The Org Poll on Independence

[orkneycadian]

Does that 700,000 include the citizens of the PROOSWI?

[Heisenberg]

Sorry..... that should have read "Rheghead" (not Raghead) my new keyboard isn't fully bedded in yet.oops! I though it were rhaghead too. But at least there's no evidence as for some reason my innocent post was deleted. At least there was no wind damage today eh.

[Heisenberg]

Do you work in the UK defence / weapons industry? a simple "yes" or "no" will suffice.is it Salt or Vinegar?

[Uncle-Bobs-Johnny]

And unless I am mistaken, the gap between Yes and No votes on 'e orgs poll on independence is widening....

A Major thanks to Raghead for that! He is, single handedly, putting off "YES" voters with every sentence of nonsense he speaks from his the bravery of being out of range, UK defence funded "keyboard".

[orkneycadian]

I wouldn't give Rheghead all the credit. Squidge, Oddquine and Piratelassie are also doing a pretty good job of turning "Don't Knows" into "Nos"

[Chook a demus]

Well said orkneycadian, I still haven't worked out what events in Salisbury and Stevenage have to do with the Scottish referendum or what the Scottish govt are supposed to do about it when they can't even hit their own NHS targets

[Uncle-Bobs-Johnny]

I wouldn't give Rheghead all the credit. Squidge, Oddquine and Piratelassie are also doing a pretty good job of turning "Don't Knows" into "Nos"

I thought it was just me who found these people PARTICULARLY annoying, I'm so happy to realise that I wasn't wrong.

[orkneycadian]

Yes Chook, I kinda missed the fact that Mr Clapson was in England, not Scotland. But the original posting still insinuated that "the system" that we have have at the moment, as part of the UK, had lead directly to his death, and that in an independant Scotland, we would be "free" of such a system.

I find it very sad that someone who isn't here to state his own case is being used as a pawn in the Scottish independence debate. And he didn't even live in Scotland.

[Chook a demus]

Yes Chook, I kinda missed the fact that Mr Clapson was in England, not Scotland. But the original posting still insinuated that "the system" that we have have at the moment, as part of the UK, had lead directly to his death, and that in an independant Scotland, we would be "free" of such a system. I find it very sad that someone who isn't here to state his own case is being used as a pawn in the Scottish independence debate. And he didn't even live in Scotland.That's due to a simple thing some people have no respect for others and no shame trying to promote their cause using any means they can. Still amazes me the mendacity of the yes campaign to say its project fear from the No campaign when they post drivel like that.

[orkneycadian]

I thought it was just me who found these people PARTICULARLY annoying, I'm so happy to realise that I wasn't wrong.

Maybe a bit strong to call them annoying.... Each to their own and all that.... And unlike Ywindythesecond, they have not made it onto the Ignore list yet!

Squdge is the mistress of the War and Peace posts that have caused the printing on my "Page Down" button to have become worn off. I do not agree however with her latest techniques to try and curry favour with the "Don't knows"

Piratelassie on the other hand is the mistress of the "Light the blue touchpaper and run" technique, using postings of no more than 20 words, without contributing any more

Oddquine falls somewhere in between.

If they didn't post, we would have no debate. But I do wish Squidge would at least keep the conversation above board and not drag some poor deceased individual into it.

[Chook a demus]

Quite simple I block them as you say each to their own freedom of speech and all that. Only time I do read the posts is when I read e org and don't sign on. They also don't seem to understand hyperbole particularly well.

[Chook a demus]

If they didn't post, we would have no debate. But I do wish Squidge would at least keep the conversation above board and not drag some poor deceased individual into it.Any chance their aiming for the Portgower vampire vote having run out of all other alternatives or maybe trying to resurrect the ones they've bored to death !

[orkneycadian]

As far as I know about this message forum is one where we sign on anonymously and it is written in the rules that we never disclose any personal information about other posters without consential disclosure. It is my hope people respect that.

My own view is that this independence referendum is bigger in importance than my own personal circumstances. I am also a husband, a father and a friend to other Scots. I will decide how I vote on priorities that are greater than my own.

I am a patriotic Englishman who recognises that the English wish to remain part of the UK so I wish what is best for the rUK. Independence will just result in a reduction of 8.4% of the UK. The consequences of independence is mild for rUK but huge for Scotland. I believe the rUK should still have the defence in force that is needed to justify their rightful place at the top international table. I do not believe it is the correct destiny of Scotland to stay with the rUK. Westminster obsesses with its post colonial obsession with international police work and that is OK by me, rather, I would like a greener, fairer and peaceful future for Scotland. With indy, Scots will no longer be sent to wars without the agreement of the Scottish government.

Have you been taking posting tips from Squidge?

[orkneycadian]

A slightly unfortunate comparison, Chook. The SNP and Yes supporters would rather we were rid of Patriots. And Tridents. And Minutemans....

I believe they would rather that we picked up wooden shields, pitchforks and claymores, just like William Wallace.

[Chook a demus]

Yes hence I deleted it Orkney. But a true patriot wouldn't rail against the country of their birth and try to break it up from a successful union.

[Rheghead]

patriotNOUNA person who vigorously supports their country and is prepared to defend it against enemies or detractors:a true patriot !Err nope you don't fit that category I'm afraid

The UK is not a country, it is a contractual arrangement between nations. People do not derive their nationality or patriotism from a contract. And yet the Better Together campaign claim otherwise. Bizarre.

[Uncle-Bobs-Johnny]

As far as I know about this message forum is one where we sign on anonymously and it is written in the rules that we never disclose any personal information about other posters without consential disclosure.


You answered the question and answer yourself via screeds of your own writings. Please don't cry "foul" now that you have been sussed.... accept your total humiliation with grace.

[Chook a demus]

Most people of this island consider themselves English Scottish Welsh or Irish but the vast majority consider themselves British as well. It's only in the mind of separatists that a 300 yr union is a mere contract. And it's that type of mentality that's made the Ukraine the mess it is at the moment.

[orkneycadian]

The UK is not a country, it is a contractual arrangement between nations. People do not derive their nationality or patriotism from a contract. And yet the Better Together campaign claim otherwise. Bizarre.

So Scotland, including Orkney and Shetland is not a country either? I don't think there was even a contract in 1468 for the dowry arrangment. So what you are saying then is that "Scotlands" oil is not Scottish?

Even more bizarre....

[Uncle-Bobs-Johnny]

As far as I know about this message forum is one where we sign on anonymously and it is written in the rules that we never disclose any personal information about other posters without consential disclosure. It is my hope people respect that.



Rules for the boys?

[Rheghead]

You answered the question and answer yourself via screeds of your own writings. Please don't cry "foul" now that you have been sussed.... accept your total humiliation with grace.

If you are trying to claim that I have consentually disclosed my personal circumstances then you are mistaken.

[Uncle-Bobs-Johnny]

Rules for the boys?

I don't agree with your forum rules and would like to change them... can we have a referendum or will you just SHOOT me?

[orkneycadian]

Sorry UBJ, under SNP rules, there will be no shooting in Scotland. Its what Kenny McAskill calls the "Rabbits Charter"

[Rheghead]

Most people of this island consider themselves English Scottish Welsh or Irish but the vast majority consider themselves British as well. It's only in the mind of separatists that a 300 yr union is a mere contract. And it's that type of mentality that's made the Ukraine the mess it is at the moment.

British is defined by the fact you were born on the island of Great Britain. Scots born in an independent country will still be British like English and Welsh. Most people therefore erroneously confuse British with Unionist .

[Oddquine]

It is stunning beyond belief that the Yes campaigners are now resorting to trying to blame the deaths of people on the fact we are not independent.

To even suggest that Mr Clapsons unfortunate death is directly due to his insulin not being kept cool, which in turn was due to his inability to afford electricity, which in turn is due to his "benefits being stopped" is in very bad taste.

Firstly, any diabetic will be aware that their insulin will keep at room temperature for at least a month after being opened. Guidance is usually to store the insulin you are using outside the fridge to make it more comfortable to inject. "Official" guidance is 1 month from opening at room temperature, but we all know that such official guidance, like food best before dates, errs well on the side of caution. So - If Mr Clapsons insulin was stored outside of a fridge for 3 weeks, that alone was not responsible for his death.

Secondly, no power company would have cut off anyones electricity after just 3 weeks, especially if hardship or life dependancy was demonstrated. Even if on a prepayment / card meter, there would be a facility for "emergency" electricity. This is typically £5 - £10.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-2164842/How-household-gadgets-cost-run-16-electricity-bills-wasted-appliances-left-standby.html
(http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-2164842/How-household-gadgets-cost-run-16-electricity-bills-wasted-appliances-left-standby.html)
...suggests that Mr Clapsons fridge would have run for at least 2 months on the £5 emergency credit.

Thirdly, if Mr Clapson found himself with out of date, impotent insulin, he would have been readily given a further supply at his local chemist or A&E

Next, there is the assertion that he was starving and had an empty stomach. Again, any Type 1, insulin dependent diabetic will tell you that in that case, its not insulin you need but sugar or sugar producing carbohydrates. If Mr Clapson hadn't eaten, then insulin would be one of the last things he needed.

I do not profess to be expert on the treatment of diabetes, but I do find the above suggestion that Mr Clapson died because Scotland is not an independant nation to be in extremely bad taste.

If this is the depths that the Yes campaigners have stooped to to try and sway some Yes votes, then I simply cannot wait until this infernal referendum is over with, and we can get back to normal life again.

Where is anyone saying that the reason any person in England died is because Scotland is not independent, pray tell? :roll:

What is being said, as far as I can see, is that an independent Scotland would not have, as Westminster does, viewed the disadvantaged, for whatever reason, as a drain on its resources, to be deliberately removed from the support to which they are entitled..and in many cases to be killed by Government policies which amount to verging on criminal actions, just as surely as they would have been killed if IDS had run over them in a taxpayer funded limousine, driven by a drunk chauffeur, as he was on the way to trough down his £39 a head breakfast.

We can certainly argue about the scope of the 21st century definition of poverty and the entitlement culture which has grown around it, which has long since surpassed affordability....but we can't blame people who have been brought up to believe they are entitled to what they have always been promised....and have come to rely on it...for relying on it, particularly as, unlike when I started working, decent paying jobs are as rare as hen's teeth or Hobby Horse's droppings.

Those of us in Scotland, who have a modicum of empathy for the underclass the UK voter has been instrumental in creating, can, however, and will, continue to blame those in both Houses of Westminster for deliberately, and with malice aforethought, quite knowingly and very deliberately targeting the poorest and least able to resist, while at the same time giving tax cuts to the wealthy, allowing the wealthy and big business to continue to take advantage of tax loopholes the Government deliberately created for that purpose.and subsidising UK companies, however much they make in profits to pay crap wages........oh, and give themselves a 16% pay rise and allow criminal bankers to keep their jobs, and still collect silly money wages and bonuses.

My father fought in WWII, and came home to a land not fit for heroes, and worked hard for the local Labour Party to help get only decent policy the UK has ever produced, and the only thing which ever made the Union worth living in, for the ordinary punter who couldn't take advantage of the UK "London and the south" gravy train, which had, along with the war dead, helped to reduce the Scottish population drastically..the Welfare State. And since 1979, the Westminster Government has been rolling back that same Welfare State to meet the Victorian values so praised by Thatcher, to the extent that we now have increasing levels of the same Victorian era health problems besetting the poor.

I notice you make much of Mr Clapson, basically saying it was his own fault, as he was too thick to know what you know, having googled it. Myself, I'd have wondered where his family was when he was having problems, but that is just the way I think. I also notice you appear to have no opinion on the other examples from squidge. Would that be because even you can't manage to come up with any justification for their treatment as a result of the application of government policies?

[squidge]

Part two

The cases that I cited at the start of the day are simply three which have been reported this week. But here are some scottish statistics for you



A 400% increase in sanctions in a very deprived area of South West Glasgow alone.
The impact of sanctions on tenants is affecting the work of Housing Associations; the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations is currently gathering evidence from its members.
During April 2012, over 200 sanctions were applied to claimants every working day
Citizens Advice Bureaux and other third sector organisations give examples of individuals and families left in extreme hardship because of sanctions applied with little or no consideration of personal circumstances and in some cases having wider impact on family and support networks (e.g. sanctions on those with caring responsibilities).
73% of referrals to food banks were related to benefit sanctions and delays.
Poor communication around expectations of claimants and when/why sanctions are applied cause tremendous worry and stress.
There is evidence of “stockpiling” of sanctions – Citizens Advice in Scotland have seen a number of cases where sanctions have been applied retrospectively for issues which occurred up to 14 months previously. This is as a result of the change in law made through the Jobseekers (Back to Work) Act 2013.
Sanctions are being applied for personal circumstances which a claimant cannot change – and which actually create savings for statutory services – for example, kinship and unpaid care situations. Examples are highlighted in the Coalition of Care Providers in Scotland’s response to the Expert Working Group on Welfare. Anecdotally we are aware of unpaid carers moving towards Jobseeker conditionality but with no support for their caring roles to enable them to take up employment.

The problem with Sanctions is not that they exist - they have always existed and been used where necessary - it is the staggering way they are being handed out left right and centre. In addition when appealed, almost 60% of sanctions are overturned and when if the appeals get as far as a tribunal - the very last stage of appeal then 9 out of 10 sanctions are overturned. This is utterly shocking and a complete and utter waste of money as well as completely devastating to those people who face being sanctioned unfairly.

The Welfare system is a clear indicator of why Scotland should be independent. The Scottish Government has shown that it wants to take a different direction on welfare. It has taken several steps over the last few years to mitigate the effect of welfare reforms by meeting shortfalls in funding to ensure that people are supported as much as possible and by developing its Community Jobs Programme. However - despite these efforts to alter the direction of travel - there is no opportunity for Scotland as part of the union to do anything truly different - so we can play around the edges but not change anything. Take the Bedroom tax, Currently the Scottish government meets the cost of the Spare Room Subsidy in full. To do this, the Scottish Government had to ask permission from Westminster to allow the Scottish Government to commit the extra money to meet this cost. The Scottish Government does not have the power to abolish the bedroom tax despite the fact 91% of Scottish MPs voted to impose this tax. So we have to allocate money from our budget to pay it.

So this is a policy which a huge majority of our MPs voted against, which is causing hardship for so many people and which we do not want in Scotland and yet we cannot get rid of it. Our government does not have the power to abolish the bedroom tax.

Independence will give us the choice to do something different and the opportunity to make that choice. In taking that opportunity Scotland will be able to show rUk that there is a different and better way to deal with people who are receiving benefits and then it would be up to the people of the rUk to demand that changes are made in their parliament.

Without independence, as part of the UK, there is NO opportunity to change things. None. The tragic and shocking stories which I mentioned at the start of the day and which are happening all over Britain today will continue. We need to show there is a different way of doing things and Independence gives us the chance to do that.

[orkneycadian]

British is defined by the fact you were born on the island of Great Britain. Scots born in an independent country will still be British like English and Welsh. Most people therefore erroneously confuse British with Unionist .

You really don't want the oil that is off the coast of the United Kingdom do you? If you are going to be separatist, then calling it solely Britain (the singular big island) is it.

OK, we'll keep it if you don't want it. All the more for the PROOSWI!

