View Full Version : 5 questions
piratelassie
13-Feb-11, 14:08
1. DO YOU AGREE THE SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL TAXES RAISED IN SCOTLAND?
2. DO YOU AGREE THE SCOTTISH PARLIMENT SHOULD HAVE FULL CONTROL OVERALL PUBLIC SPENDING IN SCOTLAND?
3. DO YOU AGREE THE SCOTTISH PARLIMENT SHOULD HAVE A SEAT AT THE TOP TABLE IN THE EUROPEAN UNION?
4. DO YOU AGREE THE SCOTTISH PARLIMENTSHOULD HAVE CONTROL OVER SCOTLAND,S OIL AND GAS REVENUES?
5. DO YOU AGREE THE SCOTTISH PARLIMENT SHOULD HAVE THE POWER TO STOP NUCLEAR WEAPONS BEING SITED IN SCOTLAND?
IF YOU ANSWERED "YES" TO ALL OR MOST OF THESE QUESTIONST THEN WHY NOT SUPPORT HOME RULE ON THE 5th OF MAY? YOU KNOW IT MAKES SENSE.
Absolutely not!
And you appear to be shouting ....
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
But I wouldn't mind a referendum just to put to bed this whole ridiculous idea of independance for at least a little while.
What and let a devious, slimeball prat like Salmond inflict more ruin on our country? I don't think so. The Scottish Parliament was one of the worst things to happen to us. We do not need a multi tiered system of Government, it is just another example of wasting resources whilst paying lip service to devolution.
Not sure what planet your on piratelassie, but my answer would be no also, as far as I tell the Home Rule issue was put on a back burner by Mr Salmond. And its bad manners to shout, thats what Capital Letters signify.
secrets in symmetry
13-Feb-11, 14:53
I support independence for Stroma.
Not sure what planet your on piratelassie,
I must live half way between Golachs planet and pirate lassies planet because I would say yes to the first two questions and no to the rest.
I like Alec Salmond. I feel Scotlands safe with him in the Scottish governemnt whether hes the first minister or the last one.
I like Alec Salmond. I feel Scotland's safe with him in the Scottish government whether hes the first minister or the last one.
I would not trust the said Mr Salmond to run a menage. This fiasco was his baby, Edinburgh is now in major debt, small businesses have gone to the wall because of this. He has got his snout into the Armed Forces Day celebrations which Edinburgh is hosting, and has already changed the running of this to his betterment.
http://news.scotsman.com/politics/Alex-Salmond-to-face-MSPs.6543989.jp
Interesting to see that "The Scottish Parliament" approved a motion on 10 February 2011 to reappoint Jim Martin as Scottish Public Services Ombudsman for a six year term.
What's this got to do with anything?
Have you heard how the Scottish Prison Service is being forced to apologise to a prisoner who was caught with drugs in his cell?
Have a look at thread "How ridiculously PC can you get" - is this a typical Alex move -appointing someone his own members complain off. Governance? Hmm don't think so - making the Scottish Prison Service a laughing stock...
PS I'm English (one of the 400,000 up here)
Whitewater
13-Feb-11, 22:50
The parliaments were united because Scotland wanted the union, we were broke. We have done well and will continue to do well out of England and even better now as we are part of Europe. If we go independant we will be out of the European Union, out of Britain. Where does Alex think he is going to get the money from. Scotlands oil??? We lost that years ago and there is no way way we will ever get it back.
A few years ago I used to think highly of Alex Salmond, not now. Seen far too much huffing and puffing and no sensible action. Get the SNP out of it, we gave them a chance. They have now lost the plot and the right to a second chance.
John Little
13-Feb-11, 22:55
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
But I wouldn't mind a referendum just to put to bed this whole ridiculous idea of independance for at least a little while.
Good idea. Vox populi - vox Dei.
The people should decide.
Home rule for Scotland? You’ve got to be joking!
The Scottish parliament in its present form couldn’t organise a p---up in a brewery!
