SCOTLAND

[Kes]

It seems rather appropriate - nothing there at all but - yes

I'd put a sign saying 'or no' just to make a decision based on nothing, rather more balanced.

[poontang]

Latest YouGov poll now shows the NO vote at 52% and the YES vote at 48%.

 

I'm going for 55% to 45% on the result...in favour of a NO vote.

[figgy]

yes.jpg Someone planted this on an island in the saltings at the bottom of my croft to be seen from the road, they hadn't allowed for a very high tide, I thought it symbolic, perhaps a sign of isolation or perhaps standing alone perhaps ...........

 

It's the loch yes monster.

 

Figgy

[Gordon R]

Not bad.

[johnphilip]

It's the loch yes monster.

Figgy

It better be the loch no monster

[grrclark]

It's the loch yes monster.

 

Figgy

[Laird Lugton]

islandgun, can you get out and plant a big "Are you joking?" sign behind it?

 

 

Nial

 

The wife and I were driving in the borders this morning and amazed at all the "Yes" signs, we thought we could add "Yes - we're better together"…..

Latest YouGov poll now shows the NO vote at 52% and the YES vote at 48%.

 

I'm going for 55% to 45% on the result...in favour of a NO vote.

 

I think you are right. Going to be an awful lot of animosity though.

 

I was in Amsterdam this evening and the Dutch staff were asking whether I thought Scotland would go independent. It's getting global coverage and the fact that some voters are basing their decision on the TV listings makes me want to weep.

Edited September 11, 2014 by Laird Lugton

[Gordon R]

Why should there be animosity?

[RossEM]

I'd vote Yes if I was resident. Having looked at it, I sympathise with more of the SNP's policies than I do with those of the Conservatives/Labour/Liberal Democrats - getting rid of Trident was the issue that swung me, but free prescriptions and tuition fees are another couple of good examples - we in England could have the same were it not for the MOD's uncontrolled defence procurement spending. Any constitutional change of the magnitude of independence would undoubtedly cause significant problems initially, but Scotland would eventually be more fiscally stable (with a population of only 5.5 million and a vast potential for harvesting natural resources - even if you ignore North Sea oil.) For example, the annual tax revenue on (just) the export sector of the Whisky industry is currently £4.3 Billion. When you consider tourism, agriculture, oil on top - there is more than enough money to go round the Scottish people. Therefore Scotland will not need to risk basing their independent economy on financial services - the greatest mistake a British government ever made in my opinion.) There will be some attrition of business (RBS, shocker) but if the SNP can make corporate taxes attractive enough, there will be some immigration too. Apparently North Korea has already shown interest! Scotland will keep the pound, because there is no way in hell that the UK government can afford to waiver Scotland's responsibility to pay their share of the UK's national debt - ergo the UK needs them far more than they need the UK - Salmond knows it, and I just hope the Scottish people have the balls to vote his way. It's got nothing to do with patriotism - it's a choice as to whether they want to continue to have their purse-strings tied by Westminster.

 

Before anyone mentions how much 'funding' Scotland gets from the rest of the UK, the 2012 figures stand at 9.4% of the total revenues provided to UK government by Scotland, while Scotland received 9.2% of the public spend from the UK government. Flanders, 2013

 

George, Dave & all are extremely nervous, because Scotland has the potential to become a successful example of a state where the public sector is appropriately funded, and we may just demand that for the rest of the UK - additionally I suspect that if Scotland votes yes, the remainder of the UK will be demanding a referendum on EU membership.

 

Something I read earlier goes on to illustrate this:

 

"...however, South of the Border a YES vote could cause some dramatic changes. Politically, Scotland is Left wing and England leans to the Right. Like the Scots, there are many English voters complaining that they also do not get the government they vote for because of the Scottish contingent of about 50 Left Wing MPs from Labour, Lib Dem and SNP at Westminster. A YES victory would remove these from the House of Commons leaving the Conservatives with a clear majority for the foreseeable future. The Tory Right Wing could then become dominant and set about leading the UK out of the EU. UK taxpayers would then get two huge direct annual savings from the £7 billion tax subsidy to Scotland and a much larger amount from UK’s nett contribution to the EU budget, plus big cost savings for industry and consumers when the UK can dump many of the EU’s costly environmental directives along with the Common Agricultural Policy and the Common Fisheries Policy.

These prospects are now causing panic amongst the Westminster political establishment, so solidly behind the NO campaign because they just love to have EU membership to take the blame for unpopular measures such as expensive Green taxes and crazy laws relating to Human Rights and Employment issues. They are happy to draw big salaries and expenses for doing very little except rubber stamping legislation handed down by foreigners and the really lucky ones get onto the Brussels gravy train with even bigger rewards for even less accountability.
Scotland’s industries would benefit from trading with a wealthier independent UK and some, such as farming and fishing, would get a much better deal from Brussels than from Westminster.
As a small remote country, Scotland’s nett funding from the EU would be much greater than it would be as part of a relatively richer UK.
A YES vote would not suit the UK political Establishment but all the peoples of the British Isles could look forward to new freedoms, and economic prosperity."

