility to instead hand every decision over to politicians. It's laughable.

Yes, the people are sovereign and they get a vote. Lots of votes actually. Makes sense to me.

In the UK people get a vote, so in your view (from those words just there) that means they're just as sovereign. So those grand opening words mean nothing to Scotland. OK, just remember that in future posts.

Contractors still located in Scotland. I was a government contractor for a short while in London, I paid rent in London, bought goods in London, etc., and that's with transitory contractors. Local contractors will be paying mortgages, etc.

It might be that, it might not.

iScotland needs tax collection software - and we're talking hu8ndreds of millions of pounds for Scotland to acquire/licence it. Will that be written in iScotland, or might it be written in (say) India, or perhaps the USA?

The point is that money will be flowing out of Scotland for these things. Your presumption of it all spent in Scotland is wrong.

I know I am not in the least intellectually or emotionally subservient to the English establishment, but if you are any other of the 99% of people in England do not consider yourselves economically and politically subservient then you're bewilderingly bewildered. Recall your troubles with the spooks, you think you'd have gotten that if your daddy was a Lord Montagu?

Eh? The only subservience I accept is for forced payment of taxes - which changes not a jot under any system in any country.

Meanwhile your own words displayed your own belief in your own subservience. You can't think me subservient within the UK without the same applying to yourself. Oh dear.

You're wanting me to hold my politicians to account for crimes you've imagined but I don't believe in.

I'll hold Salmond to account my way, you hold Cameron and Clegg to account your way.

Well, when you get round to asking Alex to show you all of the inconvenient stuff he's deliberately hiding from you (you know, the same as the 'outrageous' UK govt hiding the poll they commissioned from you, but MUCH worse), and when he does show it to you, then you'll have the info you need to make a properly informed choice.

Perhaps Alex might also expand the White Paper, to fill in all of the massive blanks it currently has that those faultless Nobel winners didn't notice were missing from their economic plans (much like those Nobel winners calling Greece both financially and politically wrong), cos there's no explanation for anything financial if Plan A turns out to be Salmond's first major failing.

I'd rather live in Alex's fantasy than the Cameron/Clegg/Weirdopede/Farage nightmare.

Because there's no such thing as a fantasy nightmare?

I've got to say that in some places (sadly, not here) the quality of the debate is now improving as some Scottish people wake up to facts and not fantasies - to the point that reading reader's comments is now getting quite boring in some places. The Telegraph is still a good place to laugh at gross stupidity tho (you'll still see stuff like "Ireland had a CU with the UK" there).

Edited July 1, 2014 by eFestivals

[Kowalski]

As someone living in Scotland I find the whole debate rather boring now, some of it is not very upbeat and there's a lot of bad feeling between each side. The yes campaign are guilty of taking a deflect, deflect, deflect attitude when responding to the no campaign, which could be their downfall. The no campaign are guilty of not being particularly positive. There is also an awful lot of "opinion presented as facts" on many forums and blogs. I just wish we could get the vote over and done with.

At the moment I'm voting no on account of there being too many unanswered questions, especially around currency, pension funding, defence, and the true cost of independence.
And I am not buying the "vote yes and help shape the future" as many of us want and deserve to know what we are voting for - it would be a catastrophe if we voted yes and somehow ended up with the Euro as a currency IMHO.

Whether there is a yes or no vote, Scotland could end up quite divided as a result which is a real concern.

[eFestivals]

The no campaign are guilty of not being particularly positive.

To be fair, it's the nature of these things.

It's the yes side that are making a proposal to change things, and they of course need to make a case for why people should support their idea to change things.

The no side are not trying to sell anything or change anything; they're merely responding to what 'yes' put forwards, pointing out what they see as flaws in those ideas or plans.

For example, saying there could be border posts is negative - but it's also a true fact of what could be the possible consequences of iScotland having a different immigration regime to rUK (which the white papers says iScotland will).

How could 'no' point out that possible consequence without it being a negative?

If anyone is deciding how to use their vote only on the basis that a lot of the 'no' stuff is negative then iScotland is very definitely going to be fucked over by its political class.

Everything to date suggests will be the case anyway, cos no one is holding that political class to account now over the biggest political question that people in Scotland will ever make.

[viberunner]

Basically you should put Alex Salmond's face on a dartboard. It's the only way forward for you.

You're asking us to hold a massively popular politician to account for crimes you and you alone are intelligent enough to see, and indeed are willing to denounce as unintelligent those who disagree with your analysis of his crimes, some of which are apparently "hidden".

If only the rest of us had your political x-ray vision and big brain we would be aware how much better off we are under the thumb of those who hold you under their thumb.

As it is it's both blind and idiotic to wish to leave Westminster by any means necessary. It's a blind idiocy the English would benefit from, my friend.