1. DO YOU AGREE THE SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL TAXES RAISED IN SCOTLAND?
2. DO YOU AGREE THE SCOTTISH PARLIMENT SHOULD HAVE FULL CONTROL OVERALL PUBLIC SPENDING IN SCOTLAND?
3. DO YOU AGREE THE SCOTTISH PARLIMENT SHOULD HAVE A SEAT AT THE TOP TABLE IN THE EUROPEAN UNION?
4. DO YOU AGREE THE SCOTTISH PARLIMENTSHOULD HAVE CONTROL OVER SCOTLAND,S OIL AND GAS REVENUES?
5. DO YOU AGREE THE SCOTTISH PARLIMENT SHOULD HAVE THE POWER TO STOP NUCLEAR WEAPONS BEING SITED IN SCOTLAND?
IF YOU ANSWERED "YES" TO ALL OR MOST OF THESE QUESTIONST THEN WHY NOT SUPPORT HOME RULE ON THE 5th OF MAY? YOU KNOW IT MAKES SENSE.
Get a grip! I love the idea of Scotland being independent but I think that in reality, it is pie in the sky. Don't get me started on that utter twit Salmond, he needs chucked off the nearest high building from Holyrood. I also believe that we can remain Scottish at heart whilst under the British banner. Scotland, England, NI and Wales all work together quite nicely so why change? Romantic notions are fine but life isn't like a Catherine Cookson........
Just for clarity piratelassie, would you allow any residing Ingerlish to vote on the matter of 'Home Rule'?
Or would that water things down?!
How can Scotland be independent in Europe? We'd still have to follow EU laws, just the same as being part of a Union with England; at least being part of a Union supposedly gives Scotland greater might, outside of the Union then Scotland would just be a minnow in a huge pond, and typical of all parliamentarians, they'll sell Scotland doon the watter just to line their own already bulging pockets, to hell with the electorate.
ywindythesecond
14-Feb-11, 00:44
I am really cheered by the posts on this thread!
Shabbychic
14-Feb-11, 01:14
If some folks think it is bad now, can you imagine what it will be like under Iain Gray?
God help us all.
piratelassie
14-Feb-11, 01:39
Just for clarity piratelassie, would you allow any residing Ingerlish to vote on the matter of 'Home Rule'?
Or would that water things down?!
Anyone resident in Scotland is eligable to vote.
piratelassie
14-Feb-11, 01:41
Absolutely not!
And you appear to be shouting ....
And why not?
piratelassie
14-Feb-11, 01:43
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
But I wouldn't mind a referendum just to put to bed this whole ridiculous idea of independance for at least a little while.
What qualifies you to call independance a ridiculous idea?
What qualifies you to call independance a ridiculous idea?
I am a registered voter. Any independance will have to come as a result of a referendum carried out by registered voters. Therefore my vote, or "qualification" is as important as anyone elses. That's one of the problems with the referendum if it ever happens, one of the most important thungs that could happen to the UK in 300 years and the decision is made by people as "qualified" as us.
I'm not going to engage in another debate on independance, I think they've been done to death on here. I will however make a comment one 1 on your "5 questions."
Why is it the supporters of Scottish independance are so against the United Kingdom, the SNP's flagship policy for example is independance, but they are happy to try to (and try they would have to - it wouldn't be automatic) join the European Union. Out of one and into the other? Hardly independance at all. Maybe it's just anti Englishness?
A big problem I have is that any referendum result FOR independance would be a one way street. Once we leave the UK, we're out. Getting back in is out of our control. Any vote AGAINST independance would only be valid until the next referendum, whenever that was. I hope any referendum carried out is done under the proviso that a "NO" decision will mean it cannot be repeated for a number of years, 25 or 50 maybe?
Registered voters is one thing, educated ones another. Going by the personal insults towards Alex Salmond on this thread I would be very surprised if some of those registered voters should be allowed out alone never mind being given the responsability of deciding a countries future.
Alex Salmond is a democrat. I dont give a hoot which party a man stands for or which policy he supports but as a democrat he deserves a certain respect from people who enjoy the ideals he fights for.
Is that too much to ask for on the org?
Perhaps the mayhem of Egypt would attract you more?
