Independence Referendum

[Kmac84]

Its the argument that the rest of the world views the UK as homogeneous blob therefore Scotland needs independence to have a strong national identity and reap greater trade benefits that this would bring that gets me. I haven't witnessed a single example of this 'Englands kid brother' mentality and in my experience Scotland has a very strong national identity, no less than England.

When we're starting to emerge from the biggest global downturn in history it feels like the UKs graph is just starting to upswing a little, obviously the gains in term of GDP take time to filter through to employment and wage growth but it feels like the Yes campaign have just draw a horizontal line and said right, well things can't possibly get any worse staying in the UK, and we think that we can do better on our own so lets go.

The Yes campaign call it scaremongering but any rational person can see that there is at least the potential for this to go really very badly and with not a huge amount of upside to becoming a smaller fish in the same big pond in the current economic climate.

I don't really recognise that argument, haven't seen it much that I can recall. It's more we need away from Westminster's type of politics.

The timing is purely down to the fact that the SNP achieved what the electoral system for Holyrood was designed to avoid, a majority, on a platform of a referendum. Naturally we'll look at the situation as it is, but if we take it back as far as the 1979 referendum it doesn't make any prettier a picture.

The timimg was actually instigated this time around by the UK Gov. My understanding is that the SNP's desired date was 2016 but Cameron forced Salmond's hand. 

As to Dan's? point.  I do recognize that arguement but it in an arguement put about by the Better Together Campaign.  They have twisted it, very much like the anti-English sentiment they have created. 

I also agree vey much with Rod's points. 

Further it should be added, that the British establishment are masters in the black art of propogands and disinformation.   Much of what we are seeing now was done in 1979, just ask many of the people around back then.  That is why, I am surprised that a large demographic of 30+ year olds back then, haven't seen through this and that now many of those over 60 are in the NO camp this time having been duped by the same misinformation. 

Surely 2014 was a must as it had to be in this parliament?  Salmond is quoted saying "He said that 2014 "was the date that allows everything to be put in a proper manner on the most important decision in Scotland for 300 years. That date will allow the Scottish people to hear all the arguments""

I think the British establishment are masters in the dark arts of politics. The yes campaigns blind belief that there will be no downside to independence is exactly the same as the negativity of better together. Both parties are pitching polar arguments as they cannot be seen to concede on any point as this is grabbed by the alternate spin machine.

An informed individual should be able to pick through both sets of propaganda and decide what is best for them and their family and to an extent their country.  The ill informed will be swayed by who shouts the loudest which is why the tactics of both sides are annoying to me.  To say you have a balanced view having read all your posts on here is just wrong.  

I wish you the best for the 18 th the strength of the campaign seems already to have won us greater devolved powers. If you win, we can decide in 5 years who can say "I told you so"

Where is the blind faith?  I certainly don't have it.  I have yet to speak to any serious campaigner who has blind faith that wake up on the 19th and think yes this is amazing, that's when the real work starts. 

I gave you 5 years to prove me wrong, not one day. Tell me one negative about independent scotland, if you cannot then you cannot be seriously impartial

For me the biggest negative is doing actually doing it, its like moving out the house for the first tiime.  But that is also one of the exciting things. 

Another negative is the negotiating team, right now we don't know who that is going to be. 

I would also say the unknown of what parties will develop in an independent Scotland could be a negative.

Additionally, the UK gov might just be stubborn and not allow a currency union, that could create some uncertainty.  I don't think that will happen but there is a very slim chance that Osbourne/Balls/alexander have boxed themselves into a corner on that one.  My personal preference would be a form of sterlingisation and membershp of EFTA rather than the EU. 

That said, I have more fears about staying within the UK especially with the next general election in 2016, I know the betting has Labour in front but I don't think they can win.  They are, imo unelectable.  Especially with that moron Milleband in charge.  They are almost certainly finished in Scotland. My fear is more cuts, more debt, privitisation of the NHS, further unnecessary wars. 

Does your potential negatives not strike you as similar to the reasons you have been shouting down? The stock people put in each is dependant on personal choice.  As I said, good luck, we won't be changing each other's minds

Not really what I have been mostly shouting down is the myth that we rely solely on North Sea Oil and that we are subsidy junkies, that we're too poor, too wee and too stupid.  The rest of it, and although I site them as negatives are just political posturing.  I 100% believe that Scotland will be in the EU, as I said and although I detest UKIP and everything they stand for, my personal preference would be for membership of EFTA, something I think has already been agreed in principle between the countries.   

