Independence - how would you vote?

[renton]

You are voting for independence for broader representation? Seriously? You currently have an MP, an MSP, and MEP and a local councillor for every scheme in Scotland. You, along with the rest of this country, are one of the most represented people on the planet. We are all over represented.

You mention the BoE setting interest rates to suit the city of London. Em... Am i missing something here? An independent Scotland will be using the pound. The pounds interest rate will be set by... The BoE. The only difference being of course, that whereas we are currently represented in the parliament which governs and regulates the BoE, we won't be if we vote yes.

We will be having our base rate set by a bank in a country in which we have no representation. This is independence?

The ironic thing is a yes vote is actually a vote for less representation. Less control over fiscal policy, less politicians representing each constituency (whether that's a bad thing or a good thing is another matter), less representation at the top tables of Brussels and NATO.

If broader representation is what you want from this referendum, i strongly suggest you vote no.

Let me get this straight. I am asked a question by a nationalist, i flip it over and it's a better together line? Brilliant

I get i am in the minority here. This is a football forum, the vast majority of users are male football supporters between 21 and 35. This is the demographic which is most likely to vote yes, it's tartan army braveheart politics. I was once like that. I seen Braveheart when i was kid and i thought i can't wait to vote yes, freedom and all that. Fast forward 20 years and as a business owner and home owner i realise that there's far more to this decision than hating the English.

You're meant to save your break down for after we vote no

Perhaps more direct and more responsive representation would be a better term. As it is, we have 59 MPs at Westminster which ,even if it were a united power bloc - and it isn't, is not enough critical mass to sway policy, even in the Labour party where most of those MPs are situated. What I want is a representative democracy where there is a tangible link between the electorate anf the legislature. Where MSPs have to go out and fight for votes and where party policy is aligned to the desires/needs of the electorate in Scotland, rather than for the populace of the South East of England - an inescapable fact given the preponderance of wealth, people and marginals in that part of the UK (and the first of those is certainly informed by the third)

Whatever the theoretical oversight we have as represented by the 59 Scottish MPs, the de facto situation is that Scottish representation on the regulation of the BoE through those MPs counts for very little. An independent Scotland in a formal currency union - rather than just using the pound (which could be negotiated) would allow for some actual real representation by a Scottish government in setting the regulation of the BoE - even if it were a minority representation, it would be a tleast equal to what we have now and probably better.

Beyond that, the ability to set tax rates, welfare policy, infrastructure and foreign and defence policy will give us a lot more freedom on how money is spent and will have a very real effect on people's lives.

While I don't like the idea personally of keeping Sterling, I recognise it's utility in the short term. For us it's a smoother transition, we don't have to worry about massive inflation from trying to float a new currency immediately after independence and we avoid the current Euro debacle. For the rUK, having our economy pegged to it means they can carry on business as usual without Sterling tanking in the wake of losing Scottihs tax revenue (from all sources).

So I don't believe that we will be handing over fiscal powers or losing any real representation on how interest rates are set. Ultimately I think we could end up with more representation in the short term and our own currency in the longer term. I believ ethat being able to control what mney is raised and where it is spent, alongisde a legislature that has to listen to the people of Scotland will markedly improve people's every day lives.

Still, you didn't quite answer my question: On a day to day basis why is the UK so superior, and why do you think indpeendence 'will never work'?

[invergowrie arab]

re: "independence will never work" lets take that as a starting point that this is true. What will it look like when it fails? Haiti, Greece, a return to a trade and barter agrarian society. or do the unionists just mean we will no longer be a "world power with a seat at the top table" because quite frankly i can handle that.

[H_B]

You haven't retracted your barefaced lie renton.

[renton]

You haven't retracted your barefaced lie renton.

In between posting on here, I actually have work to do. More than enough to keep me from trawling through the search function of the newspapers looking for a dummy to quell your tantrum. I remember, from a period a while back that we were told from various sources that we wouldn't have access to various assets and institutions belonging to the United Kingdom should we go our own way. The SNP response was, if I recall correctly that 'if we get none of the assets then we take none of the debt' whether or not they were mistaken in their reading of what the british government said, I think I am right in the SNP response to the stories.

[NorthAyrshireKillie]

You are voting for independence for broader representation? Seriously? You currently have an MP, an MSP, and MEP and a local councillor for every scheme in Scotland. You, along with the rest of this country, are one of the most represented people on the planet. We are all over represented.