Little wonder the countries in such a state with personal insults taking over from respectful debate. :(
Registered voters is one thing, educated ones another. :(
Exactly.
One man, one vote. Every idiot, one vote.
So, we're going to base the future of our nation on the voices of everyone. Not the economists, not the academics, not those above a certain level of education, not the experienced or wise, but everybody.
Who do you trust when you're ill and need an operation? The opinions of the few, educated, experienced doctors or the opinions of every man in the street?
A major failing of democracy.
At least the tribes of Afganistan let the village elders make important decisions. Those with experience and most qualified to do so. Yet we're trying to force our "better" system of democracy on them!
And why not?
This is from the forum rules, maybe you should read them.
SHOUTING!!!
When messages are posted in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS, it is considered to be shouting. On the whole, the poster does not intend to shout, but has simply omitted to check the status of their caps-lock key before posting. This type of post is almost always taken as shouting and the intent of the post can be misread by other users causing arguments and disruption to come from a simple lack of care when posting.
Shouting carries 1 Infraction point, duration 1 month.
Exactly.
One man, one vote. Every idiot, one vote.
So, we're going to base the future of our nation on the voices of everyone. Not the economists, not the academics, not those above a certain level of education, not the experienced or wise, but everybody.
Who do you trust when you're ill and need an operation? The opinions of the few, educated, experienced doctors or the opinions of every man in the street?
A major failing of democracy.
At least the tribes of Afganistan let the village elders make important decisions. Those with experience and most qualified to do so. Yet we're trying to force our "better" system of democracy on them!
The truly great thing about democracy, is that everyone is equally qualified to vote, with very few exceptions, and no group or groups have a right over any other to decide who is.
Anyone who feels they are better qualified, don't understand democracy and are the true idiots.
The truly great thing about democracy, is that everyone is equally qualified to vote, with very few exceptions, and no group or groups have a right over any other to decide who is.
But is that a truly great thing?
Ask a child if they want a parent who lets them miss homework, stay up late and eat junk food or one that is strict with homework, sends them to bed at a fixed time and makes them eat health food. Which parent wins that election?
The parent that is popular with the child or the parent that is best for the future of the child?
The same is true for democracy and voting governments. The poular candidate will win, but might not be best for the country or the people, especially in the long term.
It's the political equivalent of the X factor.
Anyone who feels they are better qualified, don't understand democracy and are the true idiots.
Just for the record, I'm not saying I'm better qualified than anyone to vote, it's just as likely I'm part of the problem!
Exactly.
One man, one vote. Every idiot, one vote.
So, we're going to base the future of our nation on the voices of everyone. Not the economists, not the academics, not those above a certain level of education, not the experienced or wise, but everybody.
Who do you trust when you're ill and need an operation? The opinions of the few, educated, experienced doctors or the opinions of every man in the street?
A major failing of democracy. At least the tribes of Afganistan let the village elders make important decisions. Those with experience and most qualified to do so. Yet we're trying to force our "better" system of democracy on them!
Initially thought this was a red herring, but apparently not. Totally disagree on this one, so basically you prefer a dictatorship of economists and academics and 'brainy' people - OK,so 35% of the UK does not bother to vote, are these the thicko's? if so your version of utopia is already here..
Using an analogy of a parent and their children or using a medical professional is puerile. As you mention you would not have the franchise, I'm pretty sure you'd be rather upset if you didn't - but maybe not.
'UK recession: How the economists got it wrong'... 'A group of 116 academics has published an open letter riddled with factual inaccuracies about the BA strike' no-one's infallible, most certainly not village elders who had a 14-year-old girl Hena Begum publicly flogged to death..
In late August 2010 a couple was stoned to death in Kunduz, North-East Afghanistan for adultery after a court of local elders ordered so. - yep all good stuff these 'wise men' do.