[orkneycadian]

I notice you make much of Mr Clapson, basically saying it was his own fault, as he was too thick to know what you know, having googled it.

Whoa!!!!!!!

Now your stating that I am saying it was Mr Clapsons own fault?

This is getting beyond belief....

Have you tried living with diabetes?

[Oddquine]

You really don't want the oil that is off the coast of the United Kingdom do you? If you are going to be separatist, then calling it solely Britain (the singular big island) is it.

OK, we'll keep it if you don't want it. All the more for the PROOSWI!

How's about you stop talking utter bollox just for the sake of arguing? It seems to be a No Bitter Together Thanks supporters' (and leaders), propensity.

[Oddquine]

Whoa!!!!!!!

Now your stating that I am saying it was Mr Clapsons own fault?

This is getting beyond belief....

Have you tried living with diabetes?

Nope.if you read your post again YOU are saying it! :roll:

[orkneycadian]

Have you tried living with diabetes?

Come on now Squidge, like Rheghead, all it takes is a Yes / No answer. Have you lived with hypos? Checking your levels? Regular visits to the diabetic nurse?

[Uncle-Bobs-Johnny]

British is defined by the fact you were born on the island of Great Britain. Scots born in an independent country will still be British like English and Welsh. Most people therefore erroneously confuse British with Unionist .

You are ENGLISH and have no idea of the Scottish culture. An Englishman with no concept of the Scottish culture is a lot more offensive than Margaret Thatcher.

[orkneycadian]

Nope.if you read your post again YOU are saying it! :roll:

I have. Several times. All it points out are facts.

The main one being "is there no end to the depths the SNP / Yes camp will stoop to?"

[orkneycadian]

Come on now Squidge, like Rheghead, all it takes is a Yes / No answer. Have you lived with hypos? Checking your levels? Regular visits to the diabetic nurse?

Hurry up Squidge, we don't have all night....

Have you lived with diabetes, or was this just a story that suited your political ends?

[orkneycadian]

That'll be a no then.....

[Chook a demus]

Let's not forget that the SNP themselves say they will require a million or so immigrants to move to a newly independent Scotland which is about an extra 20% of the population just to keep everything working properly. Think of the strain the will put on public services, schools hospitals and the effect it will have on wages. Let alone the cultural impact it will have on the country all in the space of 20yrs. That would be 1 in 5 of the population with no cultural ties moving here just to fund all the social spending, within a couple of generations the Scotland we know and love would be changed beyond recognition.

[orkneycadian]

I don't see why we need to discuss you behind closed doors, when you are happy to discuss poor Mr Clapson on a public forum.

I deduce that you saw the story somewhere and thought that could be bent to try and show how bad "the system" is.

If you do not have diabetes, or have lived with it, fair enough. No further questions required.

[orkneycadian]

Night night Squidge.

Make sure you have no nighttime hypos now.... ;)

[orkneycadian]

That would be 1 in 5 of the population with no cultural ties moving here just to fund all the social spending, within a couple of generations the Scotland we know and love would be changed beyond recognition.

Would we need to have haggis appreciation night school classes?

[Chook a demus]

Would we need to have haggis appreciation night school classes?Aye and how ta wear your kilt properly

[Chook a demus]

Mildly concerned that even when you block someone and make it patently clear you have no desire to discuss anything with them, they can't help but keep making personal digs. I will give Rheg his due at least he gives as good as he gets despite the political differences we have, but I do find the one who will not be named attempts to keep trying to associate others words to me becoming rather obsessive and it's beginning to creep me out.

[Phill]

This is coming along nicely.

*popcorn*

[Chook a demus]

This is coming along nicely.*popcorn*Salt or butter ? Would you like to max it ?

[squidge]

Let's not forget that the SNP themselves say they will require a million or so immigrants to move to a newly independent Scotland which is about an extra 20% of the population just to keep everything working properly. Think of the strain the will put on public services, schools hospitals and the effect it will have on wages. Let alone the cultural impact it will have on the country all in the space of 20yrs. That would be 1 in 5 of the population with no cultural ties moving here just to fund all the social spending, within a couple of generations the Scotland we know and love would be changed beyond recognition.

Chook is right to say that Scotland will need immigrants to help to support the economy and ensure that our population is growing and that we meet the skills that employers are looking for as well as the cost of pensions. He is however wrong aboutseveral key points. The SNP have not said anywhere that the immigration figure would be one million immigrants. The one million figure was quoted as coming from Gregg McClymont by the Herald and by the Daily Record shortly after, as coming from Yvette Cooper just before her visit to Inverness. The link to the Daily Record is here (http://archive.today/weyKE) from 24th April.

This article pointed out several paragraphs down, that the figure refers to the total net migration by 2051 – almost 40 years into the future - Not the 20 which Chook suggests and the articles in both the Herald and the Record point out that this is an average of 24000 a year.

By referring to the National Records Office shows us the statistics for the last ten years and we can see that net migration to Scotland over the last ten years has been as follows.

2002/3: 5,643
2003/4: 18,622
2004/5: 25,307
2005/6: 18,822
2006/7: 33,049
2007/8: 26,409
2008/9: 24,422
2009/10: 26,075
2010/11: 32,209
2011/12: 12,738

Average: 22,330

Interestingly this is only 1700 a year less than the 24,000 a year that Yvette and Gregg suggested we need. Its also interesting to note that the Daily Express published an article here (http://archive.today/6GbcJ#selection-991.0-974.13) last August which says
Economists believe the population needs to grow by 24,000 people a year just to keep pace with European economies. which was supported by the Conservatives.

So it appears that the figure of 1 million is not the terrifying surge in immigration that Chook suggests, but a small increase of less than 8% per year on current figures. The white paper also makes it clear that there is no plan for unfettered immigration into Scotland. EU residents will have their rights to free movement as now but an Independent Scotland will have its own immigration controls. The difference is that these controls will be designed to ensure Scotland's immigration needs are met and not ignored.

Chook's suggestion that increasing our immigration by around 1700 per year will destroy our culture, and Labour's suggestion that this is an extremely difficult figure to achieve is a bit of an over exaggeration.

We know that many NO spokespeople are a bit obsessed with foreigners and we see many suggestions that "foreigners" might have a detrimental effect on Scotland whether it is by moving here or by our Aunties, mums, dads and other relatives transforming into foreigners as soon as Independence is declared. It is however true that the Scottish Government and you know, the Scottish people as well, have traditionally been very welcoming to immigrants and I don't expect that to change with Independence.

Any links that you need just PM me and I will let you have them.

[squidge]

Here is a link to a petition demanding an inquiry into benefit sanctions by the family of the poor man, David Clapson, who's story I highlighted yesterday. If you are as horrified by the way sanctions are being used as I am, then please think about signing it. http://www.change.org/petitions/david-cameron-hold-an-inquiry-into-benefit-sanctions-that-killed-my-brother?recruiter=7492441&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=share_facebook_mobile

[erniesspeedshop]

Scotland shares the North Sea with Norway. In 1905 norway achieved independence from Sweden to become the 2nd poorest country in Europe. Now look at them. Norway is often cited as a good example of a successful independent country. In historical terms, they were almost immediately invaded and occupied by Germany, then used as a base from which to bomb Scotland. They built their modern economy post WWII largely with the help of the UK and paid for by reparations and the USA. I hope Scotland doesn't have to go through all that to become successful. Sorry, newbie, can't make the paragraphs work.:confused

[Chook a demus]

Seems the yes camps maths is rather bad .
Population of Scotland approx 5 million.
Projected immigration requirement 1 million.
Somehow that equals 8% .
It's also noticeable how the immigration figures quoted are from a period of unfettered immigration which the govt is now stemming hence the reduction in recent figures.
So that would be more of the same but worse from the Yes campaign wi no excuses and the usual blaming someone else.
And not sure how a discussion on immigration turns into using the term "foreigners" that's starting to verge into hate speech so much for the yes campaign and their high standards.

One things very clear the SNP are good at using sound bites from other people then when it comes back to bite them they blame someone else.
It's got a bit tiring over the months how everyone else is always wrong.

[squidge]

Immigration is vital to Scotland's economic wellbeing, however nowhere is it suggested that Scotland will opt for unfettered immigration. Even using the figure of 1 million immigrants required over almost 40 years that only works out as an increase of less than 8% per year on the average annual immigration for the last 10 years. Remember the 1 million figure quoted by labour is between now and 2051! How they know what Scotland's population needs will be in 2051 I don't know but hey ho.... That's what the Labour Party says.

The white paper clearly states that Scotland will change the rules back so that people who come here to study can stay and work after achieving their degree. In addition the current Scottish Government sets out plans for a points based system for immigrants from outside the EU which will reflect Scotland's population and economic needs. Is that not what many people who are concerned about immigration want? A points system? Immigrants are net contributors to the economy of the UK and of Scotland and the need for Scotland to have its own policies to meet its own needs is recognised by all those parties supporting independence.

[Alien Adrenaline Reflex]

Seems the yes camps maths is rather bad .
Population of Scotland approx 5 million.
Projected immigration requirement 1 million.
Somehow that equals 8% .
It's also noticeable how the immigration figures quoted are from a period of unfettered immigration which the govt is now stemming hence the reduction in recent figures.
So that would be more of the same but worse from the Yes campaign wi no excuses and the usual blaming someone else.
And not sure how a discussion on immigration turns into using the term "foreigners" that's starting to verge into hate speech so much for the yes campaign and their high standards.

One things very clear the SNP are good at using sound bites from other people then when it comes back to bite them they blame someone else.
It's got a bit tiring over the months how everyone else is always wrong.

An 8% jump on the vurrent level of immigration doesn;t seem too much of a leap. Maybe it is for a moron?

[Rheghead]

I'm glad you cleared that up about immigration squidge. It sounds like the pro-UK media and Better Together campaign were trying to twist SNP policy into something that is scaremongering again.

[Chook a demus]

I suggest you read the migration watch website

http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefing-paper/10.20

Here are some salient points.

In any case, immigration as a solution to the pensions problem has long been dismissed by experts. Most recently, the House of Lords Select Committee on Economic Affairs concluded that "Arguments in favour of high immigration to defuse "the pensions time-bomb" do not stand up to scrutiny as they are based on the unreasonable assumption of a static retirement age as people live longer and ignore the fact that, in time, immigrants too will grow old and draw pensions. Increasing the official retirement age will significantly reduce the increase in the dependency ratio and is the only viable way to do so".

Economic Benefits
It is also argued in Scotland that immigrants are needed to fill vacancies. The House of Lords Economics Committee concluded, however, that "Because immigration expands the overall economy, it cannot be expected to be an effective policy tool for significantly reducing vacancies. Vacancies are to a certain extent, a sign of a healthy labour market and economy. They cannot be a good reason for encouraging large-scale labour immigration".

It is also suggested that immigrants are needed to do jobs that Scots will not do. Again, this was dismissed by the House of Lords Economic Committee who concluded that "The argument that sustained net immigration is needed to fill vacancies, and that immigrants do the jobs that locals cannot or will not do, is fundamentally flawed. It ignores the potential alternatives to immigration for responding to labour shortages, including the price adjustments of a competitive labour market and the associated increase in local labour supply that can be expected to occur in the absence of immigration"

Finally, it is claimed that Scotland needs the dynamism provided by immigrants. The House of Lords was unconvinced. They concluded that “Although possible in theory, we found no systematic empirical evidence to suggest that net immigration creates significant dynamic benefits for the resident population in the UK. This does not necessarily mean that such effects do not exist but that there is currently no systematic evidence for them and it is possible that there are also negative dynamic and wider welfare effects.”

A special scheme for Scotland?

A start has been made in this direction through the "Fresh talent: working in Scotland Scheme" recently introduced. However, no such scheme could be enforced unless immigration controls and a physical barrier were to be put in place - reinforced perhaps by maritime patrols and the inspection of vehicles and trains. This only has to be stated to be dismissed as impractical.

In the absence of immigration controls, there is clearly a risk that many of those admitted for work in Scotland would head South for higher wages, a warmer climate and, often, compatriots already in England. The area of destination in the UK could be factored into a Points Based System but it would have to be on a very limited scale. Otherwise the net result would be a back door to England which provided little or no benefit to Scotland. (Australia, which has a regional dimension to its immigration regime, also has a facility for employers to check on line the immigration status of applicants).

Conclusion
There is no significant economic case for large scale immigration to Scotland. A separate immigration system that such a policy would require would be unenforceable, ineffective and undesirable.

[squidge]

Nowhere is the Scottish Government suggesting that we need a "high level" of immigration or large scale immigration.

The figure of 1 million, quoted by chook are figures provided by Labour MPs and not the Scottish Government. It's a bit rich to quote those figures and then provide information from the same parties to suggest that the figures quoted are wrong. That also assumes that 1 million immigrants over 40 years is a "high level" when I have already shown that is not really the case.

Immigration is one tool to help Scotland grow and prosper as an independent country. It is a tool in a whole toolbox of policies and to suggest it is needed to " fill jobs Scots won't do" or to reduce vacancies or that the Scottish Government is somehow basing ALL it's hopes on immigration completely ignores the rest of the tools which are available to improve and support the Scottish economy.

These include better support to return those on benefits to work, and includes a work programme that actually improves the chances of people finding work, which the current programme does not do; it includes developing a pension policy and system which meets Scotland's particular needs, it includes childcare policies to enable parents to return to work, it includes apprenticeships and inward investment.

Immigration, a fair transparent and sensible policy which meets Scotland's particular needs - like that which is proposed will help Scotland be a successful independent country, but it isn't what we are relying on, it's just part of the package.

[Rheghead]

I suggest you read the migration watch website

What's that? You mentioned a number of groups/bodies, migrationwatch (littered with ex westminster MPs), House of Lords, House of Lords Economics Committee, the House of Lords Select Committee on Economic Affairs.

How in touch are they with Scottish affairs?

It seems to me that your post gives a good example of why I think the only people who are the best qualified to make decisions for Scotland is the Scottish people themselves.

It goes right at the heart of what this referendum is all about.

[golach]

What's that? How in touch are they with Scottish affairs? It goes right at the heart of what this referendum is all about.

too right Rheg, A BILLION pounds of anti-poverty measures has been diverted by the Scottish Government to patch over local authority cuts and subsidise handouts for the wealthiest Scots, a new Labour-commissioned report is to claim.

[golach]

More ducking and diving from our big fearty FM Eck Salmond, first he knocks back two live BBC debates with Alistair Darling and now he's also knocked back Andrew Neil's numerous requests for an interview...
Eck Salmond is hiding away under the safety of the SNP controlled and very bias STV (Salmond TV). Utterly pathetic.

[Rheghead]

too right Rheg, A BILLION pounds of anti-poverty measures has been diverted by the Scottish Government to patch over local authority cuts and subsidise handouts for the wealthiest Scots, a new Labour-commissioned report is to claim.



Face/Palm, you are getting desperate now. The author of the report admitted that Westminster plans to cut Scotland's block grant by £2.2 billion. Also in his report, he fails to factor in the 'free' benefits that are provided by the Scottish Government that directly benefit people in poverty.

[Chook a demus]

See the nice thing about migration watch is it is not just one party it covers cross party consensus where as young rheg likes to support the SNPs totally unsupported line, it may have escaped your notice but the House of Lords and all the other groups also includes Scots.
Where as your line on 1 million immigrants is just acceptable because the SNP says so.