I don't buy into the SNP's vision for Scotland but people like Robin McAlpine have put forward very strong cases for financial models post indy and there is some fantastic ideas in his work.  Jim Sillars has some very good ideas about raising money and inward investment and given his background should be part of any negotiating team.  Patrick Harvie has put the greens into the forefront of many peoples minds with his progressive politics.  I see many positves outwith the SNP.  One of the biggest things for me, and I haven't joined yet because I want to see what course they take post indy is Labour For Indy.  They have been tennacious, disciplined and creative.  If they rejoin the main Labour Party post indy I seriously couldn't join unless every sitting MSP and MP were expelled from the new Scottish Party.   But I was a Labour member from 14 till half way through Blair's term.  I come from a very Labur orientated family. 

No shit here was me thinking you were a closet thatcher groupie like me!

This t-shirt has pride of place in my wardrobe.

[Marky147]

Snappy dresser 

[Kmac84]

Additionally, the UK gov might just be stubborn and not allow a currency union, that could create some uncertainty.  I don't think that will happen but there is a very slim chance that Osbourne/Balls/alexander have boxed themselves into a corner on that one.  My personal preference would be a form of sterlingisation and membershp of EFTA rather than the EU. 

if you had any basic understanding of economics you would know they cant agree a currency union , you cant have currency union without political union , its the same for the euro & it will never work without a federal europe

Scotland can keep the pound but not have any control over the UK pound & just keep it linked like Denmark does with the euro & alot of countries in Asia follows the $ , fat Alex just keeps telling lies & hope the yes vote wins but only down side is we will be stuck with a tory goverment

I'm sory but Professors Andrew Hughes Hallett, Sir Jim Mirrlees, Frances Ruane and Joseph Stiglitz say differently, and I would trust them more than you sir.  

Also when you refer to people as "fat Alex" you lose the arguement straight away.  So toddle off back into your corner.  

[Kmac84]

Snappy dresser 

Thanks ;-)

[Rod Paradise]

Additionally, the UK gov might just be stubborn and not allow a currency union, that could create some uncertainty.  I don't think that will happen but there is a very slim chance that Osbourne/Balls/alexander have boxed themselves into a corner on that one.  My personal preference would be a form of sterlingisation and membershp of EFTA rather than the EU. 

if you had any basic understanding of economics you would know they cant agree a currency union , you cant have currency union without political union , its the same for the euro & it will never work without a federal europe

Scotland can keep the pound but not have any control over the UK pound & just keep it linked like Denmark does with the euro & alot of countries in Asia follows the $ , fat Alex just keeps telling lies & hope the yes vote wins but only down side is we will be stuck with a tory goverment

The Governor of the Bank of England disagrees with you....

[Rod Paradise]

I don't buy into the SNP's vision for Scotland but people like Robin McAlpine have put forward very strong cases for financial models post indy and there is some fantastic ideas in his work.  Jim Sillars has some very good ideas about raising money and inward investment and given his background should be part of any negotiating team.  Patrick Harvie has put the greens into the forefront of many peoples minds with his progressive politics.  I see many positves outwith the SNP.  One of the biggest things for me, and I haven't joined yet because I want to see what course they take post indy is Labour For Indy.  They have been tennacious, disciplined and creative.  If they rejoin the main Labour Party post indy I seriously couldn't join unless every sitting MSP and MP were expelled from the new Scottish Party.   But I was a Labour member from 14 till half way through Blair's term.  I come from a very Labur orientated family. 

No shit here was me thinking you were a closet thatcher groupie like me!

This t-shirt has pride of place in my wardrobe.

I joined Labour for Indy last year, talking to another member about what happens in the event of a Yes vote & we feel it's 50/50 on LfI succeeding in getting rid of the Lamonts, Murphys etc who have so blindly followed party line (maybe not the complete bloodletting you're advocating), or failing to wrest control from them & forming a new party, possibly in conjunction with Common Weal & the RIC.

I reckon I know where you got that shirt too....

[Kmac84]

I don't buy into the SNP's vision for Scotland but people like Robin McAlpine have put forward very strong cases for financial models post indy and there is some fantastic ideas in his work.  Jim Sillars has some very good ideas about raising money and inward investment and given his background should be part of any negotiating team.  Patrick Harvie has put the greens into the forefront of many peoples minds with his progressive politics.  I see many positves outwith the SNP.  One of the biggest things for me, and I haven't joined yet because I want to see what course they take post indy is Labour For Indy.  They have been tennacious, disciplined and creative.  If they rejoin the main Labour Party post indy I seriously couldn't join unless every sitting MSP and MP were expelled from the new Scottish Party.   But I was a Labour member from 14 till half way through Blair's term.  I come from a very Labur orientated family. 