Seeing that the majority of your 'voting people' will be class A. B. and 'maybe' C1 (the C2. D's and E's can continue to fornicate in their ghettos) I'm reading between the lines, the present Government in Westminster (for a start) is exactly what you want - as their classification fits like a glove...sneaky that.. ;)
Initially thought this was a red herring, but apparently not. Totally disagree on this one, so basically you prefer a dictatorship of economists and academics and 'brainy' people - OK,so 35% of the UK does not bother to vote, are these the thicko's? if so your version of utopia is already here..
Using an analogy of a parent and their children or using a medical professional is puerile. As you mention you would not have the franchise, I'm pretty sure you'd be rather upset if you didn't - but maybe not.
'UK recession: How the economists got it wrong'... 'A group of 116 academics has published an open letter riddled with factual inaccuracies about the BA strike' no-one's infallible, most certainly not village elders who had a 14-year-old girl Hena Begum publicly flogged to death..
In late August 2010 a couple was stoned to death in Kunduz, North-East Afghanistan for adultery after a court of local elders ordered so. - yep all good stuff these 'wise men' do.
Seeing that the majority of your 'voting people' will be class A. B. and 'maybe' C1 (the C2. D's and E's can continue to fornicate in their ghettos) I'm reading between the lines, the present Government in Westminster (for a start) is exactly what you want - as their classification fits like a glove...sneaky that.. ;)
Whoa! Steady on there.
Not for one minute did I suggest that a dictatorship was better.
I'm just trying to question the worldview that most of us hold, that democracy is the best and, in many cases, the only way forward.
I don't see why the parent/child anology is puerile, I think it highlights an important way of seeing things. What people want and chose is not always best for them. I'd rather have a chippy than a salad any day of the week!
And I don't deny that people/professionals/experts can get things wrong. Just that somethings, like our health, we leave to these experts while others, like politics, we don't.
Although I agreed with the new government that a number of the quangos were a waste of money and had to be culled, it worries me that so much power that was once with expert steering groups and panels has now been handed to politicians trying to win a popularity contest.
As for the point about the flogging in Kabul, fair enough, maybe you don't agree with what these "wise men" do but what about the 40 or so executions that occured in the USA in the last year? Is that okay because they have democracy? Is that okay because they are convicted by a "western" court rather than the established practices of another culture? Should we invade America to force them to change their justice system to match ours?
Again, all I was trying to do was get people to question what right we have to force our way of doing things around the world. Just because we THINK they are the best doesn't mean that they are.
Let's see what happens in Egypt now they have shifted towards democracy.
I think the general view is that the majority of the Arabic Muslim world is "against" Israel. It is therefore possible that a politician who promises a hard line against the Jews would be popular in Egypt, and therefore likely to win votes, maybe even an election.
So then Egypt, possibly the most moderatate country in the region, and one which has helped considerably keep the peace in previous years is now a danger...................
Hypothetical, I know, but food for thought for all of us brought up to think that democracy is best?
John Little
14-Feb-11, 13:16
'Democracy'.
What is it? Plato called it 'the noble lie'. A ruling and informed political elite dictate outcomes in society according to their own information and imperatives whilst maintaining the illusion of consent.
In the end the difference between 'democracy' and 'dictatorship' lies somewhere in the presentation of it and the severity of its application.
'Democracy' is not what it seems. In order for it to function you must manufacture consent because it's a bargain between rulers and ruled.
And to manufacture consent you use media to spread your version of truth. Once it is believed then you have consent - or even better you have apathy. Then you can do what you want without fear of being brought to account. Like invading a country that's done nothing to us.
But that does not make it 'better' in what it does.
It only makes it work more smoothly.
Whoa! Steady on there.
Not for one minute did I suggest that a dictatorship was better.
I'm just trying to question the worldview that most of us hold, that democracy is the best and, in many cases, the only way forward.
I don't see why the parent/child anology is puerile, I think it highlights an important way of seeing things. What people want and chose is not always best for them. I'd rather have a chippy than a salad any day of the week!
And I don't deny that people/professionals/experts can get things wrong. Just that somethings, like our health, we leave to these experts while others, like politics, we don't.
Although I agreed with the new government that a number of the quangos were a waste of money and had to be culled, it worries me that so much power that was once with expert steering groups and panels has now been handed to politicians trying to win a popularity contest.