The reality is during the debate we have you who denounces anything that doesn't tow official SNP policy, and the other one who is so ashamed of the policies that she refuses to publicly post them and constantly asks for PMs, so her position can't be challenged publicly.
A Duplicitous and underhand attempt to manipulate people's opinion at least the No people have the decency to keep the debate public and out in the open.

The amount of times in recent posts figures have been quoted as Labours, does makes you wonder of the SNP are capable of making their own policy instead of using Labours discredited immigration policy.

[Rheghead]

rheg likes to support the SNPs totally unsupported line.

I do not support the SNP. I only support truth of what has been said and not said and what can be factually verified. Big difference.

[Chook a demus]

I do not support the SNP. I only support truth of what has been said and not said and what can be factually verified. Big difference.
Can you show me independent stats on immigration I've yet to see any verified factual evidence that an extra million people are required.

And whilst you're at it can you show me the verified factual evidence for EU & Nato membership or currency for an independent Scotland.

I'd really like to see your independent verified facts on these issues.

[Rheghead]

Can you show me independent stats on immigration I've yet to see any verified factual evidence that an extra million people are required.

And whilst you're at it can you show me the verified factual evidence for EU & Nato membership or currency for an independent Scotland.

I'd really like to see your independent verified facts on these issues.

It is not just facts you need but a well reasoned interpretation as well. That is why the Yes campaign is still on track because the Yessers are determining the debate whilst Better Together are still repeating the same old scare stories.

[golach]

It is not just facts you need but a well reasoned interpretation as well. That is why the Yes campaign is still on track because the Yessers are determining the debate whilst Better Together are still repeating the same old scare stories.Your still not providing "verified factual evidence" yet.........why not?

[Headwark]

Betting is now 1/8 for a no vote
and 9/2 for a yes vote .

Seems like all the talk is Hypothetical to me.

[Rheghead]

Your still not providing "verified factual evidence" yet.........why not?

Here is one verified undeniable fact for you. The UK government has refused to discuss anything to do with post independence negotiations.

If you want to see the SNP's vision for an independent country then read Scotland's Future.

In all honesty, the SNP have gone to long lengths to make sure you have the best info to make your choice. But the Scottish Labour Party has not made ANY vision for an independent Scotland and that is less than 2 years away. How scarily ill prepared is that?

[Rheghead]

Betting is now 1/8 for a no vote
and 9/2 for a yes vote .

Seems like all the talk is Hypothetical to me.

Good odds for a Yes vote. If it is in the bag, why are the No campaigners looking increasingly desperate?

[golach]

If you want to see the SNP's vision for an independent country then read Scotland's Future. Ah you mean Eck's wish list, nothing in that paper is verifiable, we want facts, not maybe's or half truths

[Rheghead]

Ah you mean Eck's wish list, nothing in that paper is verifiable, we want facts, not maybe's or half truths

So if you are effectively saying the choice on the table is a certain future of chronic political disempowerment or an uncertain future with all the powers to change our destiny then I say it is a no brainer.

[golach]

So if you are effectively saying the choice on the table is a certain future of chronic political disempowerment or an uncertain future with all the powers to change our destiny then I say it is a no brainer.Show me, where we will have a certain future , with powers to change our destiny, you cannot. No brainer I would say in return.

[Chook a demus]

I do not support the SNP. I only support truth of what has been said and not said and what can be factually verified. Big difference.
So the question was asked and you where called to answer !

It is not just facts you need but a well reasoned interpretation as well. That is why the Yes campaign is still on track because the Yessers are determining the debate whilst Better Together are still repeating the same old scare stories.
And then when called to task it appears nothing you say is factually verifiable !

Then you change tact and once again try to claim the yes campaign is gaining ground as you've been saying over and over , but once again it's another unverifiable non fact based on your assertions and actually disproved by the vast majority of unbiased polls which show the yes campaign has not gained any ground in months and actually looks as though it's taken a 2 percentile drop in the last month.

Political rhetoric is all very well and good but when it flies in the face of all the evidence it's a deliberate attempt to mislead.

You also complain that the UK govt will not negotiate with the SNP prior to the outcome, part of the job of the govt is to maintain the Union why should they negotiate anything until you actually have something to negotiate about. As of yet Scotland is not an independent country and there is no requirement to negotiate about a hypothetical situation that looks like it may never occur.

[squidge]

Can you show me independehint stats on immigration I've yet to see any verified factual evidence that an extra million people are required.Crikey Chook for the third time I think....The SNP has not said anywhere that Scotland needs 1 million immigrants - nowhere do they use this figure. This figure was produced by the Labour MPs named in the articles. The SNP has only ever said that Scotland needs immigration and an Indy Scotland will be able to design an immigration policy which meets the needs and priorities of Scotland. The SNP can't be expected to provide evidence to support figures which are touted as what Scotland needs by other parties.

The Labour MPs quoted figures which said Scotland needs 1 million immigrants by 2051. That's not such a huge amount more than we are already getting and secondly the SNP has not said Scotland needs 1 million, a huge amount, a massive increase or that we will need to rely on immigration as our only hope of anything. They have simply said Scotland needs an immigration policy to meet the needs of Scotland and we do not have that now.

[Rheghead]

Show me, where we will have a certain future , with powers to change our destiny, you cannot. No brainer I would say in return.

I didn't say that. I said it was was a no brainer to take an uncertain future with powers to change things for the better over a certain future with chronic political disempowerment. How difficult is that for you to understand golach?

[erniesspeedshop]

I didn't say that. I said it was was a no brainer to take an uncertain future with powers to change things for the better over a certain future with chronic political disempowerment. How difficult is that for you to understand golach?I don't think the majority of people particularly care about politics so I certainly don't see that as a big draw to either yes or no. I think an uncertain future is much more of a reason to stay in UK rather than go it alone.

[Rheghead]

I don't think the majority of people particularly care about politics so I certainly don't see that as a big draw to either yes or no. I think an uncertain future is much more of a reason to stay in UK rather than go it alone.

If that is your view then fair enough. But if they aren't bothered about poitics then they won't be voting in the referendum, will they? But there have been many times in history such as when we get a Conservative government, the poll tax, bedroom tax, foreign wars etc where Scotland is helpless to help itself. With independence Scotland will have the government that it votes for.

[Chook a demus]

Crikey Chook for the third time I think....The SNP has not said anywhere that Scotland needs 1 million immigrants - nowhere do they use this figure. This figure was produced by the Labour MPs named in the articles. The SNP has only ever said that Scotland needs immigration and an Indy Scotland will be able to design an immigration policy which meets the needs and priorities of Scotland. The SNP can't be expected to provide evidence to support figures which are touted as what Scotland needs by other parties. The Labour MPs quoted figures which said Scotland needs 1 million immigrants by 2051. That's not such a huge amount more than we are already getting and secondly the SNP has not said Scotland needs 1 million, a huge amount, a massive increase or that we will need to rely on immigration as our only hope of anything. They have simply said Scotland needs an immigration policy to meet the needs of Scotland and we do not have that now.

It's all very well and good producing a white paper with lots of attractive polices in but absolutely not one jot of information about how the proposed policies are to be paid for.
To then become disengenoius about how those policies would be paid for when opposition parties state the obvious is almost childlike in its naivety.

You have two choices higher taxation which would align us closer to Scandinavian countries or higher immigration.

Which is it ? constantly denying everything and blaming it on other parties does not answer the fundamental question.

Where is the money coming from ?
Higher Taxation
Immigration

Either one of them aren't vote winners hence the reason for the white paper being light in detail.

[Chook a demus]

If that is your view then fair enough. But if they aren't bothered about poitics then they won't be voting in the referendum, will they? But there have been many times in history such as when we get a Conservative government, the poll tax, bedroom tax, foreign wars etc where Scotland is helpless to help itself. With independence Scotland will have the government that it votes for.You seem very concerned with other people not voting who don't see your point of view it's not the first time you've suggested people don't vote.

[erniesspeedshop]

If that is your view then fair enough. But if they aren't bothered about poitics then they won't be voting in the referendum, will they? But there have been many times in history such as when we get a Conservative government, the poll tax, bedroom tax, foreign wars etc where Scotland is helpless to help itself. With independence Scotland will have the government that it votes for.Actually, I think there will be a very high turnout in the referendum, primarily because people object to having fanatics decide their future for them. After that, they will be able to go back to living their lives in peace. On a couple of your other points. Scots have been enthusiastic participents in foreign wars. (aren't all wars foreign?)
Not all Scots object to Spare room subsidy removal, Conservative governments or Poll tax. I've noticed the Yes camp tend to like to think they speak for Scotland, when they actually speak for the minority (still).

[Heisenberg]

If that is your view then fair enough. But if they aren't bothered about poitics then they won't be voting in the referendum, will they? But there have been many times in history such as when we get a Conservative government, the poll tax, bedroom tax, foreign wars etc where Scotland is helpless to help itself. With independence Scotland will have the government that it votes for.I don't really care about politics in general but I will most definitely be voting, thank you very much Mr Spock! I don't care which way the vote goes as I know for certain the future will be uncertain either way. I will most likely vote NO mostly based on the garbage being spouted on this thread by the YES campaigners

[Rheghead]

I don't really care about politics in general but I will most definitely be voting, thank you very much Mr Spock! I don't care which way the vote goes as I know for certain the future will be uncertain either way. I will most likely vote NO mostly based on the garbage being spouted on this thread by the YES campaigners

As if there was any indecision in the first place. :)

[Rheghead]

Actually, I think there will be a very high turnout in the referendum, primarily because people object to having fanatics decide their future for them. After that, they will be able to go back to living their lives in peace. On a couple of your other points. Scots have been enthusiastic participents in foreign wars. (aren't all wars foreign?)
Not all Scots object to Spare room subsidy removal, Conservative governments or Poll tax. I've noticed the Yes camp tend to like to think they speak for Scotland, when they actually speak for the minority (still).

Erm excuse me but at the last election, the SNP got an overall majority in a political set up that was designed to stop the SNP from getting an overall majority. So forgive me for saying so but they are entitled to speak for Scotland. It was your fellow Scots (a big assumption there) that voted them in.

[squidge]

It's all very well and good producing a white paper with lots of attractive polices in but absolutely not one jot of information about how the proposed policies are to be paid for.To then become disengenoius about how those policies would be paid for when opposition parties state the obvious is almost childlike in its naivety.

The disingenuity is saying that the white Paper is light on details when you conveniently "forget" or ignore perhaps, that the financial case for independence was set out in a paper all of its own. "Scotland's economy - The case for independence" was published in May 2013. Since then there has been a plethora of additional information for people to read and digest and consider when deciding for themselves whether they believe Scotland can afford Independence. This document is available for download from the Scottish Government Site - just google it.




You have two choices higher taxation which would align us closer to Scandinavian countries or higher immigration.

Which is it ? constantly denying everything and blaming it on other parties does not answer the fundamental question.

Where is the money coming from ?
Higher Taxation
Immigration

Either one of them aren't vote winners hence the reason for the white paper being light in detail.

Lets see - Scotland's money - its income does not just come from personal taxation or from immigration - what a bizarre thing to suggest. There are a whole range of ways in which any country raises money to fund the policies which it's electorate vote for.

Scotland has plenty of resources and it can be confident that it can afford to be independent. The financial Times said as much fairly recently too.

Examples are
£17billion construction industry
£10 billion tourism indistry
£13 billion food and drink industry
£10 billion Business Services industry
£3 billion Creative industries
More than £10 billion in Chemical and life sciences
and £7 billion Financial services industry. Whisky exports generate £4.3billion

And i havent even mentioned oil and gas yet!!!!

Scotland has significant natural resources. It has an historic environment which alone is worth £2.3billion.

The total value of international exports from Scotland in 2012 was £26billion and of exports to the rest of the UK was £47billion.

When comparing Scotland's GDP from the first quarter of 2013 to the first quarter of 2014 we see a growth of 2.6%

So income from all of the industries mentioned, Personal Taxation,other taxation, investments, borrowing, the alternatively hated and feted EU grants - all of these and more makes up the income of Scotland just like in any other country.

In addition we can factor in savings which we will make as a result of not being part of the UK, things which we choose to do differently which will reduce costs - welfare is a key area where savings can be made with very little expenditure, closing taxation loopholes and devising a simpler system will also free up money to spend elsewhere. We have done defence spending to death but to remind you that Scotland can save £1billion whilst increasing spending on Defence; Not having to pay for things like the London sewer system and HS2 will also mean that Scotland has more money to spend. Removing trident will also in the long term mean Scotland having more money to pay for policies which its electorate vote for.

There will of course be costs associated with becoming independent but Scotland is well placed to be a successful and wealthy country and with Independence we have the change to use that wealth for the good of all.

Remember also that we arent starting from nothing - Scotland is entitled and will receive a share of the assets of the UK and will take a share of the debt too of course but to suggest that the things laid out in the White Paper by the Scottish Government can only be afforded by increased taxation or immigration makes no sense.

[squidge]

I don't really care about politics in general but I will most definitely be voting, thank you very much Mr Spock! I don't care which way the vote goes as I know for certain the future will be uncertain either way. I will most likely vote NO mostly based on the garbage being spouted on this thread by the YES campaigners

I am delighted you will be voting Heisenberg, I dont give a hoot which way you vote just that you have the opportunity to hear all sides of the arguments before you do so.

[Rheghead]

In addition we can factor in savings which we will make as a result of not being part of the UK, things which we choose to do differently which will reduce costs

Indeed squidge, there is the matter of removing 2 complete layers of governance, the House of Lords and the Westmister MPs. That must account for a saving of £millions.

[Rheghead]

Here is an inconvenient truth about Scotland's place in the UK. A healthy distribution of GDP across the UK, Yes I admit the No campaign are keen to generate money and are very good at it. But look where the richest households are distributed. The money gets sucked south leaving us with the crumbs as usual. Scotland needs to take control of its finances to keep the money back in Scotland. Scotland has the oil but all the trade in oil takes place in London for the benefit of Westminster and London.

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f244/Rheghead/unknowns/gdp2010_zps909897f6.png


http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f244/Rheghead/unknowns/Big-Wealth-Gap_zps9b7abbfb.jpg

[Chook a demus]

And indeed there is money in the economy already which is already being spent on public services any bright spark can list off where the money in the economy comes from but where is the additional money required for these schemes coming from that is the question.
As I said additional taxation or immigration ?
Then we have the costs to Scotland or trade with rUK that may well be lost or cost more.

Very ingenious publishing a white paper for the public to decide which way to vote but publish the financial detail elsewhere nothing like making it easy for people.

Doesn't really matter how much you type the public aren't buying into the SNP smoke and mirrors games. How many times can you spend a £ I've given up trying to count how times the SNP can spend the same £.

It's about as credible as Rhegs constantly saying the yes campaign is gaining ground but polls remain stubbornly the same ..

What the yes campaign lacks is credibility

[Chook a demus]

As for Rhegs pretty little diagrams if the population of the highlands was as dense as the south east of England then the maps would certainly look different how can you expect a country the size of Scotland with 5 million inhabitants to have anything like the wealth distribution of say London which has more people in than the whole of a Scotland. Another desperate attempt to distort the reality of the situation

[Rheghead]

As for Rhegs pretty little diagrams if the population of the highlands was as dense as the south east of England then the maps would certainly look different how can you expect a country the size of Scotland with 5 million inhabitants to have anything like the wealth distribution of say London which has more people in than the whole of a Scotland. Another desperate attempt to distort the reality of the situation

The info is based on percentages and per capita not absolute totals. The population size is irrelevant.