No shit here was me thinking you were a closet thatcher groupie like me!

This t-shirt has pride of place in my wardrobe.

I joined Labour for Indy last year, talking to another member about what happens in the event of a Yes vote & we feel it's 50/50 on LfI succeeding in getting rid of the Lamonts, Murphys etc who have so blindly followed party line (maybe not the complete bloodletting you're advocating), or failing to wrest control from them & forming a new party, possibly in conjunction with Common Weal & the RIC.

I reckon I know where you got that shirt too....

It wasn't Calton Books ;-)

I've been impressed by LFI, moreso Common Weal - shame Robin comes across like a very sensible chap on speed when he speaks. 

[Rod Paradise]

So did anyone actually have a lump on the yes when the odds suggested there was no chance?

Yep - sadly not as much as I would have liked - bike expenses got in the way.

Details tbc but I'm sure the Osborne bribe will just do enough to keep daylight between the camps.

Osborne's bribe will just be a pre-election promise from the tory party though - the UK & Scottish Governments are legally banned from making any new promises. So it won't/can't have any legal guarantee and will have less weight for that reason.

It'll also be an embarrassment, the 3 main unionist parties put months of thought into their different offers, to chuck them out and try new ones with just over a week to go smacks of desperation.

[dwh103]

As a Southerner, economics graduate working in financial services (no, I'm not a banker), it would be disappointing for me if the Scots voted yes.

Points made about economies of scale are broadly correct. Scotland 'should' be better off as part of the union. However, if the allocation of resources is uneven, or at least the perception is this, then maybe it is for the best for Scotland to go it alone. Should never have gotten this far though - the fact we're at this point is a sad indictment of Westminster and the British political system. Can the Scots make it on their own? Sure, and anyone who says otherwise is an idiot. Will their potential ceiling be lower in the event of independence? Of course it will, and as an economist - a yes vote would be a sad day for me.

The desire to be in control of your own destiny is a laudable one, however I fear Scotland may simply swap one gravy train for another. No-one can truly be sure whether independence will work, but the behaviour of both sides of the debate has been utterly shameful imo - I can't believe either side are telling the truth, and that's doing the electorate (including 16yos, wtf) a huge disservice. That's the biggest crime here. This forum is far more educated and informed than Joe Public will ever be, and just look at this thread.

Either way, I hope the outcome will be a catalyst for change for the better. Well, I can hope...

[Rod Paradise]

I don't buy into the SNP's vision for Scotland but people like Robin McAlpine have put forward very strong cases for financial models post indy and there is some fantastic ideas in his work.  Jim Sillars has some very good ideas about raising money and inward investment and given his background should be part of any negotiating team.  Patrick Harvie has put the greens into the forefront of many peoples minds with his progressive politics.  I see many positves outwith the SNP.  One of the biggest things for me, and I haven't joined yet because I want to see what course they take post indy is Labour For Indy.  They have been tennacious, disciplined and creative.  If they rejoin the main Labour Party post indy I seriously couldn't join unless every sitting MSP and MP were expelled from the new Scottish Party.   But I was a Labour member from 14 till half way through Blair's term.  I come from a very Labur orientated family. 

No shit here was me thinking you were a closet thatcher groupie like me!

This t-shirt has pride of place in my wardrobe.

I joined Labour for Indy last year, talking to another member about what happens in the event of a Yes vote & we feel it's 50/50 on LfI succeeding in getting rid of the Lamonts, Murphys etc who have so blindly followed party line (maybe not the complete bloodletting you're advocating), or failing to wrest control from them & forming a new party, possibly in conjunction with Common Weal & the RIC.

I reckon I know where you got that shirt too....

It wasn't Calton Books ;-)

I've been impressed by LFI, moreso Common Weal - shame Robin comes across like a very sensible chap on speed when he speaks. 

I didn't think it was, I've worn 2 of them out.....

[Rod Paradise]

As a Southerner, economics graduate working in financial services (no, I'm not a banker), it would be disappointing for me if the Scots voted yes.

Points made about economies of scale are broadly correct. Scotland 'should' be better off as part of the union. However, if the allocation of resources is uneven, or at least the perception is this, then maybe it is for the best for Scotland to go it alone. Should never have gotten this far though - the fact we're at this point is a sad indictment of Westminster and the British political system. Can the Scots make it on their own? Sure, and anyone who says otherwise is an idiot. Will their potential ceiling be lower in the event of independence? Of course it will, and as an economist - a yes vote would be a sad day for me.