As for the point about the flogging in Kabul, fair enough, maybe you don't agree with what these "wise men" do but what about the 40 or so executions that occured in the USA in the last year? Is that okay because they have democracy? Is that okay because they are convicted by a "western" court rather than the established practices of another culture? Should we invade America to force them to change their justice system to match ours?
Again, all I was trying to do was get people to question what right we have to force our way of doing things around the world. Just because we THINK they are the best doesn't mean that they are.
Let's see what happens in Egypt now they have shifted towards democracy.
I think the general view is that the majority of the Arabic Muslim world is "against" Israel. It is therefore possible that a politician who promises a hard line against the Jews would be popular in Egypt, and therefore likely to win votes, maybe even an election.
So then Egypt, possibly the most moderatate country in the region, and one which has helped considerably keep the peace in previous years is now a danger...................
Hypothetical, I know, but food for thought for all of us brought up to think that democracy is best?
My apologies for suggesting a dictatorship. There's a whole lot of problems with democracy, but it's the lesser of evils - I note in your post: "I'm just trying to question the worldview that most of us hold, that democracy is the best and, in many cases, the only way forward" my emphasis on 'Most of us hold' Exactly, my point.
I see today that Yemen is rioting in Sana'a.. right this second in Bahrain police are using teargas on protestors against their government. In Algiers police block protests.. Why even Iran is rioting - which is ironic as Democracy existed temporarily among the Medes (ancient Iranian people) in the 6th century BC!..
These protestors have a myriad of reasons for their actions, but are they all demanding Autocracy, Despotism, Communism, Imperialism, Pluralism, Plutocracy, Socialism, Theocracy? no, but mostly democracy, it's stood the test of time,
In the UK I have freedom, In 1976 (before the Wall fell) I spent over a month in East Germany and Poland.. anyone who complains of democracy should certainly have spent time in a Soviet Satellite State.
I honestly believe that if our Democracy is hijacked because those of lesser intelligence had voted, and we, the British did not like it, we would, I believe react in time honoured fashion; to whit the Poll Tax riots.. there's always a loophole..
Comparison re Kabul and USA? a couple of village elders decide in hours that someone dies - in yankland takes years and years and all avenues are explored.
'Democracy'.
What is it? Plato called it 'the noble lie'. A ruling and informed political elite dictate outcomes in society according to their own information and imperatives whilst maintaining the illusion of consent.
In the end the difference between 'democracy' and 'dictatorship' lies somewhere in the presentation of it and the severity of its application.
'Democracy' is not what it seems. In order for it to function you must manufacture consent because it's a bargain between rulers and ruled.
And to manufacture consent you use media to spread your version of truth. Once it is believed then you have consent - or even better you have apathy. Then you can do what you want without fear of being brought to account. Like invading a country that's done nothing to us.
But that does not make it 'better' in what it does.
It only makes it work more smoothly.
Spoken like a true Academic - "Like invading a country that's done nothing to us" incidentally, what did Germany do to us again?
Humour me all.....
Can Scotland go it alone???
Walter Ego
14-Feb-11, 19:11
Humour me all.....
Can Scotland go it alone???
Pirate lassie believes that oil will solve all our worries and we can all live like they do in Norway. Unfortunately when PL is challenged about the fiscal realities of that statement and independence, PL doesn't respond.
In answer to your question, Sandy.
Realistically: No.
John Little
14-Feb-11, 19:22
Spoken like a true Academic - "Like invading a country that's done nothing to us" incidentally, what did Germany do to us again?
LOL! That's worth a thread on its own. Where could I start.....
W.E. As I perceived.....I recently read the book...How the Scots invented the Modern World by A. Herman. Then the rise and fall of the British Empire......
Rather interesting reading.......
Then I looked at the population of Scotland compared to the UK....'Tis small.....
And some other 'things' I noticed....5 M pounds were lost on the Brora Wool Mill and then it was sold for approx 10% of that to.......enuff sed!
And then the 'heating plant' in Wick.. I am sure there are others....seems sad.