[kaosmark2]

You're asking us to hold a massively popular politician to account for crimes you and you alone are intelligent enough to see, and indeed are willing to denounce as unintelligent those who disagree with your analysis of his crimes, some of which are apparently "hidden".

Wow, noone except Neil is aware that Salmond has faults? Wow. Just wow.

[kaosmark2]

You're asking us to hold a massively popular politician to account

Also, I wonder what might have happened if another massively popular politician had been held to account the moment he started courting Murdoch:

[eFestivals]

You're asking us to hold a massively popular politician to account for crimes you and you alone are intelligent enough to see, and indeed are willing to denounce as unintelligent those who disagree with your analysis of his crimes, some of which are apparently "hidden".

Did Alex lie about having had legal advice about the EU? Oh look, he did.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/10367759/Alex-Salmond-spent-20000-keeping-secret-non-existent-EU-legal-advice.html

I can see them, and you can see them too if you stop being wilfully blind.

As it is it's both blind and idiotic to wish to leave Westminster by any means necessary. It's a blind idiocy the English would benefit from, my friend.

.... and there's nothing more important to most yes-ers than getting one over on the English, eh?

It's a shame you don't consider the future of your country to be as important as that.

[eFestivals]

Also, I wonder what might have happened if another massively popular politician had been held to account the moment he started courting Murdoch:

some of us tried, some of knew where it led.

Yes-ers can find no fault with Alex's regular meetings with Murdoch, not even the ones he lies to them about (which he's been caught on too).

[kaosmark2]

some of us tried, some of knew where it led.

Yes-ers can find no fault with Alex's regular meetings with Murdoch, not even the ones he lies to them about (which he's been caught on too).

It's fine, Murdoch's a-hole is spotless so Salmond's tongue won't get dirty licking it.

[LJS]

So, as Labour fall behind with Neil's favourite pollster. (it would appear DC has benefited from being being snubbed by almost the entire EU), the prospect of the double whammy of another 5 years of Tory austerity looms. This time there will be no lib dems there to talk them out of their most rabid plans. It is not rocket science to see a UK withdrawal from the EU as a distinct possibility.

Meanwhile Labour falls over itself to present itself as tougher on welfare cuts than the Tories.

The future in an independent Scotland is indeed uncertain & fraught with potential problems.

Tell you what. Give me uncertainty any day over the certainty of continuing right wing nonsense and increasing inequality whoever gets in.

I am not naive enough to believe a reduction in inequality will inevitably follow a yes vote. But neither am I naive enough to believe there is any chance at all within the current UK.

& as for Alex...don't worry, we'll sort him out if he goes too far.

[eFestivals]

Tell you what. Give me uncertainty any day over the certainty of continuing right wing nonsense and increasing inequality whoever gets in.

Then don't vote for the certainty of continuing right wing nonsense and increasing inequality that the SNP are promising you and you say you'll vote to endorse.

Anyone who thought the lax financial regulation of the tories and Labour was too restrictive is not left-leaning, and nor is anyone who is promising tax cuts for the richest, and nor is anyone who is sucking up to Murdoch, and nor is anyone who uses racism as policy.

But hey, if Scotland wants to think of that as more left wing than some of the alternatives, then Scotland has really lost all grasp of political reality.

& as for Alex...don't worry, we'll sort him out if he goes too far.

he already has and you've not yet noticed.

Why do you think Scotland will suddenly start doing what it's not doing?

[LJS]

Neil, you can be quite intelligent when you try ...but really ...SNP right wing? Compared to who exactly in a UK context?

& racist? Really? Against whom? The English? Now that would be really stupid as that's 10% of the population. Oh and they got into trouble for joining the launch of the English for Indy campaign in the grounds of Holyrood which is against the rules.

I'm not arguing that Alex is some sort of che Guevara figure but compared to the alternatives, he sure ain't right wing.

[eFestivals]

Neil, you can be quite intelligent when you try ...but really ...SNP right wing? Compared to who exactly in a UK context?

Salmond's bank lax regulation thing was to the right of the tories - in fact, perfectly in line with John Redwood, the man too right wing even for the tories.

Who cuts corp tax to benefit the richest? That'll be the right wingers too.

Who sucks up to Murdoch? Those on the right.

& racist? Really? Against whom? The English? Now that would be really stupid as that's 10% of the population.

It depends who is the more stupid, Salmond or those 10%.

And so far, sadly, it's the 10%. They're not screaming and shouting about how a legal loophole has allowed Salmond to implement his anti-English racist policy, and neither are they screaming and shouting about how he's promised to continue with it after indy despite it then being contrary to EU law.

And more disappointing for me personally... neither are you.