The desire to be in control of your own destiny is a laudable one, however I fear Scotland may simply swap one gravy train for another. No-one can truly be sure whether independence will work, but the behaviour of both sides of the debate has been utterly shameful imo - I can't believe either side are telling the truth, and that's doing the electorate (including 16yos, wtf) a huge disservice. That's the biggest crime here. This forum is far more educated and informed than Joe Public will ever be, and just look at this thread.

Either way, I hope the outcome will be a catalyst for change for the better. Well, I can hope...

The debate's been a wonderful thing in Scotland, I feel that certain English papers have badly misrepresented it. I was asked into the pub as I passed it this afternoon as they were discussing political parties & arrangements if there is a Yes, that was a whole bar involved in and interested in the political process. In an area where disenchantment from politics has been the rule for years it's been fantastic.

The important thing will be to keep that level of interest and involvement up after the vote - whatever the result.

[dwh103]

As a Southerner, economics graduate working in financial services (no, I'm not a banker), it would be disappointing for me if the Scots voted yes.

Points made about economies of scale are broadly correct. Scotland 'should' be better off as part of the union. However, if the allocation of resources is uneven, or at least the perception is this, then maybe it is for the best for Scotland to go it alone. Should never have gotten this far though - the fact we're at this point is a sad indictment of Westminster and the British political system. Can the Scots make it on their own? Sure, and anyone who says otherwise is an idiot. Will their potential ceiling be lower in the event of independence? Of course it will, and as an economist - a yes vote would be a sad day for me.

The desire to be in control of your own destiny is a laudable one, however I fear Scotland may simply swap one gravy train for another. No-one can truly be sure whether independence will work, but the behaviour of both sides of the debate has been utterly shameful imo - I can't believe either side are telling the truth, and that's doing the electorate (including 16yos, wtf) a huge disservice. That's the biggest crime here. This forum is far more educated and informed than Joe Public will ever be, and just look at this thread.

Either way, I hope the outcome will be a catalyst for change for the better. Well, I can hope...

The debate's been a wonderful thing in Scotland, I feel that certain English papers have badly misrepresented it. I was asked into the pub as I passed it this afternoon as they were discussing political parties & arrangements if there is a Yes, that was a whole bar involved in and interested in the political process. In an area where disenchantment from politics has been the rule for years it's been fantastic.

The important thing will be to keep that level of interest and involvement up after the vote - whatever the result.

Couldn't agree more. I'm just concerned the spiel on both sides makes it very difficult for voters to have a truly informed opinion. If something independent doesn't fit the 'story', this let's just rubbish/discredit the source. Of course, this is politics, it's image and electability over substance, and not likely to change any time soon.

I do hope this perception is wrong, fwiw.

[Kmac84]

As a Southerner, economics graduate working in financial services (no, I'm not a banker), it would be disappointing for me if the Scots voted yes.

Points made about economies of scale are broadly correct. Scotland 'should' be better off as part of the union. However, if the allocation of resources is uneven, or at least the perception is this, then maybe it is for the best for Scotland to go it alone. Should never have gotten this far though - the fact we're at this point is a sad indictment of Westminster and the British political system. Can the Scots make it on their own? Sure, and anyone who says otherwise is an idiot. Will their potential ceiling be lower in the event of independence? Of course it will, and as an economist - a yes vote would be a sad day for me.

The desire to be in control of your own destiny is a laudable one, however I fear Scotland may simply swap one gravy train for another. No-one can truly be sure whether independence will work, but the behaviour of both sides of the debate has been utterly shameful imo - I can't believe either side are telling the truth, and that's doing the electorate (including 16yos, wtf) a huge disservice. That's the biggest crime here. This forum is far more educated and informed than Joe Public will ever be, and just look at this thread.

Either way, I hope the outcome will be a catalyst for change for the better. Well, I can hope...

I don't agree with the end sentiment but nice wordage and well thought out measure response. 

[Kmac84]

http://yes2014.net/2014/09/05/jim-murphy-whitewash-removed-wikipedia/

[Rod Paradise]

On a lighter note there was a comedy night on the referendum in Glasgow, and it was shown on TV over the weekend, well worth a watch:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04h8kvx/kevin-bridges-live-at-the-referendum

The reception for the English comedians was good despite the scare stories. Jack Dee in particular when he had a good go at Scotland.