[Even Chance]

The current Scottish Government have already done the world of good to Scotland over the last few years, making living here and having our way of life the envy of all living in the RUK. Think NHS, Education etc, all driving Scotland to become the best Nation in the World.
Why do you feel that they will make a botch of it after Independence when the track record is so good already? Voting Yes will assure we continue to prosper, and things can only get better when the choices are made by us. Remember this all you Salmond haters out there......Its not really all aboot Salmond, but dont tell everyone!

[Chook a demus]

So comparing the GDP of a rural area with hardly one living in it to a densely populated finance city is going to give you an accurate representation. Mind how many people do earn over £967000 if you also look at the other diagram central belt & Aberdeen and surrounding area seems to do ok compared to the south east .

[Rheghead]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bt3cbiRIQAA9exy.png:large

Less than Scotland's population share of employers who are taking advantage of the Employment allowance are in Scotland. UK is not working for Scotland. Big bias towards SE England though.

[Chook a demus]

Fact: Scotland spent £12 billion more than it raised in taxes last year (that’s from the Scottish Government’s own figures, including North Sea revenues). So it’s hard to see how we’d be able cut corporation tax and air passenger duty on one hand but still spend more on benefits and create an oil fund on the other.

[Rheghead]

Fact: Scotland spent £12 billion more than it raised in taxes last year (that’s from the Scottish Government’s own figures, including North Sea revenues). So it’s hard to see how we’d be able cut corporation tax and air passenger duty on one hand but still spend more on benefits and create an oil fund on the other.

Cut us free then, you'll save a packet.

[Chook a demus]

Fact: The white paper does not answer the key questions. Many of the independence plans, for example on currency and EU membership, are in the hands of foreign governments who would be acting in the interests of their own citizens ahead of Scotland’s. And the white paper does not add up - the plans to cut taxes and extend childcare need £1.6 billion of additional funding.

[Chook a demus]

Fact: The EU .We’d have to apply as a new state and negotiate entry – it’s hard to imagine it would be an easy process (look at how long it took Croatia to join - almost eight years), and even harder to imagine that we’d be given advantageous terms (like the UK rebate or opt-outs, including from the Euro).

[squidge]

How will additional money be raised in an independent Scotland?Well chook, let's see. If additional money was needed and you know that's a big if, the figures for Scotland's economy that we have don't include VAT for example, They don't include export tax for whisky which is allocated to the English economy because they leave from English ports. There are clearly savings to be made as both I and rheg have suggested unless you think that those savings don't exist. If we need to raise extra money then Scotland would do what EVERY OTHER INDEPENDENT COUNTRY does. Increase borrowing, raise taxes, make cuts.... Scotland is not different than any other country. Those of us supporting yes aren't asking for anything that doesn't happen elsewhere. It's not going to be some sort of utopia and we may have to make changes to our plans or prioritise some things over others. The point is however that wherever the money comes from, money raised in Scotland will be spent by a Scottish Government on the priorities of Scotland and it's you and I who get to decide what those priorities are when we vote. That doesn't happen now.

[Rheghead]

Mere technicalities do not create a sense of nationhood, national identity, national self-confidence to do better for ourselves and ultimately trust in ourselves will create national self determination. A well reasoned think about those important issues can be sorted out in the 18 month negotiation period.

[Chook a demus]

ONE of the big drivers of inequality in Scotland is that we have, in Edinburgh, some of the highest-paid financial staff in the Western world.In Scotland, as the economists David Eiser and David Comerford have shown, the richest one per cent had 6.3 per cent of pre-tax incomes in 1997 but 9.4 per cent by 2009.The SNP know that – and it is one of the reasons they’ve refused to commit to Labour’s proposals for a 50p tax rate. Nor do they support a new top-rate band on council tax, or a mansion tax, a higher rate of stamp duty for the most expensive house sales.They don’t even support a tax on bankers’ bonuses. In fact, their main tax pledge is to cut corporation tax by up to three per cent, which would reduce revenues for public services.The SNP do not look to be serious about tackling inequality. That isn’t simply a political failing on their 
part as a party – it is a direct result of the notion of independence itself, which focuses on the constitutional status of the nation rather than the inequalities within it.

[Chook a demus]

WHAT about the SNP’s predicted growth through immigration?For the purposes of their analysis of the impact of migration on growth and the fiscal position, the Institute for Fiscal Studies assume that long-term productivity levels in Scotland will be similar to those of the UK.But it is doubtful whether a major increase in immigration can give us all the extra growth we need. Survey evidence suggests there is little difference in attitudes to immigration between Scotland and the rest of the UK, making it hard to secure public backing for immigration rates at the level Scotland would need.The IFS have examined the impact of an increase in net inward migration over the next 50 years and calculated the impact of a rise from the current average of 9000 people a year to 26,000 a year.This trebling of net inward migration would require immigration to exceed emigration by an overall total of more than one million people between now and 2062.The Treasury believe that net migration between Scotland and the rest of the UK, which has been running at 40,000 a year, may fall to 10,000 a year.But even the most optimistic projection – an additional £1.3billion added over five decades through net migration – would 
not give us the extra growth we need, according to the IFS, to keep our fiscal position in order.

[Chook a demus]

How will additional money be raised in an independent Scotland?Well chook, let's see. If additional money was needed and you know that's a big if, the figures for Scotland's economy that we have don't include VAT for example, They don't include export tax for whisky which is allocated to the English economy because they leave from English ports. There are clearly savings to be made as both I and rheg have suggested unless you think that those savings don't exist. If we need to raise extra money then Scotland would do what EVERY OTHER INDEPENDENT COUNTRY does. Increase borrowing, raise taxes, make cuts.... Scotland is not different than any other country. Those of us supporting yes aren't asking for anything that doesn't happen elsewhere. It's not going to be some sort of utopia and we may have to make changes to our plans or prioritise some things over others. The point is however that wherever the money comes from, money raised in Scotland will be spent by a Scottish Government on the priorities of Scotland and it's you and I who get to decide what those priorities are when we vote. That doesn't happen now.Fact: During the last crisis the UK taxpayer shelled out £66 billion to bail out the banks – more than £1,000 for every man, woman and child in the UK. Including guarantees, UK taxpayers gave more than £320 billion of support to Royal Bank of Scotland alone. Could we really afford these sorts of sums on our own?

And you're talking about borrowing more despite all the rhetoric about UK debt

[Chook a demus]

Mere technicalities do not create a sense of nationhood, national identity, national self-confidence to do better for ourselves and ultimately trust in ourselves will create national self determination. A well reasoned think about those important issues can be sorted out in the 18 month negotiation period.Hundreds of thousands of Scots and English have made their homes in each other's nation. Half of us have English neighbours. Hundreds of thousands of Scots were born in England. This interdependence - the coming together of family, friends, ideas, institutions and identities - is a strength not a weakness, and is an ideal worth celebrating. The truth is we're better together.

[Rheghead]

Hundreds of thousands of Scots and English have made their homes in each other's nation. Half of us have English neighbours. Hundreds of thousands of Scots were born in England. This interdependence - the coming together of family, friends, ideas, institutions and identities - is a strength not a weakness, and is an ideal worth celebrating. The truth is we're better together.

We will still be friends and family after Scottish independence. My mum assured me of that.

[erniesspeedshop]

Erm excuse me but at the last election, the SNP got an overall majority in a political set up that was designed to stop the SNP from getting an overall majority. So forgive me for saying so but they are entitled to speak for Scotland. It was your fellow Scots (a big assumption there) that voted them in.So? It would appear that a goodly number of SNP voters are not going to be yes voters so my point remains. I also don't like the idea that the yessers seam to think they have exclusive title to the Saltire.

[Rheghead]

Even institutions like English Heritage and Historic Scotland will share membership perks. RSPCA and SSPCA will carry on as normal. A Scottish defence force will work side by side with rUK forces to keep this coastline secure, sharing info and resources. There is too many examples to list where it does not matter if Scotland goes independent.

Unless Lex Luther has moved to Scotland and has a grand real estate plan in the borders, I do not think Scotland will be cast adrift into the big unknown.

[Rheghead]

I also don't like the idea that the yessers seam to think they have exclusive title to the Saltire.

I don't think that is the case, I have seen little evidence of it but then you've got the Union Flag, haven't you?

[golach]

I don't think that is the case, I have seen little evidence of it but then you've got the Union Flag, haven't you?We all have the Union Flag Rheg, even you, and the Saltire is part of it.

[Chook a demus]

Even institutions like English Heritage and Historic Scotland will share membership perks. RSPCA and SSPCA will carry on as normal. A Scottish defence force will work side by side with rUK forces to keep this coastline secure, sharing info and resources. There is too many examples to list where it does not matter if Scotland goes independent.Unless Lex Luther has moved to Scotland and has a grand real estate plan in the borders, I do not think Scotland will be cast adrift into the big unknown.Can you show me anywhere that the govt or Mod has said they are prepared to work alongside a Scottish defence force and keep Scotland's coastline secure let alone share information. As the govt has made clear if a Scotland does become independent and it's immigration policy is out of alignment with that of rUK an official border will appear and be manned. Why do you assume that rUK is going to be benevolent to Scotland on these issues if Scottish policy diverges to much from that of rUk.

[Rheghead]

Can you show me anywhere that the govt or Mod has said they are prepared to work alongside a Scottish defence force and keep Scotland's coastline secure let alone share information. As the govt has made clear if a Scotland does become independent and it's immigration policy is out of alignment with that of rUK an official border will appear and be manned. Why do you assume that rUK is going to be benevolent to Scotland on these issues if Scottish policy diverges to much from that of rUk.

Again reason saves the day. It wouldn't be benevolence, it would be pragmatism to be cooperative in the best interests of both.

[Rheghead]

With independence, Scotland can improve its digital connectivity for the benefit of Scottish businesses. As we all know, connectivity is dire here. But progress is being hampered by the fact that telecommunications policy and regulation is reserved to Westminster.

An independent Scotland will have the powers necessary to issue future spectrum licences that will have safeguards to ensure cover in rural areas.

Westminster just auctions off licenses with no such guarantees of uniform coverage.

http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/with-independence-scotland-can-improve-its-vital-digital-networks/

[Chook a demus]

Again reason saves the day. It wouldn't be benevolence, it would be pragmatism to be cooperative in the best interests of both.Considering Alex Salmonds somewhat belligerent approach to issues so far I don't for see excessive amounts of benevolence being bestowed upon Scotland should it become independent especially in the early days. I'd expect no more than the very minimum rUK can do and no more.

[Chook a demus]

With independence, Scotland can improve its digital connectivity for the benefit of Scottish businesses. As we all know, connectivity is dire here. But progress is being hampered by the fact that telecommunications policy and regulation is reserved to Westminster.An independent Scotland will have the powers necessary to issue future spectrum licences that will have safeguards to ensure cover in rural areas.Westminster just auctions off licenses with no such guarantees of uniform coverage.http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/with-independence-scotland-can-improve-its-vital-digital-networks/But unless you're prepared to privatise companies there's very little you can do to force them to give super fast broadband to rural locations, and if you do it will only means horrendous price increases for consumers.

[orkneycadian]

..... But look where the richest households are distributed. The money gets sucked south leaving us with the crumbs as usual. Scotland needs to take control of its finances to keep the money back in Scotland. Scotland has the oil but all the trade in oil takes place in London for the benefit of Westminster and London.

http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f244/Rheghead/unknowns/Big-Wealth-Gap_zps9b7abbfb.jpg

Right, lets "zoom in" a bit and see what the picture looks like for Scotland....

http://www.poverty.org.uk/s53/maph.png

Now, whats that saying.... Cripes! It says that the Highlands, Moray, Clackmannashire and Dumfries and Galloway are the 4 regions with the highest proportion of employees getting less than £7 an hour. Whilst the Central Belt and the East Coast have the lowest proportion of employees on less than £7 an hour.

So in Scotland, the best paid employees live in the Central Belt / East Coast. Where the centre of government is situated.

How is that different from the UK?

And how concerned should we be to hand the reins of government to the area where 80% of the population live, and where the wages are the highest?

Finally, what plans have the SNP got to redress this imbalance in regional wages? It affects a whopping 20% of the population, so must be about top of their priority list!

[orkneycadian]

Scotland has the oil but all the trade in oil takes place in London for the benefit of Westminster and London.

Who's oil?

Once they start fracking under Princes and Sauchiehall Streets, then rScotland might be able to have a decent sized claim to oil and gas!

[squidge]

But unless you're prepared to privatise companies there's very little you can do to force them to give super fast broadband to rural locations, and if you do it will only means horrendous price increases for consumers.That is not necessarily true. The Scottish Government has entered into a partnership arrangement to deliver high speed broadband across Scotland. This is a publicly funded initiative, with money from the Scottish Government, the EU and private business. This initiative has begun in the Highlands and Islands. Dingwall has benefitted from this and the roll out is set to continue throughout Scotland until 2020.

[Chook a demus]

That is not necessarily true. The Scottish Government has entered into a partnership arrangement to deliver high speed broadband across Scotland. This is a publicly funded initiative, with money from the Scottish Government, the EU and private business. This initiative has begun in the Highlands and Islands. Dingwall has benefitted from this and the roll out is set to continue throughout Scotland until 2020.So the public are paying for it so it must mean a higher bill somewhere. And your answer once again assumes Scotland is part of the EU and retains schemes which pay for such enterprises. I can't see how you can say an EU scheme is set to continue till 2020 when you can't be sure Scotland or the UK will still be part of the EU at that time.

[Chook a demus]

Right, lets "zoom in" a bit and see what the picture looks like for Scotland....http://www.poverty.org.uk/s53/maph.pngNow, whats that saying.... Cripes! It says that the Highlands, Moray, Clackmannashire and Dumfries and Galloway are the 4 regions with the highest proportion of employees getting less than £7 an hour. Whilst the Central Belt and the East Coast have the lowest proportion of employees on less than £7 an hour.So in Scotland, the best paid employees live in the Central Belt / East Coast. Where the centre of government is situated.How is that different from the UK?And how concerned should we be to hand the reins of government to the area where 80% of the population live, and where the wages are the highest?Finally, what plans have the SNP got to redress this imbalance in regional wages? It affects a whopping 20% of the population, so must be about top of their priority list!Answer is they don't most of what they say is rhetoric, poorly thought out ideas with no intention of implementing most of them. As usual the govt will look after the 80% and the 20% will be nae better off.

[squidge]

Considering Alex Salmonds somewhat belligerent approach to issues so far I don't for see excessive amounts of benevolence being bestowed upon Scotland should it become independent especially in the early days. I'd expect no more than the very minimum rUK can do and no more.It is not benevolence. Both Governments are committed already to working together. In The Edinburgh agreement, signed by both parties the text is: ‘The two governments are committed to continue to work together constructively in the light of the outcome, whatever it is, in the best interests of the people of Scotland and of the rest of the United Kingdom.’This makes explicit that each of the two governments is equally commited to work in the equal interests of the peoples of both Scotland and the continuing United Kingdom, in the event of a vote for independence; and to work in the interests of the peoples of both Scotland and the United Kingdom as a whole, in the event of a vote for Scotland to remain within the United Kingdom.The eyes of the world will be watching how Westminster handles a YES vote and I fully expect that negotiations will be tough but fair.