1. DO YOU AGREE THE SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT SHOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL TAXES RAISED IN SCOTLAND?
2. DO YOU AGREE THE SCOTTISH PARLIMENT SHOULD HAVE FULL CONTROL OVERALL PUBLIC SPENDING IN SCOTLAND?
3. DO YOU AGREE THE SCOTTISH PARLIMENT SHOULD HAVE A SEAT AT THE TOP TABLE IN THE EUROPEAN UNION?
4. DO YOU AGREE THE SCOTTISH PARLIMENTSHOULD HAVE CONTROL OVER SCOTLAND,S OIL AND GAS REVENUES?
5. DO YOU AGREE THE SCOTTISH PARLIMENT SHOULD HAVE THE POWER TO STOP NUCLEAR WEAPONS BEING SITED IN SCOTLAND?
IF YOU ANSWERED "YES" TO ALL OR MOST OF THESE QUESTIONST THEN WHY NOT SUPPORT HOME RULE ON THE 5th OF MAY? YOU KNOW IT MAKES SENSE.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes and
Yes
But 100% NOT with the band of clueless muppets that currently form the Scottish Parliment.
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes and
Yes
But 100% NOT with the band of clueless muppets that currently form the Scottish Parliment.
I keep reading about the clueless people in power....but....didn't they get voted in by the populace.
We are the same here. No one accepts those in power, but somebody voted for them didn't they!
Seems like the councillor in Wick.....No one else wanted the job....
So how can people be so critical...not only there/ here also
I keep reading about the clueless people in power....but....didn't they get voted in by the populace.
We are the same here. No one accepts those in power, but somebody voted for them didn't they!
Seems like the councillor in Wick.....No one else wanted the job....
So how can people be so critical...not only there/ here also
Politicians lie through their teeth to get into power, and then they change their policies to suit themselves once they are voted into power. The Lib Dems are a prime example of that. There is not a single politician, from local to national, that i trust or believe.
This is from the forum rules, maybe you should read them.
SHOUTING!!!
When messages are posted in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS, it is considered to be shouting. On the whole, the poster does not intend to shout, but has simply omitted to check the status of their caps-lock key before posting. This type of post is almost always taken as shouting and the intent of the post can be misread by other users causing arguments and disruption to come from a simple lack of care when posting.
Shouting carries 1 Infraction point, duration 1 month.
Thank you Golach. Knew of the (un)social nicety but didn't get round to checking the forum rules.
I am really cheered by the posts on this thread!
Me too!
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes and
Yes
But 100% NOT with the band of clueless muppets that currently form the Scottish Parliment.
Who might you suggest as an appropriate group to head up this newly independant country?
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
But I wouldn't mind a referendum just to put to bed this whole ridiculous idea of independance for at least a little while.
As polls go, this thread is a pretty good thermometer.
Getting old now (and my memory can no longer be trusted) but have we not had a referendum on independance before? Maybe I dreamt it!
There was a referendum some time ago in the 70s. It ended in a bit of a stramash. If you didnt vote your paper was counted as a no. Quite right too. There would need to be a fair majority for such a change to happen. I dont doubt Scotland could becoome independant but I would rather it didnt. I respect a genuine democratic nationalist. Alex Salmonds one of them.
There was a referendum some time ago in the 70s. It ended in a bit of a stramash. If you didnt vote your paper was counted as a no. Quite right too. There would need to be a fair majority for such a change to happen. I dont doubt Scotland could becoome independant but I would rather it didnt. I respect a genuine democratic nationalist. Alex Salmonds one of them.
Glad someone is happy with the 'poor bloke'!
Walter Ego
15-Feb-11, 23:04
As expected, Piratelassie is making no effort to defend her corner.
As expected, Piratelassie is making no effort to defend her corner.
I see Walter she last checked in 14-Feb-11 at 20:48, might be away, give her time... ;)
piratelassie
16-Feb-11, 00:37
There was a referendum some time ago in the 70s. It ended in a bit of a stramash. If you didnt vote your paper was counted as a no. Quite right too. There would need to be a fair majority for such a change to happen. I dont doubt Scotland could becoome independant but I would rather it didnt. I respect a genuine democratic nationalist. Alex Salmonds one of them.