[Laird Lugton]

Why should there be animosity?

 

The "Yes" campaigners almost have a religious zeal. Alex Salmond said all voters who vote "no" are not on "Team Scotland". They are not going to take this lying down….

[Laird Lugton]

I'd vote Yes if I was resident. Having looked at it, I sympathise with more of the SNP's policies than I do with those of the Conservatives/Labour/Liberal Democrats - getting rid of Trident was the issue that swung me, but free prescriptions and tuition fees are another couple of good examples - we in England could have the same were it not for the MOD's uncontrolled defence procurement spending. Any constitutional change of the magnitude of independence would undoubtedly cause significant problems initially, but Scotland would eventually be more fiscally stable (with a population of only 5.5 million and a vast potential for harvesting natural resources - even if you ignore North Sea oil.) For example, the annual tax revenue on (just) the export sector of the Whisky industry is currently £4.3 Billion. When you consider tourism, agriculture, oil on top - there is more than enough money to go round the Scottish people. Therefore Scotland will not need to risk basing their independent economy on financial services - the greatest mistake a British government ever made in my opinion.) There will be some attrition of business (RBS, shocker) but if the SNP can make corporate taxes attractive enough, there will be some immigration too. Apparently North Korea has already shown interest! Scotland will keep the pound, because there is no way in hell that the UK government can afford to waiver Scotland's responsibility to pay their share of the UK's national debt - ergo the UK needs them far more than they need the UK - Salmond knows it, and I just hope the Scottish people have the balls to vote his way. It's got nothing to do with patriotism - it's a choice as to whether they want to continue to have their purse-strings tied by Westminster.

 

Before anyone mentions how much 'funding' Scotland gets from the rest of the UK, the 2012 figures stand at 9.4% of the total revenues provided to UK government by Scotland, while Scotland received 9.2% of the public spend from the UK government. Flanders, 2013

 

George, Dave & all are extremely nervous, because Scotland has the potential to become a successful example of a state where the public sector is appropriately funded, and we may just demand that for the rest of the UK - additionally I suspect that if Scotland votes yes, the remainder of the UK will be demanding a referendum on EU membership.

 

Something I read earlier goes on to illustrate this:

 

"...however, South of the Border a YES vote could cause some dramatic changes. Politically, Scotland is Left wing and England leans to the Right. Like the Scots, there are many English voters complaining that they also do not get the government they vote for because of the Scottish contingent of about 50 Left Wing MPs from Labour, Lib Dem and SNP at Westminster. A YES victory would remove these from the House of Commons leaving the Conservatives with a clear majority for the foreseeable future. The Tory Right Wing could then become dominant and set about leading the UK out of the EU. UK taxpayers would then get two huge direct annual savings from the £7 billion tax subsidy to Scotland and a much larger amount from UK’s nett contribution to the EU budget, plus big cost savings for industry and consumers when the UK can dump many of the EU’s costly environmental directives along with the Common Agricultural Policy and the Common Fisheries Policy.

These prospects are now causing panic amongst the Westminster political establishment, so solidly behind the NO campaign because they just love to have EU membership to take the blame for unpopular measures such as expensive Green taxes and crazy laws relating to Human Rights and Employment issues. They are happy to draw big salaries and expenses for doing very little except rubber stamping legislation handed down by foreigners and the really lucky ones get onto the Brussels gravy train with even bigger rewards for even less accountability.

Scotland’s industries would benefit from trading with a wealthier independent UK and some, such as farming and fishing, would get a much better deal from Brussels than from Westminster.

As a small remote country, Scotland’s nett funding from the EU would be much greater than it would be as part of a relatively richer UK.

A YES vote would not suit the UK political Establishment but all the peoples of the British Isles could look forward to new freedoms, and economic prosperity."

 

 

But it is a myth to suggest that by removing 50 labour MP's the Conservatives will be permanently in power. Since the end of the second world war only 3 elections have needed the Scottish MP's to help provide a majority.

 

The only change would be the size of labours majority.

 

To then lead on from this that there will be a permanent Conservative government with a potential withdrawal from the EU is not correct, because the facts don't bear this out.

[shaun4860]

Does Scotland receive any EU subsidies?

 

[MartynGT4]

Scotland will keep the pound, because there is no way in hell that the UK government can afford to waiver Scotland's responsibility to pay their share of the UK's national debt - ergo the UK needs them far more than they need the UK - Salmond knows it, and I just hope the Scottish people have the balls to vote his way. It's got nothing to do with patriotism - it's a choice as to whether they want to continue to have their purse-strings tied by Westminster.

 

Actually no they won't keep the pound and if they don't cough up their share of the debt they'll get a junk international credit rating meaning nobody will lend to them and investors will be scared off. It's not all 'Bluff and Bluster' or 'Scare Stories' as Salmond would put it, it's fact! Salmond has been saying the finance companies won't leave bonny Scotland and that it's all "Scare Stories" from Westminster, yet it's clear that is exactly what is going to happen, companies will be leaving Scotland in droves. When are people going to wake up and realise that all Salmond wants is power, not matter what the cost. He's an obsessed, mindless and hateful idiot who's going to bring Scotland to it's bloody knees..