[squidge]

So the public are paying for it so it must mean a higher bill somewhere. And your answer once again assumes Scotland is part of the EU and retains schemes which pay for such enterprises. I can't see how you can say an EU scheme is set to continue till 2020 when you can't be sure Scotland or the UK will still be part of the EU at that time.Whether they are or not this programme gives the lie to the suggestion that there is nothing that can be done to roll out super fast broadband to areas without it costing consumers an arm and a leg. The Scottish Government recognise that this is vital for the future and as such fund an initiative to do so. If Independent Scotland can make more choices like this and will have the freedom to allocate ALL the income Scotland has to meet the priorities the voters choose when the vote for their government

[Chook a demus]

I think you'll find there is a world of difference between what Scotland will consider it's best interests and what rUK consider their best interests.
To believe that rUK will concede to every whim of a newly independent Scotland is naivety of the highest order. As for the rest of the world consider who has the balance of power Scotland a newly independent country with some exports and a bit of oil . Or rUk a larger economy more global reach than Scotland and with all the trade deals and memberships it requires already locked in place.
The world is a far more pragmatic place than you may wish to believe.
You're already seeing the rumblings of what it will be like with currency a simple No it's not in our interests is all it took.

[Chook a demus]

Whether they are or not this programme gives the lie to the suggestion that there is nothing that can be done to roll out super fast broadband to areas without it costing consumers an arm and a leg. The Scottish Government recognise that this is vital for the future and as such fund an initiative to do so. If Independent Scotland can make more choices like this and will have the freedom to allocate ALL the income Scotland has to meet the priorities the voters choose when the vote for their governmentYes it proves that when the govt spends public and EU money anything can be achieved quite easy with profligate public spending but that doesn't mean it will continue. Dingwall is quite a distance from here so let's wait and see. All the income you mean the 12 billion deficit you still haven't managed to successfully explain where all this money is coming from for these wonder projects. A list of what Scotland's income will not suffice in this instance or hyperbole. This is extra new spending that has to come from somewhere current future spending for an independent Scotland puts it in a financial black hole from day one.

[golach]

, in the event of a vote for Scotland to remain within the United Kingdom.The eyes of the world will be watching how Westminster handles a YES vote and I fully expect that negotiations will be tough but fair.

There you go again Squidge, assuming the yesnp vote will win. When the NO vote wins, there will be no need for tough negotiations will there?

[Chook a demus]

When we get the fully expected NO vote will Mr Salmond do the honourable thing and resign and call a snap election so we the people can be rid of this troublesome wee man

[Rheghead]

When we get the fully expected NO vote will Mr Salmond do the honourable thing and resign and call a snap election so we the people can be rid of this troublesome wee man

He says he will stay on either way. But and it is a big but, if we vote Yes in Sept 2014 then vote for who we really want in 2016 then Alex Salmond will disappear off the political map.

Vote No and he remains as the flea in your ear.

[Uncle-Bobs-Johnny]

It's all the same wherever you are, these maps and graphs are most misleading. If you are purchasing an average house in London (costing £750,000) then you will require a wage of around £80,000 per year. If you are purchasing a house in Caithness (costing £75,000) then a wage of £7 per hour will be more than enough.

People in the south are not "richer".... they have to pay a million quid for a house that you get up here for £100,000 so if their income is way above the national average it's only because of the strength of the pound in their area.

Free parking everywhere in Caithness..... £30 for a days parking in London, £11.50 congestion charge to drive into the centre of London etc. you would expect the wage rates to be higher down there or nobody could afford to live.

This impression that some people have that all southerners are "loaded" is absolute nonsense, they are actually worse off because they have to pay entry into almost every venue / car park / zoo / club / bar and some people have to PAY to park outside their own house!!

You'll go a lot further on a Monkey up here than you will in London.... in fact, a Monkey up here will get you through the week with ease.... a Monkey down in London will not go far. A monkey is £500 just incase you don't know. If you are prudent then you could easily get by on a score a day up here. A pony a day (pocket money) would get you some decent shopping with ZERO parking fees.

When it doesn't work is when someone from Caithness goes to London for a weeks holiday..... they will need a couple of grand (minimum)...... a Londoner can come up here with a Monkey and still have spare change when he gets back home to the smoke. Thing is, when the Londoner gets back to the smoke, his pony will only be worth a fiver compared to what he could do with it in Caithness.

I reckon the minimum "living" wage in Caithness should be set at a monkey per week..... anybody who reckons £500 (per person) isn't enough are quite simply expecting too much. It wasn't too long ago that a potato was classed as a desirable foodstuff up here and limpets kicked off rocks were a sunday dinner norm.

Has anybody noticed the amount of Audi and BMW cars on the road up here? You would think, by all these graphs and statistics, that all you would see on the roads are rusty old MK4 cortinas with different coloured doors...... nope, most of the cars are almost brand new and a very high Audi and BMW count.

Looking at the graphs / maps, you would think that everybody up here had tuberculosis, didn't wash, had no electricity and had heather growing out of their ears.

Not at all! Fine dining is available to all at Sandras Hostel (they do a superb battered mars bar for 75 pence!), you can eat like a lord at the upmarket Robin's fish and chip shop or you can dine out in style at Shelina Spice (remember to ask them for a free wooden fork and napkin).......

To be honest, any more than minimum wage and I would run riot around Thurso indulging in everything it had to offer.... it wouldn't be good for my health..... I would be like a madman sampling all the Thai, Indian, Indonesian, French, Spanish, Greek, African, Somalian, Russian, English, Moroccan, Australian, American, Vietnamese etc. etc. etc. restaurants.

And the pub crawl? The Com bar, the Newmarket and the Holborn...... that's what I'm talking about! Living the dream!


Who needs all this "Southern" type entertainment? We have it all here with a cheap as chips entry fee.

[Chook a demus]

He says he will stay on either way. But and it is a big but, if we vote Yes in Sept 2014 then vote for who we really want in 2016 then Alex Salmond will disappear off the political map.Vote No and he remains as the flea in your ear.He can stay until 2016 if he looses the referendum as expected he will be a politically spent force I'd fully expect the SNP to jettison him as quickly as possible. Nothing worse for a political party whose main objective is independence to loose a referendum and still have the leader who lost them vote hanging round their neck like an albatross.

[Uncle-Bobs-Johnny]

It's all the same wherever you are, these maps and graphs are most misleading. If you are purchasing an average house in London (costing £750,000) then you will require a wage of around £80,000 per year. If you are purchasing a house in Caithness (costing £75,000) then a wage of £7 per hour will be more than enough.

People in the south are not "richer".... they have to pay a million quid for a house that you get up here for £100,000 so if their income is way above the national average it's only because of the strength of the pound in their area.

Free parking everywhere in Caithness..... £30 for a days parking in London, £11.50 congestion charge to drive into the centre of London etc. you would expect the wage rates to be higher down there or nobody could afford to live.

This impression that some people have that all southerners are "loaded" is absolute nonsense, they are actually worse off because they have to pay entry into almost every venue / car park / zoo / club / bar and some people have to PAY to park outside their own house!!

You'll go a lot further on a Monkey up here than you will in London.... in fact, a Monkey up here will get you through the week with ease.... a Monkey down in London will not go far. A monkey is £500 just incase you don't know. If you are prudent then you could easily get by on a score a day up here. A pony a day (pocket money) would get you some decent shopping with ZERO parking fees.

When it doesn't work is when someone from Caithness goes to London for a weeks holiday..... they will need a couple of grand (minimum)...... a Londoner can come up here with a Monkey and still have spare change when he gets back home to the smoke. Thing is, when the Londoner gets back to the smoke, his pony will only be worth a fiver compared to what he could do with it in Caithness.

I reckon the minimum "living" wage in Caithness should be set at a monkey per week..... anybody who reckons £500 (per person) isn't enough are quite simply expecting too much. It wasn't too long ago that a potato was classed as a desirable foodstuff up here and limpets kicked off rocks were a sunday dinner norm.

Has anybody noticed the amount of Audi and BMW cars on the road up here? You would think, by all these graphs and statistics, that all you would see on the roads are rusty old MK4 cortinas with different coloured doors...... nope, most of the cars are almost brand new and a very high Audi and BMW count.

Looking at the graphs / maps, you would think that everybody up here had tuberculosis, didn't wash, had no electricity and had heather growing out of their ears.

Not at all! Fine dining is available to all at Sandras Hostel (they do a superb battered mars bar for 75 pence!), you can eat like a lord at the upmarket Robin's fish and chip shop or you can dine out in style at Shelina Spice (remember to ask them for a free wooden fork and napkin).......

To be honest, any more than minimum wage and I would run riot around Thurso indulging in everything it had to offer.... it wouldn't be good for my health..... I would be like a madman sampling all the Thai, Indian, Indonesian, French, Spanish, Greek, African, Somalian, Russian, English, Moroccan, Australian, American, Vietnamese etc. etc. etc. restaurants.

And the pub crawl? The Com bar, the Newmarket and the Holborn...... that's what I'm talking about! Living the dream!


Who needs all this "Southern" type entertainment? We have it all here with a cheap as chips entry fee.

[Uncle-Bobs-Johnny]

He's already losing his hair, the poor man is stressed to hell with all his lies and misinformation, I hope the result in September doesn't kill him.

[golach]

He says he will stay on either way. But and it is a big but, if we vote Yes in Sept 2014 then vote for who we really want in 2016 then Alex Salmond will disappear off the political map.Vote No and he remains as the flea in your ear.Oh I love your optimism Rheg, a winning yesnp vote???

[squidge]

Yes it proves that when the govt spends public and EU money anything can be achieved quite easy with profligate public spending but that doesn't mean it will continue. Dingwall is quite a distance from here so let's wait and see. All the income you mean the 12 billion deficit you still haven't managed to successfully explain where all this money is coming from for these wonder projects. A list of what Scotland's income will not suffice in this instance or hyperbole. This is extra new spending that has to come from somewhere current future spending for an independent Scotland puts it in a financial black hole from day one.

The £12billion deficit is another number like the 1 million immigrants - initially terrifying but in reality less so. The deficit is a serious issue and any increase in deficit is concerning especially if it were to show a significant divergence from the deficit of the UK. However, it doesn't.

The £12billion equates to a deficit for Scotland of 5.9%. During the same period the deficit for the UK was 5.8%. This £12billion comes on the back of record investment in oil which led to a fall in oil revenues. It also reflects a change in government spending to capital projects and investment in Scottish water. GERS also shows that the average five year deficit was 4.3% in Scotland compared to 5.9% for the UK. It actually goes to show that if Scotland can suffer a difficult year economically and still keep it's deficit in line with that of the UK then that surely indicates the underlying strength of the Scottish Economy.

[Uncle-Bobs-Johnny]

The maps / graphs are all relative to where you live.

[squidge]

I think you'll find there is a world of difference between what Scotland will consider it's best interests and what rUK consider their best interests. To believe that rUK will concede to every whim of a newly independent Scotland is naivety of the highest orderI think what I said was that negotiations are likely to be tough but fair. The suggestion that YES supporters believe that the UK will concede to every whim of a newly independent Scotland is your chook. Not mine. To reiterate - both countries have signed the Edinburgh Agreement which commits them to working together constructively regardless of the outcome.

[Chook a demus]

The £12billion deficit is another number like the 1 million immigrants - initially terrifying but in reality less so. The deficit is a serious issue and any increase in deficit is concerning especially if it were to show a significant divergence from the deficit of the UK. However, it doesn't. The £12billion equates to a deficit for Scotland of 5.9%. During the same period the deficit for the UK was 5.8%. This £12billion comes on the back of record investment in oil which led to a fall in oil revenues. It also reflects a change in government spending to capital projects and investment in Scottish water. GERS also shows that the average five year deficit was 4.3% in Scotland compared to 5.9% for the UK. It actually goes to show that if Scotland can suffer a difficult year economically and still keep it's deficit in line with that of the UK then that surely indicates the underlying strength of the Scottish Economy.One major problem you have with that is the current record low rate of borrowing the Scottish govt has access to. In a newly independent Scotland with an adjusted credit rating and without the backing of the BoE the cost of borrowing will be higher. Unless Scotland decides to have its own currency with all the associated costs and requirement for a central bank . It will be tied to either using sterling or the euro so there goes your ability to manage your own economy and all the costings and your 5.9% deficit suddenly becomes a bigger problem as you have to then access money markets to borrow that money at considerably higher cost than we do now. Not such a pretty picture under those circumstances which is what you fail to mention. Let's not brush off so lightly the loss in trade and extra costs involved in shipping goods out of a Scotland either so there will be a drop in revenue. Estimates are a loss of £8 billion to the Scottish economy.

[Chook a demus]

I think what I said was that negotiations are likely to be tough but fair. The suggestion that YES supporters believe that the UK will concede to every whim of a newly independent Scotland is your chook. Not mine. To reiterate - both countries have signed the Edinburgh Agreement which commits them to working together constructively regardless of the outcome.Well working constructively can mean different things to different people and depends where you're standing Scotland will hardly be in a position to make demands who is going to listen ? The EU ...not a member..NATO ...not a member....the commonwealth ...not a member . Infact globally you won't be in any of the clubs that count so that puts Scotland in a very weak position. Population of 5 million demanding fair play from a population of 55 million it's just decided to leave. I'd say unless you're very naive you can expect a bit of a rough ride with many issues being not acceptable to the electorate of rUK

[Uncle-Bobs-Johnny]

Do any of you people actually have a life or is your time spent tapping away on a keyboard?

[Chook a demus]

I live in Portgower Nuff said give us a pint of your best claret :0))

[Rheghead]

Oh I love your optimism Rheg, a winning yesnp vote???

Yep, I fully expect a Yes vote. It is the only decision you can make if you look critically at the evidence, the indyref is not a football match, we shouldn't pick sides and then blindly support your team. We should impartially look at the debate and make our choice about who had the best case.

I did that, I was convinced that the No campaign was the best way to go. But I kept my open mind and listened to both sides despite my viscous negativity towards squidge and oddquine etc. I quickly realised the No side erroneously repeated facts that weren't reasoned and were totally debunked. BT had no vision for the future or ambition for Scotland. I kept repeating their dogma until I had to think to myself 'I can't go on doing this'

Since then, I have liberated myself from the shackles of the unionist dogma and I see a bright future for Scotland.

Come on golach, jump in, the water is lovely.

[golach]

Sorry Rheg no way , I am for the Union and always will be thanks for the invite but no way will I share your bath water, I have seen who you have been consorting with

[squidge]

Standard and Poor expect Scotland to have the highest rating and whilst Moody's expect Scotland to have a lower credit rating than the rest of the UK, they also expect this will increase reasonably promptly after independence. No one has said that Independence will be an easy ride Chook, least of all me, but none of the things you mention are catastrophic, or even severe enough to suggest Scotland can't afford Independence.

You also seem to forget that during the negotiating period Scotland WILL be a member of the EU, Scotland WILL be a member of NATO and Scotland WILL be a member of the Commonwealth. There are likely to be independent people brought into support and facilitate negotiations. Once again - I think for the third time, no one is saying it will be easy, nothing worth having ever is chook.