I'm not arguing that Alex is some sort of che Guevara figure but compared to the alternatives, he sure ain't right wing.

So what left wing policy has he introduced because he likes it, rather than him liking to shove one at the English?

When the people of Scotland have suggested to him that he uses his existing powers to implement left-wing policies his response has been "I'll only do it if you firstly give me extra powers even tho I don't need them to do what you ask".

He's not even living up to to the promise of the constitution he's ready-written for you (after promising he wouldn't!) - because it starts of saying "the people are sovereign" and then goes on to explain in detail that they're not. All power rests with politicians no different to Westminster. "The people" can only ever overturn that if the politicians let them: he's already grabbed all power for the political class, and it's not even voting day.

I'm not trying to suggest he's worse than anything we already have btw, I'm merely pointing out that the dream you're voting for is just that - a dream, that will never be fulfilled.

If the people of Scotland were as progressive as you want to believe, then polls of general opinions would be vastly different to the UK's (they're not), and the AV vote would have been won within Scotland, and all sorts of other things - such as holding your politicians to account. As i've said many times, the conservatives in Scotland didn't all drop dead in 1983; they all still exist and they all still exert the greatest influence.

[LJS]

The dream I am voting for is not Alex salmond.

This simple fact, (you like facts, don't you?) seems to constantly escape you.

Is it perhaps because it is easier to base your argument on personalities?

[eFestivals]

The dream I am voting for is not Alex salmond.

This simple fact, (you like facts, don't you?) seems to constantly escape you.

Is it perhaps because it is easier to base your argument on personalities?

I know that you (and plenty of others) don't want to think you're voting to put Alex in control of your nation's destiny. But you are. That's what is passing you by.

For example, Scotland has swallowed the first line of the constitution hook line and sinker, but there's not even a whisper of protest that it's not true. You only have to read the rest of the document to see it clearly stated that it's not true.

This is the point. He's stealing your dream from you, and you're not even noticing.

If Alex has his way*, iScotland will be in-perpetuity economically subservient by treaty to rUK.

(* luckily for you he won't, but you don't want to believe that he won't. It's madness ).

You don't get a say on it. When you vote yes, you also vote for that to happen.

Edited July 1, 2014 by eFestivals

[LJS]

WTF has a proposed interim constitution got to do with anything?

[LJS]

If Alex has his way*, iScotland will be in-perpetuity economically subservient by treaty to rUK.

(* luckily for you he won't, but you don't want to believe that he won't. It's madness ).

Gosh ... imagine that!

A bit like the last 300 years.

[LJS]

Better together?

"The chances of people on low incomes affording a decent life, according to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, have dramatically reduced "

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jul/01/minimum-income-standard-joseph-rowntree-foundation

No thanks

[viberunner]

.... and there's nothing more important to most yes-ers than getting one over on the English, eh?

It's a shame you don't consider the future of your country to be as important as that.

I'm English. Or at least English born with a strong English accent...

I don't want to get "one over" on the English. Get one over on you, here, yes. But that's personal not national. And just for fun.

I believe, hope perhaps but I think a realistic hope, that Scottish independence would be GOOD for the English, not least in terms of thinking about the regions of England, perhaps getting some devolved powers. I heard today - rightly or wrongly - that 80% of the new private sector jobs were created in London. Not only is that f-all use for Scotland and Wales, it's f-all use for the majority of England too.

It's not England I have a problem with - it's the selfish clusterfuck that is the Westminster Tory hegemony.

[crazyguy]

I really don't give a flying hoot what you jocks do but one question; will I need a passport to get to Rockness or T in The Park next year, assuming your all-powerful dictator Salmond, - who let's face it will be less popular than Assad by next summer when to quote the King Blues "the hippy dreams faded" replace hippy with short-sighted lefty nationalism - sanctions this fun?

[kaosmark2]

with short-sighted lefty nationalism - sanctions this fun?

I wouldn't say it's lefty nationalism. I'd say it's centre-right masquerading as lefty, much like Lib Dems and Labour.

I don't think Salmond's much worse than the top end of those parties, but I think anyone who reckons HE would be better is delusional. Of course, maybe an independent Scotland wouldn't actually have the SNP in charge for long and end up with a genuine left or centre-left option. Who knows? But my guess is they won't and everyone will both be worse off and the high inequality will remain.

[viberunner]

I really don't give a flying hoot what you jocks do but one question; will I need a passport to get to Rockness or T in The Park next year, assuming your all-powerful dictator Salmond, - who let's face it will be less popular than Assad by next summer when to quote the King Blues "the hippy dreams faded" replace hippy with short-sighted lefty nationalism - sanctions this fun?

No, but if David Cameron has his way you'll have to change your Pounds Sterling into something tradeable such as wine or steel*.

* Craster's Keep reference