Edited September 11, 2014 by MartynGT4

[RossEM]

Trust me, Scotland will use the pound whether they are in a currency union or not. What I was trying to say in my last post is that the attrition of financial institutions is not the great tragedy for Scotland that everyone thinks it will be. There are other, more stable industries that it can build its new economy around.

[MartynGT4]

Trust me, Scotland will use the pound whether they are in a currency union or not. What I was trying to say in my last post is that the attrition of financial institutions is not the great tragedy for Scotland that everyone thinks it will be. There are other, more stable industries that it can build its new economy around.

 

Perhaps they will, perhaps they won't but if they do I doubt it would be with agreement and in that scenario they won't have any control over it, hardly a good start for a newly independent country is it? Agreed, the financial institutions aren't the only industries that can build a Separate Scotland's economy but they do bring rather a lot of money in and their exit will hurt and it's the people of Scotland who will feel that hurt the most.. don't forget the negative affect that exodus will have (and already is having) on businesses confidence to invest in Scotland.

[MartynGT4]

Why should there be animosity?

 

There shouldn't be and regardless of how the vote goes because the result will be a reflection of the will of the majority of the Scottish people, I just don't think those in the Yes camp would take a No result particularly well (that's putting it mildly). Hope I'm wrong though

[figgy]

After reading and hearing more and more on this,I'm starting to change my mind in favor of a yes vote. Then Scotland can go and do as it pleases without all the we've been kept down by the English government blah blah.

 

Let them stand and prosper or fail and fall by their own hand. If of the off chance they get it right and do well then we can look to change for the better too.

 

Forgetting Scotland for the Scottish for a moment,Do we as a country actually need them, I think not. What do they bring to the table we can't do without.

 

Figgy

[Kes]

After reading and hearing more and more on this,I'm starting to change my mind in favor of a yes vote. Then Scotland can go and do as it pleases without all the we've been kept down by the English government blah blah.

 

Let them stand and prosper or fail and fall by their own hand. If of the off chance they get it right and do well then we can look to change for the better too.

 

Forgetting Scotland for the Scottish for a moment,Do we as a country actually need them, I think not. What do they bring to the table we can't do without.

 

Figgy

Shared history, sometime common values, I thought a mature attitude to world affairs, each willing to help the other if needed.

I agree though Alex S has duped the Scots for his moment in history, maybe we should let go and hope they succeed but if they choose to cast off, I for one wouldnt want them back now.

[norfolk dumpling]

On balance I'm hoping for a 'no' vote. I suspect it would cost all of us on both sides of the border a lot of money to sort this out plus years of animosity. However if it goes the other way then I won't be disappointed but signs are it will also cost us a lot of money to resolve, a couple of hundred thousand scots want to come south (on no!) but on the positive side Labour will lose nearly 60 seats in what remains of the UK so no fear of them cocking up our economy again.

[AVB]

 

 

But it is a myth to suggest that by removing 50 labour MP's the Conservatives will be permanently in power. Since the end of the second world war only 3 elections have needed the Scottish MP's to help provide a majority.

 

The only change would be the size of labours majority.

 

To then lead on from this that there will be a permanent Conservative government with a potential withdrawal from the EU is not correct, because the facts don't bear this out.

However, as one of the previous graphs showed, the conservatives used to get lots of seats in Scotland so looking back at the effect since WW2 is slightly misleading. If you assume that the Conservatives would get 0-1 seats and Labour 40-50 from Scotland in the future then the loss of these would mean the odds of a future Labour Government would be significantly diminished. Silver lining and all that.

[aris]

This whole referendum is a lose-lose situation. If you look at other independence referendums like Quebec in Canada - they had two go's! Second one was closer than the first. Are we going to have a second go in Scotland in the event of a No vote? If so, that may well damage business confidence for future investment.

Edited September 12, 2014 by aris

[Penelope]

Sturgeon has said within 5 years if it's a No vote.

 

This whole referendum is a lose-lose situation. If you look at other independence referendums like Quebec in Canada - they had two go's! Second one was closer than the first. Are we going to have a second go in Scotland in the event of a No vote? If so, that may well damage business confidence for future investment.

[Laird Lugton]

Sturgeon has said within 5 years if it's a No vote.

 

I hope HM govt tell her where she can stick her referendum.

 

Everything is on hold up here....

[johnphilip]

I hope HM govt tell her where she can stick her referendum.

 

Everything is on hold up here....

if its a No and i hope so, then it should be the end of it all and no more wasting of money and causing ill feelings and driving a great country apart

[kaunda]

Should Jolly Jock,the Unctious Tartan Toad,have his way and they leave the Union we must consider the implications for sportsmen.The movement of firearms across international borders requires CONTROL,this is achieved by a BUREAUCRACY,which costs money to implement and maintain.Guess who will pay ?