Uncle Bobs Johnny lol - this is a welcome break after my lovely son got the keys for the first house he and his girlfriend have bought. On top of that, my other lovely son got word that he has secured the flat he wanted in Edinburgh. After all the excitement and the moving of boxes it's good to be sitting quietly politely discussing issues around independence, whilst my lovely husband works on a wee project of his own. :)

[Chook a demus]

Oh the arguments getting weaker and weaker during a 16 month window of opportunity you hope to achieve everything. I'd enjoy seeing that if it where likely to happen but as we are both aware the yes campaign has lost support in the past couple of months and it's highly unlikely to win. A 2% drop in support this close to the referendum is a sign things aren't going your way.

[squidge]

It has been widely reported that an 18 month window - September 2014 to March 2016 is 18 months - is a reasonable time period to allow key negotiations to take place. You seem to think you have it in the bag, chook. I congratulate you on your certainty and wish you luck. Me? I'll keep campaigning and speaking wherever I am asked to speak and wait and see what the 18th September brings.

[Chook a demus]

It has been widely reported that an 18 month window - September 2014 to March 2016 is 18 months - is a reasonable time period to allow key negotiations to take place. You seem to think you have it in the bag, chook. I congratulate you on your certainty and wish you luck. Me? I'll keep campaigning and speaking wherever I am asked to speak and wait and see what the 18th September brings.
All the polls show the yes camp lagging behind and even if a large percentage of the don't knows vote yes it's still not enough to change the outcome.

Does seem odd that you're requested to speak at events but claim to be just one of us normal folk,appears that you're far more ingrained in the political system than the ordinary person in the street but seem shy about admitting it.

[squidge]

If that's what you believe chook, why would I try to dissuade you? I have little interest in opinion polls, I just speak to people and do what I can and I will be doing exactly that until the polls close on September 18th. If you are so certain that NO have won the race I'm surprised you haven't booked a holiday :)

[Chook a demus]

Why would I book a holiday and miss my opportunity to fulfill my democratic right. If you need no voters to not vote you must be on shakey ground.

[Rheghead]

The old Better Together scaremongering that Scotland is going to be kicked out of the EU and will have to reapply again is ridiculous. I mean, look at what they're saying. No undecided person is going to believe that and vote No when everybody knows 75% of the No campaign hates the EU and wants to get the heck out of it at the nearest opportunity.

[Chook a demus]

The old Better Together scaremongering that Scotland is going to be kicked out of the EU and will have to reapply again is ridiculous. I mean, look at what they're saying. No undecided person is going to believe that and vote No when everybody knows 75% of the No campaign hates the EU and wants to get the heck out of it at the nearest opportunity.So let's totally ignore Mr Salmond and Ms Sturgeon blethering on about fast track membership to the EU as you know something that don't eh ! Problem is membership of the EU isn't down to the electorate of Scotland but the 28 members of the EU accepting Scotland as a member.Now your 75% of no voters wanting out of the EU is just a made up number more of your misinformation and scaremongering. Sounds like you're getting desperate Rheg having to make up statistics is the sight of failure looming on the horizon making you realise how many people disagree with you.

[Rheghead]

So let's totally ignore Mr Salmond and Ms Sturgeon blethering on about fast track membership to the EU as you know something that don't eh ! Problem is membership of the EU isn't down to the electorate of Scotland but the 28 members of the EU accepting Scotland as a member.Now your 75% of no voters wanting out of the EU is just a made up number more of your misinformation and scaremongering. Sounds like you're getting desperate Rheg having to make up statistics is the sight of failure looming on the horizon making you realise how many people disagree with you.

Incorrect again. Here is the first line of the EU mission statement.


The Directorate General Taxation and Cu
stoms Union's mission is to develop
and manage the Customs Union, a foundation of the European Union, and to
develop and implement tax policy across
the EU for the benefit of citizens,
businesses and the Member States.
Particular attention is given to the Internal
Market, by making sure it func
tions smoothly and efficiently.

In other words, existing citizenship takes priority over country matters. We are already EU citizens, same as we are UK citizens.

[squidge]

Why would I book a holiday and miss my opportunity to fulfill my democratic right. If you need no voters to not vote you must be on shakey ground. not at all chook. :)

Although, Gosh, I am really surprised that you don't know that you can register for a postal or proxy vote so that taking a holiday does not mean you will miss the vote!!!!!!

There is still time to apply for a postal or proxy vote for anyone who needs to do so. If you haven't registered to vote yet then you can do so up until 2nd September. You can apply for a proxy vote - where someone votes on your behalf or a postal vote - where you can send in your vote by post - up to 3rd September.

If anyone hasn't registered and is worried about how to do that then drop me a PM and I'll point you to the right advice about registering, whatever your political view is, I don't care. It is simply important that everyone who wants to vote can do so.

[orkneycadian]

Steady Chook. As they say, "the show ain't over till the fat boy sings"

That he might be singing for his supper on the 19th of September is a different matter! [lol]

[Chook a demus]

Incorrect again. Here is the first line of the EU mission statement.In other words, existing citizenship takes priority over country matters. We are already EU citizens, same as we are UK citizens.Interesting but incorrect interpretation of the facts Rheg, I'm surprised you find understanding that Scotland would be leaving the United Kingdom ...the member of the EU and becoming a new state ...not a member. Yes whilst still under a British passport you remain an EU citizen but until such time as An independent Scotland secures membership of the EU that won't be guaranteed. And once you do secure it your currency becomes a problem as you'll have to use the Euro :0))

No need to worry it's all hypothetical just remember yes votes are slipping away.
So carry on with your misinformation and misleading you're doing a grand job of turning peoples heads to NO as they know it makes sense.

[Chook a demus]

not at all chook. :) Although, Gosh, I am really surprised that you don't know that you can register for a postal or proxy vote so that taking a holiday does not mean you will miss the vote!!!!!!There is still time to apply for a postal or proxy vote for anyone who needs to do so. If you haven't registered to vote yet then you can do so up until 2nd September. You can apply for a proxy vote - where someone votes on your behalf or a postal vote - where you can send in your vote by post - up to 3rd September. If anyone hasn't registered and is worried about how to do that then drop me a PM and I'll point you to the right advice about registering, whatever your political view is, I don't care. It is simply important that everyone who wants to vote can do so.I've no desire to go on holiday during such an exciting time for Scotland. On the 19th I'm rather looking forward to seeing the look on Ecks face as he is humbled into announcing he's lost. That will be better than any holiday.

[squidge]

In order to be a member of the EU a country has to meet the Copenhagan criteria. Scotland already does that. Scotland's laws, procedures, human rights record and policies, economy, all meet the standards laid down by the EU. All the member states have to accept Scotland as a new member - none of these states have said that They will veto Scotland's membership, not even Spain despite the best efforts of the press to suggest they would.

If there is a YES vote Scotland's independence will be achieved through a democratic process agreed by both parties, not through conflict - something we should be very proud of. In addition the vast majority of Scottish residents will be British Citizens and will remain British Citizens for their whole lives, or as long as they want to. Is it likely that the EU will refuse membership to a country which fulfils all the criteria and which is full of its citizens? I think not

You guys have to weigh up the evidence for yourselves but so far all I see from the no camp is "Scotland won't be accepted as a member of the EU because erm erm because it just won't". Because Scotland already fulfils all the criteria for membership, the 18month timescale for negotiations which I expect will be tough but fair, has been said to be realistic by the UK governments own adviser.

[Chook a demus]

And equally the cost of joining the EU will be less negotiating power than the Uk currently has and accepting the Euro as a currency which means all your pensions, savings and any investments,held in rUK would be affected by exchange rates the cost of exporting to a Scotland's largest market rUK suddenly increases with the extra paperwork involved and your economy is suddenly at the behest of Germany who effectively controls the Euro.

Whilst squidge is quite correct you will remain a British citizen whilst you hold a British passport but your children will not necessarily enjoy dual nationality.
And as squidge quite correctly states non of the 28 members of the EU have said they will not accept Scotland into the EU non have said they will.
But a very telling statement is the recent one about not expanding the 28 current states. Scotland would become number 29 !
See giving the implications of rejoining the EU are important that's why we are Better Together.

[Rheghead]

When Scotland becomes an EU member, our MEP tally will increase from 5 MEPs to 13 MEPs thus increasing our influence to the same level as other countries of our size.

[Chook a demus]

When Scotland becomes an EU member, our MEP tally will increase from 5 MEPs to 13 MEPs thus increasing our influence to the same level as other countries of our size.

Surely that should be IF an independent Scotland becomes a member of the EU after the transition period and all 28 members vote to allow you to join and Scotland accepts the Euro as a currency.

But first and foremost you have to win the referendum and with Polls putting support for the separatist slipping backwards that looks increasingly unlikely.

Because people don't want all the hassle of changing currency just to pop down and see friends and family. Business does not want the extra burden of currency conversion to their largest market. Pensioners don't want to loose money on exchange rates.

That's why we are Better Together and people realise seperatism is the way of the past staying within a successful Union means stability and increasing prosperity.

[theone]

When Scotland becomes an EU member, our MEP tally will increase from 5 MEPs to 13 MEPs thus increasing our influence to the same level as other countries of our size.

Yes. Countries with huge power on the European and world stage like Croatia and Ireland. Half as many as greece and Belgium, and a few less than Slovakia.

If power and influence in the EU is your desire, the only way to achieve it is to vote no and stay in the UK.

[Rheghead]

The real winners from independence won't be me or you, it will be our children and their children. Scotland is awash with rich resources that currently aren't being utilised to make our lives better. We've contributed more than we have taken out of the UK for over 30 years now. The UK needs us to pay their bills.

When the Better Together team say we aren't big enough, clever enough or strong enough to stand up on our own two feet then that makes me think that we are going to do it anyway.

[Rheghead]

The oil company Shell has no major concerns over Scottish independence and will carry on investing in the North Sea.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/business/company-news/shell-vows-to-invest-billions-in-north-sea.24925660?utm_source=headlines&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=email%252Balert

[squidge]

Ok, hmmm let's see.

1. British Citizenship - if as parents you both are British Citizens then your children will also be British Citizens. By the time your grandchildren are born they won't care that they are not British Citizens.

2. Scotland will not have to join the Euro. To join the euro any country has to first join the ERM (exchange rate mechanism) which is voluntary. The Rules for this are "set out in the 16 June 1997 Resolution of the European Council establishing the Exchange Rate Mechanism and the 16th March 2006 agreement between the European Central Bank and the national central banks of the Member States outside the euro area. These make clear "participation in ERM II is voluntary for the non-euro area Member States".

3. Is it "power and influence" Scotland wants or a fair deal for Scotland? There are plenty of studies which show that smaller countries like Scotland do well within the EU because they focus on the issues that are important to their country and don't get sidetracked by the politicking and jostling for power that the UK, France and Germany do. Scotland is not going to be a super power but surely those supporting independence don't expect it to be. If you are wanting to strut your stuff as such a superpower then you should vote NO. You just then have to hope that the UK doesn't take us out of the EU when we have a referendum on membership.

4. Representation. Scotland is represented in the EU by Westminster, recently a minister had to apologise because having been asked to raise a specific issue at an EU meeting he didn't. His reason was "he forgot". I have some sympathy but having Scotland represented in the EU by people who's job is to represent Scotland's Interests and only Scotland's interests will surely be better than being represented by someone who has FOUR different countries to represent.

5. Polls, I don't really care about polls but for those if you that do, the latest information is that the referendum is too close to call. YES are trailing slightly but for statistical purposes and given the margin of error it's pretty much neck and neck. Reminds me of a few weeks ago when the NO campaign, the mainstream media and many MPs were saying the BannockburnLive event had poor sales and was going to be a huge flop. In actual fact it was sold out on the Saturday by lunchtime and 100 tickets short of a sell out on the Sunday. 19,900 people! Let's just wait and see shall we.

[golach]

Many thanks for your detailed posts Squidge, thank you, I have trouble sleeping these days, but your screeds manage to make me fall asleep quickly, usually about paragraph 2

[Heisenberg]

The real winners from independence won't be me or you, it will be our children and their children. Scotland is awash with rich resources that currently aren't being utilised to make our lives better. We've contributed more than we have taken out of the UK for over 30 years now. The UK needs us to pay their bills.When the Better Together team say we aren't big enough, clever enough or strong enough to stand up on our own two feet then that makes me think that we are going to do it anyway.No the real winners won't be the children (not mine anyway -as I have non), it'll be the politicians as it usually is."The UK needs us to pay their bills" , just spouting the same old crap over and over doesn't make it true you know.The UK doesn't need Scotland, it wants Scotland as it is an asset to both Scotland and the rest of the UK to remain attached in politics as it is in land. It doesn't have to be complex at all.

[squidge]

Many thanks for your detailed posts Squidge, thank you, I have trouble sleeping these days, but your screeds manage to make me fall asleep quickly, usually about paragraph 2Not quickly enough for me Golach, you still find time to post!

[golach]

Not quickly enough for me Golach, you still find time to post!Yawn, stretches , sorry Squidge I must have popped off again, thanks for your good work keep it up please.

[Chook a demus]

Meanwhile back in the real world far far away from yes campaign spin central, real people see through the lack of honest answers the lack of detailed answers and the pure spin and still the majority believe that we are Better Together.

[erniesspeedshop]

So in the EU, using the Pound, piles of cash for everyone. Still voting No.

[Chook a demus]

I think someone needs tae take a look at the current entry requirements for the EU ....Indy Scotland uses the Euro or doesn't join plain and simple. Nothing like trying to confuse people with misinformation and deliberately misleading them .

Only dear old Rheg would use 30 yrs out of 300 to argue the case for eternal exit for the union. Maybe that's why he uses the picture of an imaginary alien on his profile........totally illogical Spock !

[squidge]

Meanwhile back in the real world far far away from yes campaign spin central, real people see through the lack of honest answers the lack of detailed answers and the pure spin and still the majority believe that we are Better Together.Where have any of the things that I say been dishonest?

Golach complains that there is too much detail, you that there is not enough, which is it?

And which of my answers are pure spin?

With many issues or to be honest MOST issues there is plenty of evidence to support both sides of the argument. Academics, politicians, journalists, can be wheeled out to provide evidence for every point of view. Just because we think different things does not make my answers dishonest. And even when you are wrong, like about children not being British citizens, or about 1 million immigrants over 20 years I don't think you are being dishonest, I assume that you have made a mistake.

[golach]

Golach complains .Where was I complaining? I was thanking you! My sleep is most important to me.

[orkneycadian]

5. Polls, I don't really care about polls but for those if you that do, the latest information is that the referendum is too close to call.

Thats odd, as the Poll Tracker on the BBC webpage has the latest poll update (Panelbase), says that the Yes/No gap has not changed since their last poll in May.

The latest Survation poll also shows no change in gap between 16th June and 8th July

The rest show either a very minor narrowing, or a major widening.

Average them all out and the gap is widening.

[orkneycadian]

When Scotland becomes an EU member, our MEP tally will increase from 5 MEPs to 13 MEPs thus increasing our influence to the same level as other countries of our size.

Jeez. Even more bureaucracy....