Am i right in thinking that the 70s referendum was the only vote in U.K. history that was'nt first past the post? And to defend my argument Scotland has a lot more resorces than oil and gas. We have Coal, Hydro, Water in abundance. plus our exports, Whisky. Wood,
Engineering components etc,etc.
May i also apologise for shouting, it was not intended to offend.
John Little
16-Feb-11, 07:27
http://www.jcpa.org/dje/articles/ref-pleb.htm
And to defend my argument Scotland has a lot more resorces than oil and gas. We have Coal, Hydro, Water in abundance. plus our exports, Whisky. Wood,Engineering components etc,etc..
Coal is not a environmental fuel any longer, the majority of coal mines are no longer workable, may I suggest more Wind Farms in our windiest county Caithness, our present first minister seems to be in favour of them. Even silicon glen in Livingston is closing down.
Coal is not a environmental fuel any longer, the majority of coal mines are no longer workable, may I suggest more Wind Farms in our windiest county Caithness, our present first minister seems to be in favour of them. Even silicon glen in Livingston is closing down.
Yes, after truly massive public investment in several 'Mega' factories producing Silicon wafers, the price worldwide went from £90 per wafer to 90p per wafer pretty much overnight.
Walter Ego
16-Feb-11, 17:21
Am i right in thinking that the 70s referendum was the only vote in U.K. history that was'nt first past the post? And to defend my argument Scotland has a lot more resorces than oil and gas. We have Coal, Hydro, Water in abundance. plus our exports, Whisky. Wood,
Engineering components etc,etc.
May i also apologise for shouting, it was not intended to offend.
Oil and gas: You'll never get all the revenue from it. That's all part of the Nationalist myth that it is 'Scottish' oil.
Coal: Expensive to mine (therefore financially non-viable).
Wood: OK.
Hydro: OK
Wind + Tide: OK
Whisky: Is a good export - but does little for direct employment. You can run a modern distillery with just a handful of people. PLus the profit will go to Multinationals in many cases - so no rel benefit for Scotland apart from Duty revenue.
Engineering: Mainly geared towards offshore work - thus a limited market. Other engineering enterprises are finding it extremely difficult to find contracts that are not being undercut by other countries with cheaper labour.
The refererendum you speak of was designed so that a clear sizeable majority must be in place to ensure stability. 51% either way would not be a clear result and would lead to constant challenges and upheaval. This is a major issue, don't forget, not a local election that will take place again in a couple of years time. Once it's done it would be virtually impossible to go back. So it must be what the vat majority of Scots want.
If the Nationalists were unsuccessful - it's because they couldn't raise enough people from their political slumber to actually vote in favour of independence.
peter macdonald
17-Feb-11, 17:48
[QUOTE=Blarney;819213]What and let a devious, slimeball prat like Salmond inflict more ruin on our country?
As far as being a slime ball Salmond is as clean as a whistle compared with the people in the Labour party who willed Scotlands name to be dragged through the mire over the Abdelbaset Ali Mohamed Al Megrahi affair while doing their own desert deals to get the man released with Gaddaffi.....That is slime
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/alancochrane/8311919/Who-will-win-the-Lockerbie-election-battle.html
If you read Alan Cochrane regularly you will know he is not normally kind to the SNP
peter macdonald
17-Feb-11, 17:59
Coal is not a environmental fuel any longer, the majority of coal mines are no longer workable, may I suggest more Wind Farms in our windiest county Caithness, our present first minister seems to be in favour of them. Even silicon glen in Livingston is closing down.
Coal isnt dead ...At least not in Germany ...maybe the Billion tonnes under the Forth will come in useful after all
http://news.scotsman.com/scotland/Scotland-plugs--into-Forth.6329104.jp
http://interestingenergyfacts.blogspot.com/2009/04/germany-to-have-coal-power-plants-with.html
And it appears the pro wind farm lobby has an other party leader in their midst
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/24/wind-farms-opposition-ed-miliband
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.