[Chook a demus]

Nicola Sturgeon e day was saying commonwealth games would make more peoples vote yes she obviously didn't hear all the applause from the crowds for people of all nations competing and winning. Sad she has to try and politicise the games as the day grows closer their desperation gets more palpable.

[squidge]

Here is the excerpt from the report in the Observer of the interview Chook is referring to.

" In an exclusive interview with the Observer, Sturgeon, who is leading the SNP's yes campaign, said: "I do think the momentum is with us. I think, as we come out of the Commonwealth Games at the weekend, that is us in the final straight of the campaign and you will see that momentum quite visibly."

Asked about the impact of the Games on the referendum, she suggested that while any impact would be indirect, voters in Scotland had been instilled with a renewed belief in the country's potential for going it alone. "I think it will inevitably leave a feelgood factor," she said. "I think confidence not only in Glasgow but across the country is high."Not only have we staged already what is being talked about as the best Commonwealth Games ever, but the team has done incredibly well with a record number of medals. But sport is sport, politics is politics."

Doesn't seem like she says the commonwealth games is going to win the referendum for us.

The games have been fantastic and I have thoroughly enjoyed watching them and cheering for many different nationalities. It's been awesome. And despite all the things that the unionists would have us believe have been staged by the Scottish Government to influence people, it seems that the SG and Nicola Sturgeon are well aware that this referendum is not about who's athletes perform best, how loudly people cheer for commonwealth games, BannockburnLive, armed Forces Day, your favourite band at T in the park or some old showing of a crappy in historic film from years ago. It is about people, democracy and the type of society we want.

[Chook a demus]

Aye wee Ecks was said tae be reet upset when he found out tossin e salad was nae a recognisable sport at e games.

[Chook a demus]

6 weeks to go and the everyone's talking yes campaign take another 1% slide backwards despite the expected uplift from the commonwealth games.

[erniesspeedshop]

Jim Murphy is holding street meetings as part of his 100 streets tour tomorrow 4 August 11.30am in Thurso outside M&Co in the precinct and in Wick at 2.00pm outside M&Co. He will be bringing the message about the benefits to Scotland of remaining with the UK.

I'm not a Labour supporter but I have a lot of time for Jim, a very genuine guy.

[Gronnuck]

I’m still sitting on the fence completely confuddled. From what I’ve seen, heard and read many people in England want us to separate and good riddance. Some comments have been quite vitriolic. They complain about the Barnet formula, jobs, contracts and all sorts of big subsidies granted to Scotland by Westminster. Yet the politicians who represent these same people appear to go to any lengths to want us to remain part of the UK! If Scotland is really such a drain on England’s resources I would have thought they would be happy to be shot of us! Someone south of the border is lying through their teeth.

[Rheghead]

Where was I complaining? I was thanking you! My sleep is most important to me.

If Scotland votes No and then we go on to sing about Scotland being an independent country once again every Commonwealth games and 6 nations, how can we sleep at night if we didn't take this chance? I will really think we're bunch of cowards to think we couldn't go independent. Go on, give in to the Better Together propaganda. At least I was proud to say Yes rather than too scared to say Yes.

[squidge]

I’m still sitting on the fence completely confuddled. From what I’ve seen, heard and read many people in England want us to separate and good riddance. Some comments have been quite vitriolic. They complain about the Barnet formula, jobs, contracts and all sorts of big subsidies granted to Scotland by Westminster. Yet the politicians who represent these same people appear to go to any lengths to want us to remain part of the UK! If Scotland is really such a drain on England’s resources I would have thought they would be happy to be shot of us! Someone south of the border is lying through their teeth.If you are finding it confusing Gronnuck then it's a great idea to go to some of the informal events and formal events being held by both sides of the debate. The informal ones are great cos you get to chat to other people about how they arrived at their decision or what issues they are struggling with. If you can't manage an event the. Engage with some of the street stalls. The people doing these will be delighted to talk to you from both sides I am sure :)

[scorrie]

Well, if you believe the bookies the Yes campaign doesn't have much chance. The best odds you can get on a No vote are 1/5, with as low as 1/8 with some firms.

I have been watching the betting for some time now and a few quid went on the Yes vote for a while. Some betting pundits said the odds would get a lot closer nearer the time but it hasn't happened, if anything it's gone the other way.

When you get down to it, no matter how gung ho and Braveheart you might be, the choice will boil down to accepting what you have or risking believing in the promises of something better if you vote yes. How much do people really trust politicians to deliver the greener grass, that you can't see on the other side of the fence but they want you to believe is there?

I think people will stick with what they know they have now, rather than jump the fence and step right into a pile of dog turd that the Yes men didn't happen to mention before.

[orkneycadian]

If Scotland votes No and then we go on to sing about Scotland being an independent country once again every Commonwealth games and 6 nations, how can we sleep at night if we didn't take this chance?

I for one will not feel compelled to sing about Scotland being independant every commonwealth games and 6 nations. I'll be too busy sleeping at night! ;)

[golach]

If Scotland votes No and then we go on to sing about Scotland being an independent country once again every Commonwealth games and 6 nations, how can we sleep at night if we didn't take this chance? I will really think we're bunch of cowards to think we couldn't go independent. Go on, give in to the Better Together propaganda. At least I was proud to say Yes rather than too scared to say Yes.

I will sleep well when its a No vote, and I rareley sing that dirge written by the Corrie's. When it is a No vote, we will go back to singing the UK national anthem. I find your reference that I am too scared, is a very school playground type threat, but hey ho names calling will never hurt me.......so there Rheg.

[Rheghead]

Well, if you believe the bookies the Yes campaign doesn't have much chance. The best odds you can get on a No vote are 1/5, with as low as 1/8 with some firms.

I have been watching the betting for some time now and a few quid went on the Yes vote for a while. Some betting pundits said the odds would get a lot closer nearer the time but it hasn't happened, if anything it's gone the other way.

When you get down to it, no matter how gung ho and Braveheart you might be, the choice will boil down to accepting what you have or risking believing in the promises of something better if you vote yes. How much do people really trust politicians to deliver the greener grass, that you can't see on the other side of the fence but they want you to believe is there?

I think people will stick with what they know they have now, rather than jump the fence and step right into a pile of dog turd that the Yes men didn't happen to mention before.

Sounds like political Stockholm syndrome.

[scorrie]

Sounds like political Stockholm syndrome.

And your point is?

I have already bet somebody that there will not be a YES vote. Effectively I have got even money on an event that is as low as 1/8

You can talk all you want but the odds ie likelihood of a YES vote, indicate it is going to be a minor shock if it occurs.

[Mr Z]

I have read some of the posts here and its all about what a YES vote will give or not give. Can the Org experts help explain to the undecided voters what Scotland gets with a NO vote.
Westminster wants to keep us Cameron says Scotland put the Great into Great Britain but what will we actually get/gain from a NO vote. Will vague promises be delivered or will we become the Guinea Pigs for experiment like the '80's poll tax.
Tonight's tv debate may answer some questions however I still believe Cameron should be the voice for No because if it is a No vote he will certainly be heard then after Sept with what Scotland will or wont get from Westminster.

[Big Gaz]

personally i think Scotland will get royally screwed over in the event of a NO vote and i'm more than certain that Cameron and his cronies will ensure that every asset, mineral and piece of wealth that is currently available to Scotland will be tagged and exploited to ensure that any possible future independence bids will leave Scotland with nothing. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if once this was done, then England would have a vote on independence from the rest of the UK and we all know how that will turn out!

[Chook a demus]

Well leaving the above post which absolutely baseless

Here's a good article on why you should vote no.

http://www.sheilagilmore.co.uk/the-independence-referendum-why-im-voting-no/

[Big Gaz]

lol, i really don't give a NO vote if its baseless, it's as much a reality as many of the fairy stories in this thread. :D

As for Gilmore, she paints a pretty picture, always has done but in reality it's a blank canvas. All the things she's quoted on the link you gave are possibly true but if so, then why isn't she out campaigning to get them implemented now and not using them as a reason to vote NO?

[Chook a demus]

Well at least you give it as much worth as a fairy story. Says it all .

[Big Gaz]

Well at least you give it as much worth as a fairy story. Says it all .

From what i've seen on the threads here on the Org, you're the one saying it all. As for reality and worth, nothing you say fits the bill for either. touché

[Rheghead]

Don't forget to watch the big debate @8pm

[Chook a demus]

Note to self .... Never mock the afflicted !

[Chook a demus]

So Alex Salmond on Currency no to the euro, no to a Scottish currency it's a currency union or nothing ....NO plan B C D E F or anything ...fail

[golach]

Who is writing Fat Eck's comic scripts? Answer the question!!!

[Chook a demus]

Well this is how Alex Salmond respects the electorate by turning it into a silly jokes session instead of dealing with the issues shame on him !

[Gronnuck]

Well I'm more confuddled than ever before.:confused Alex spun is a good yarn, lots of positives but little substance. Alistair listed a load of negatives and scared the whatsit out of me. I reckon I’ll just spin a coin on September 18th :eek:

[golach]

Eck 0 - Better together 1

[Rheghead]

Eck 0 - Better together 1

A clapometer would indicate 'Vote Yes', but I say 'It's make your mind up time!!'

[scorrie]

The Guardian ICM viewers Poll gave Darling as the winner by 56% to 44%

[golach]

A clapometer would indicate 'Vote Yes', but I say 'It's make your mind up time!!'Made my mind up so long ago!!

[Chook a demus]

A clapometer would indicate 'Vote Yes', but I say 'It's make your mind up time!!'

Would that be the clapometer that totally ignored the bit where Alex Salmond was loudly booed for failing to answer a question !

Parts of it where typical politics but that boo spoke of a total inability to answer a vital question .

[Rheghead]

Would that be the clapometer that totally ignored the bit where Alex Salmond was loudly booed for failing to answer a question !

Parts of it where typical politics but that boo spoke of a total inability to answer a vital question .

No it was referring to the clap at the end of the debate.

[Rheghead]

You know Chook, I am convinced that you are on the the Yes campaign and you are paroding this ridiculous No campaigner that is totally desperate. You've even taken over from golach. Crack on kidder...:lol: You are too clever for me

[Rheghead]

oops perhaps I have scunnered our best card? Listen to the best evidence, vote Yes

[erniesspeedshop]

I thought both performances were cringeworthy. I can sympathise with Alistair D though, you know how frustrating it is to try to reason with someone who is talking rubbish, when you know they know they are talking rubbish. Nicola in the post debate bit looked a bit embarrassed to me. A.S. is very good at bringing up what people have said in the past and trying to beat them with it. If you do it to him (Pound = millstone anyone?) it is quite legitimate to change your mind apparently. As far as the currency is concerned, it looks like Alex is pinning everyone's future financial wellbeing on what an un-named someone, allegedly, senior in the government, allegedly said. I don't think I would risk nailing my colours to that particular mast. Europe, again we hear Scotland wants to be in Europe, we know that that, may well not be true.

[Chook a demus]

oops perhaps I have scunnered our best card? Listen to the best evidence, vote Yes

But we did listen to the first Minister last night and unfortunately he failed to answer the important questions.

Sept 19th 2014 is when I will be laughing Rheg !

[Mr Z]

Both sides failed to answer questions, even refused to answer questions- politics at its best!! Got more useful info from the audience!!
So with 6 weeks to go no one can tell us what's going to happen whichever way the vote goes.

[golach]

But we did listen to the first Minister last night and unfortunately he failed to answer the important questions.Sept 19th 2014 is when I will be laughing Rheg !

Me too Rheg, laughing my head off last night too.

[Big Gaz]

Both sides failed to answer questions, even refused to answer questions- politics at its best!! Got more useful info from the audience!!
So with 6 weeks to go no one can tell us what's going to happen whichever way the vote goes.

Without a crystal ball (and possibly the help of Crayola) No-one can tell us what's going to happen in the future, if they could, then the country wouldn't be in the mess it is now and we possibly wouldn't have gotten to the stage where we are now where we are attempting to break up the union.

[Rheghead]

Without a crystal ball (and possibly the help of Crayola) No-one can tell us what's going to happen in the future, if they could, then the country wouldn't be in the mess it is now and we possibly wouldn't have gotten to the stage where we are now where we are attempting to break up the union.

You are right about not seeing into the future. But the whole point of this debate is that when it comes to making the big decisions that shape our lives, it is the people of Scotland that are best qualified to make them.

[Rheghead]

Clair Ridge oilfield contains 8 billion barrels of oil. This is the big league. This will make Scotland insanely rich as an independent country. If we stay in UK then it will be squandered on policies that Scotland didn't vote for.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-23681061

[theone]

Clair Ridge oilfield contains 8 billion barrels of oil. This is the big league. This will make Scotland insanely rich as an independent country. If we stay in UK then it will be squandered on policies that Scotland didn't vote for.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-23681061

The whole Clair area held an estimated 8bn barrels. The majority of which is not recoverable.

The Clair ridge platform itself will recover about a 12th of that 8 billion barrels over 40 years.

And the UK (or Scottish) governments won't see a penny in cash from it until after the first 7 years of production, when the original investment is repaid. Somewhere around 2025.

[Rheghead]

The whole Clair area held an estimated 8bn barrels. The majority of which is not recoverable.

The Clair ridge platform itself will recover about a 12th of that 8 billion barrels over 40 years.

And the UK (or Scottish) governments won't see a penny in cash from it until after the first 7 years of production, when the original investment is repaid. Somewhere around 2025.

Strange that, ETFDaily were saying there is game changing technology coming out to recover that oil and more some. You can be sure of one thing, where there is oil, there is a way.

[theone]

Strange that, ETFDaily were saying there is game changing technology coming out to recover that oil and more some. You can be sure of one thing, where there is oil, there is a way.

I see nothing strange.

Your own article mentions 640m barrels.

The technology is EOR, it involves pumping chemicals in with injection water. The 640m barrels recoverable includes EOR.

[Rheghead]

I see nothing strange.

Your own article mentions 640m barrels.

The technology is EOR, it involves pumping chemicals in with injection water. The 640m barrels recoverable includes EOR.

The BBC article is a year old and makes no mention of the basement drilling that would recover that 8 billion barrels. :roll:

[Phill]

Isn't this fossil fuel reliance at odds with a 'green' manifesto (and your own views?).

This West of Shetland basin nonsense has been made up to be a stick for either side to beat each other with. As far as I understand it has been known about for decades but the cost / technology to extract is not yet viable.

The UK is sat on huge coal reserves, but we import from China.

[theone]

The BBC article is a year old and makes no mention of the basement drilling that would recover that 8 billion barrels. :roll:

You can drill as many wells as you want.

The platform is designed for 40 years with a maximum throughput of 120 thousand barrels a day dry oil. Add Increasing watercut from the EOR and formation water and that production figure reduces in time.

Even without water, the platform would take 180 years to produce 8 billion barrels.

Not happening.

[Rheghead]

You can drill as many wells as you want.

The platform is designed for 40 years with a maximum throughput of 120 thousand barrels a day dry oil. Add Increasing watercut from the EOR and formation water and that production figure reduces in time.

Even without water, the platform would take 180 years to produce 8 billion barrels.

Not happening.

So you've just shown that the oil wells have a rich sustainable future. 120,000 barrels of oil per day for 180 years.

[Rheghead]

Isn't this fossil fuel reliance at odds with a 'green' manifesto (and your own views?).

This West of Shetland basin nonsense has been made up to be a stick for either side to beat each other with. As far as I understand it has been known about for decades but the cost / technology to extract is not yet viable.

The UK is sat on huge coal reserves, but we import from China.

My views are irrelevent, just pointing out facts. But I would say that a Yes vote and a vote for Scottish Greens will give us the best chance to keep that oil in the ground.

[Rheghead]

Clair Ridge is being described as the next oil boom for Scotland. If we vote Yes then it will be used for Scotland's priorities and not squandered on David Cameron's priorities.

http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/clair-ridge-and-scotlands-new-oil-boom/

[theone]

So you've just shown that the oil wells have a rich sustainable future. 120,000 barrels of oil per day for 180 years.

And we've also shown that the new Clair Ridge platform will not produce anything remotely close to 8 billion barrels, and the field wont make Scotland insanely rich anytime soon.

[scorrie]

Without a crystal ball (and possibly the help of Crayola) No-one can tell us what's going to happen in the future, if they could, then the country wouldn't be in the mess it is now and we possibly wouldn't have gotten to the stage where we are now where we are attempting to break up the union.

There is no crystal ball but bookmakers moved their lines after last night's debate, towards the NO vote. The best odds are now 1/6 from 1/5 and the YES vote went out to 5/1, which is the biggest price it has been for a while.

One intrepid punter has placed £400,000 on the NO vote, the biggest bet ever placed on a Political event, after turning up at a William Hill shop with a banker's draft for the amount. Another punter has £200,000 invested on the same bet and is believed to be the same person who placed the identical amount, successfully, on David Cameron to become the next Conservative leader back in the day.

If we wind the clock back to May of this year, the odds on a YES vote were as low as 7/4 in a place and if we were to compare the drift from those odds to 5/1, with a racehorse in the same position, it might not quite be the case that the YES campaign are flogging a dead horse, but certainly one that appears to have lost a leg in recent months.

[Rheghead]

And we've also shown that the new Clair Ridge platform will not produce anything remotely close to 8 billion barrels, and the field wont make Scotland insanely rich anytime soon.

So you are effectively saying the UK government is throwing £7 billion of our money down the pan if it isn't going to make money? You aren't making sense. I go where the money is.

[theone]

So you are effectively saying the UK government is throwing £7 billion of our money down the pan if it isn't going to make money? You aren't making sense. I go where the money is.

I don't understand your question.

What £7 billion?

[Rheghead]

I don't understand your question.

What £7 billion?

The £7 billion that the UK has spent on developing the oilfield.

[golach]

So you are effectively saying the UK government is throwing £7 billion of our money down the pan if it isn't going to make money? You aren't making sense. I go where the money is.I do not understand this, why would the UK government spend £7 million , it's usually a private developer that invests that amount of cash, they were granted the licence to develop it, and pay for the privilege , not the government , please enlighten me Rheg.

[theone]

The £7 billion that the UK has spent on developing the oilfield.

The UK hasn't spent a penny developing the field.

BP and it's partners have.

That's why the government won't see a penny from the field for 7 years - the companies don't pay tax until their investment is returned.

After that, they only pay tax on their profits.

In 2012 the government got roughly £17 tax per barrel. As lift costs increase in deeper fields requiring expensive technologies such as EOR, that amount will reduce.

[Rheghead]

I do not understand this, why would the UK government spend £7 million , it's usually a private developer that invests that amount of cash, they were granted the licence to develop it, and pay for the privilege , not the government , please enlighten me Rheg.

£7 billion has been spent on the oilfield, not £7 million.

[Rheghead]

The UK hasn't spent a penny developing the field.

BP and it's partners have.

That's why the government won't see a penny from the field for 7 years - the companies don't pay tax until their investment is returned.

After that, they only pay tax on their profits.

In 2012 the government got roughly £17 tax per barrel. As lift costs increase in deeper fields requiring expensive technologies such as EOR, that amount will reduce.

The UK has given away tax breaks and incentives so effectively BP etc have built it for free.

[golach]

£7 billion has been spent on the oilfield, not £7 million.Oh dear me I made a typo, slaps my own wrist. :(

[Rheghead]

UK government offering incentives for the drilling. Mind you, it cocks a snoop at ywindythesecond's assertion that fossil fuels do not get subsidised. :roll: But that is a different thread.


“The UK government is very keen to see the basement reservoirs developed, and is making noises about offering tax losses for the basement play, which could certainly improve the economics.”

[Rheghead]

Oh dear me I made a typo, slaps my own wrist. :(

It is OK, I do it all the time but it is as if I've deliberately lied to everyone by some individuals on here :lol:

[theone]

The UK has given away tax breaks and incentives so effectively BP etc have built it for free.

No.

The tax break comes from future production. They still have to invest their own money, wait for a return, then they can operate without paying tax until the £7 Billion is returned.

They're certainly not building it for free. In actual fact problems or delays could have a huge effect on the share price and hence major developments like this are a big risk to company and investors.

[Rheghead]

No.

The tax break comes from future production. They still have to invest their own money, wait for a return, then they can operate without paying tax until the £7 Billion is returned.

They're certainly not building it for free. In actual fact problems or delays could have a huge effect on the share price and hence major developments like this are a big risk to company and investors.

They've only scraped the surface with that £7 billion and yet it is the future of the oilfield that will return the money. I'm not going to get bogged down into details of who paid what. The bottom line is that nobody is going to pay £7 billion for an oilfield with little return which is your assertion.

The oilfield is freeliy being described as the next boom sector by the oil industry.

[Chook a demus]

I'm not sure where rheg gets his un-named petroleum industry quotes from or his figures but if you want to read about the Clair ridge Field why not read BPs site at least it's the official one funny how it mentions. £4.5 billion investment with 640 million barrels over a 40 yr period with peak production at 120000 a day. Sounds a bit different to what Rheg is claiming.



http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/press/press-releases/new-clair-ridge-jackets-safely-installed-west-of-shetland.html

[Rheghead]

I'm not sure where rheg gets his un-named petroleum industry quotes from or his figures but if you want to read about the Clair ridge Field why not read BPs site at least it's the official one funny how it mentions. £4.5 billion investment with 640 million barrels over a 40 yr period with peak production at 120000 a day. Sounds a bit different to what Rheg is claiming.



http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/press/press-releases/new-clair-ridge-jackets-safely-installed-west-of-shetland.html

I little while ago you were asserting the oilfield didn't exist. lol

[Chook a demus]

No I've never claimed it didn't exists everyone knows there's oil out there just not on the scale you've been claiming for a few days and certainly not as part of some big conspiracy hush hush story.


Now stop frothing at the mouth and sit in the corner.

[Rheghead]

And the tragedy of it all is that the Clair Ridge HQ is in London yet the oilfield is in Scottish waters. All the money goes south.

[Rheghead]

No I've never claimed it didn't exists everyone knows there's oil out there just not on the scale you've been claiming for a few days and certainly not as part of some big conspiracy hush hush story.


Now stop frothing at the mouth and sit in the corner.

No, you tried desperately to discredit any source that the oilfield exists. You tried a damage limitation exercise.

[Moira]

When all's said and done the only numbers which matter is the final count on the final day - Thursday 18th September 2014.

I will be voting "NO".

When I first viewed this poll I rolled my eyes and thought "Here we go....." I voted "Yes" on this Poll for no other reason than because I could.

I've listened to and read all the arguments in the No/Yes debate and I've not been tempted to change my mind at all

When the vote closes on 18/9/2014 and anyone wants to compare the national vote with the Caithness dot Org Poll, please remember that the vote I cast in this Poll should be transferred to the No side or at least discounted.

[Rheghead]

Everyone knows that after the first phase of drilling, other companies take over oilfields with different technologies to drain the remaining oil out.

[Chook a demus]

No, you tried desperately to discredit any source that the oilfield exists. You tried a damage limitation exercise.
Actually I discredited the websites you use not the existence of the oil field.

Regardless of whether it contained 30 trillion barrels of oil after last nights little gaff by Mr Salmond it's all by the by.

You may as well give up pack your bags and expect a NO vote.

Remember when he blew it for the yes party...No Plan B

Start accepting reality Rheg you're about to loose and all the bluff and bluster can't undo what happened last Night.

NO Plan B C D E F or anything else.

[Rheghead]

When all's said and done the only numbers which matter is the final count on the final day - Thursday 18th September 2014.

I will be voting "NO".

When I first viewed this poll I rolled my eyes and thought "Here we go....." I voted "Yes" on this Poll for no other reason than because I could.

I've listened to and read all the arguments in the No/Yes debate and I've not been tempted to change my mind at all

When the vote closes on 18/9/2014 and anyone wants to compare the national vote with the Caithness dot Org Poll, please remember that the vote I cast in this Poll should be transferred to the No side or at least discounted.

Well Moira, I would really like to know the result of this org poll if we had all the No voting sock puppets removed from the tally who keep repeatedly getting banned for trolling and joining under another login.

[Rheghead]

Actually I discredited the websites you use not the existence of the oil field.

Regardless of whether it contained 30 trillion barrels of oil after last nights little gaff by Mr Salmond it's all by the by.

You may as well give up pack your bags and expect a NO vote.

Remember when he blew it for the yes party...No Plan B

Start accepting reality Rheg you're about to loose and all the bluff and bluster can't undo what happened last Night.

NO Plan B C D E F or anything else.

He answered it perfectly clear. There WILL be a shared currency because that is in the best interests of Scotland. Darling believes a shared currency is the best option for both sides.

If rUK are going bite their nose to spite their face then there a range of other options which are not a secret. :roll:

[Chook a demus]

Ahh the desperation of a drowning man throwing wild accusations about in a futile attempt to change the inevitable.

[theone]

They've only scraped the surface with that £7 billion and yet it is the future of the oilfield that will return the money. I'm not going to get bogged down into details of who paid what. The bottom line is that nobody is going to pay £7 billion for an oilfield with little return which is your assertion.

The oilfield is freeliy being described as the next boom sector by the oil industry.

Not at all Rheghead. When you're in a hole, stop digging.

You started this with nonsense figures of production, which I proved wrong..

You've then claimed the government is spending money on oilfields, which is wrong.

You then claimed that BP are developing the field at no cost, which is wrong.

I've done my best to give you facts and figures on a subject you obviously understand very little about.

The field will provide a good return to the oil companies after 7 years or so. The government will then benefit through taxation, which I've shown will be a lot lower than most people would think.

Now. Let's put Clair Ridge into perspective.

Expected production 700 million barrels over 40 years.
That averages 17.5 million barrels a year.
17.5 million barrels a year, with the government getting £17 a barrel equals less than £300 million a year tax revenue.
£300 million a year divides by 5.5 million Scots equals Less than £55 per head.

Now, do you still maintain, as stated in your previous post, that Clair Ridge will make Scotland "insanely rich" or are you willing to accept the facts presented to you?

[Chook a demus]

He answered it perfectly clear. There WILL be a shared currency because that is in the best interests of Scotland. Darling believes a shared currency is the best option for both sides.If rUK are going bite their nose to spite their face then there a range of other options which are not a secret. :roll:He was clearly asked for plan B and failed to answer we all know he wants a currency union,but he can't answer that one question clearly instead he insults the electorate with repetition or his preferred position.

[Rheghead]

Ahh the desperation of a drowning man throwing wild accusations about in a futile attempt to change the inevitable.

I am not so sure about that. Pro-union Daily Record are running a poll on their website just now about how the big debate has changed their readership's view on independence. 73% are for voting Yes. That flies in the face of their headlines. I wonder how long it takes before it gets pulled?

[golach]

Well Moira, I would really like to know the result of this org poll if we had all the No voting sock puppets removed from the tally who keep repeatedly getting banned for trolling and joining under another login.That was Squidge's theory , another yesnp excuse, the figures don't add up in our favour, so there must be some gingery pockery going on with the count, Eck will be howling that on the 19th Sept lol

[Rheghead]

Not at all Rheghead. When you're in a hole, stop digging.

You started this with nonsense figures of production, which I proved wrong..

You've then claimed the government is spending money on oilfields, which is wrong.

You then claimed that BP are developing the field at no cost, which is wrong.

I've done my best to give you facts and figures on a subject you obviously understand very little about.

The field will provide a good return to the oil companies after 7 years or so. The government will then benefit through taxation, which I've shown will be a lot lower than most people would think.

Now. Let's put Clair Ridge into perspective.

Expected production 700 million barrels over 40 years.
That averages 17.5 million barrels a year.
17.5 million barrels a year, with the government getting £17 a barrel equals less than £300 million a year tax revenue.
£300 million a year divides by 5.5 million Scots equals Less than £55 per head.

Now, do you still maintain, as stated in your previous post, that Clair Ridge will make Scotland "insanely rich" or are you willing to accept the facts presented to you?

Yes, it will. 8 billion barrels of oil plus Scotland's other assets will put us up with Qatar. However, I concede your points or nitpicking over my generalisation. It is still our money, we pay the oil companies to run our cars and those investments will still need to be recovered by transferring the costs on the price of a litre of petrol. I'm not going to get bogged down by your details about who paid who by who on what other than that. I was purely saying £7 billion has been spent developing the oilfield and that has been encouraged by the UK through incentives. You asserted that the gains from Clair Ridge amount to nothing much. Clair Ridge is being celebrated within the oil industry as the next boom sector. 10/10 for picking up on me saying the 'UK' has paid.

[Chook a demus]

Aye let's not not pick as we all know the saying ...devils in the detail...something you and Alex Salmond are light on.

[theone]

You asserted that the gains from Clair Ridge amount to nothing much.

I've just shown you that the Clair Ridge platform will provide the people of Scotland £55 each per year for 40 years.

It is up to the individual to decide if that amounts to "nothing much" (my opinion) or "insanely rich" (your opinion).

[Chook a demus]

I am not so sure about that. Pro-union Daily Record are running a poll on their website just now about how the big debate has changed their readership's view on independence. 73% are for voting Yes. That flies in the face of their headlines. I wonder how long it takes before it gets pulled?All it's means is lots of yes voters are trying to delude themselves that by rigging online polls it will effect the referendum outcome. More delusions or are you suggesting that one poll so starkly different to all the other polls is somehow credible.

[Rheghead]

I've just shown you that the Clair Ridge platform will provide the people of Scotland £55 each per year for 40 years.

It is up to the individual to decide if that amounts to "nothing much" (my opinion) or "insanely rich" (your opinion).

I've come across those sort of statistics when I have spoke about wind farms, eg Renewable incentives putting x amount on top of bills. Once you dig into the details then most are folly or unsound.

Facts are that nobody knows for sure about what is out there, unlike you. Experts are claiming a potential of 8 billion barrels of oil. Like with North Sea, they will always find more oil, find new technologies to justify to open up old oilfields where it wasn't recoverable. etc etc. North Sea oil would have dried up years ago going by original expectations.

Once a Yes vote is in the bag, we can then think about the massive oilfield. It isn't going anywhere fast.

[Rheghead]

All it's means is lots of yes voters are trying to delude themselves that by rigging online polls it will effect the referendum outcome. More delusions or are you suggesting that one poll so starkly different to all the other polls is somehow credible.

Have you got any evidence of Yes voters are rigging the vote? The poll is for the readership of the Daily Record, a traditional Pro-union paper.