You mention the BoE setting interest rates to suit the city of London. Em... Am i missing something here? An independent Scotland will be using the pound. The pounds interest rate will be set by... The BoE. The only difference being of course, that whereas we are currently represented in the parliament which governs and regulates the BoE, we won't be if we vote yes.

We will be having our base rate set by a bank in a country in which we have no representation. This is independence?

The ironic thing is a yes vote is actually a vote for less representation. Less control over fiscal policy, less politicians representing each constituency (whether that's a bad thing or a good thing is another matter), less representation at the top tables of Brussels and NATO.

If broader representation is what you want from this referendum, i strongly suggest you vote no.

Let me get this straight. I am asked a question by a nationalist, i flip it over and it's a better together line? Brilliant

I get i am in the minority here. This is a football forum, the vast majority of users are male football supporters between 21 and 35. This is the demographic which is most likely to vote yes, it's tartan army braveheart politics. I was once like that. I seen Braveheart when i was kid and i thought i can't wait to vote yes, freedom and all that. Fast forward 20 years and as a business owner and home owner i realise that there's far more to this decision than hating the English.

You seriously believe this is why people want to vote yes?

[AberdeenBud]

Has British Racist returned since his revelatory insights into the North Sea O&G industry?

Sent from my C5303 using Pie & Bovril mobile app

[DeeGas]

You are voting for independence for broader representation? Seriously? You currently have an MP, an MSP, and MEP and a local councillor for every scheme in Scotland. You, along with the rest of this country, are one of the most represented people on the planet. We are all over represented.

You mention the BoE setting interest rates to suit the city of London. Em... Am i missing something here? An independent Scotland will be using the pound. The pounds interest rate will be set by... The BoE. The only difference being of course, that whereas we are currently represented in the parliament which governs and regulates the BoE, we won't be if we vote yes.

We will be having our base rate set by a bank in a country in which we have no representation. This is independence?

The ironic thing is a yes vote is actually a vote for less representation. Less control over fiscal policy, less politicians representing each constituency (whether that's a bad thing or a good thing is another matter), less representation at the top tables of Brussels and NATO.

If broader representation is what you want from this referendum, i strongly suggest you vote no.

Let me get this straight. I am asked a question by a nationalist, i flip it over and it's a better together line? Brilliant

I get i am in the minority here. This is a football forum, the vast majority of users are male football supporters between 21 and 35. This is the demographic which is most likely to vote yes, it's tartan army braveheart politics. I was once like that. I seen Braveheart when i was kid and i thought i can't wait to vote yes, freedom and all that. Fast forward 20 years and as a business owner and home owner i realise that there's far more to this decision than hating the English.

You're meant to save your break down for after we vote no

Brilliant Lex!

Best post/s I've ever read on P&B.

Spot on.

So true.

[Ad Lib]

In between posting on here, I actually have work to do. More than enough to keep me from trawling through the search function of the newspapers looking for a dummy to quell your tantrum. I remember, from a period a while back that we were told from various sources that we wouldn't have access to various assets and institutions belonging to the United Kingdom should we go our own way. The SNP response was, if I recall correctly that 'if we get none of the assets then we take none of the debt' whether or not they were mistaken in their reading of what the british government said, I think I am right in the SNP response to the stories.

Institutions aren't assets. The things they own and the things they use are assets. This is the basic reason why the UK can't just "give" a pro rata share of EU membership to Scotland, and why Scotland can't force them to share the Bank of England as a last resort, but that it remains very likely that the *value* of deposits in the Bank of England will be split or a recognition and value equivalent made in the settlement of assets and liabilities by the respective negotiating teams.

Therefore it is utterly untrue to say that the UK Government said that Scotland would not be entitled to a share of the non territorial or institutional specific assets (and liabilities) of HMG and connected bodies. Utterly untrue.

[H_B]

In between posting on here, I actually have work to do.

How convenient. This work requirement didn't seem to prevent you answering Lex's post, which was several minutes after mine.

I remember, from a period a while back that we were told from various sources that we wouldn't have access to various assets and institutions belonging to the United Kingdom should we go our own way.

The trials of a lengthy "trawl" through the news sites is actually resolvable easily via a simple google search.

"a 62-page report by the UK Government accompanying the [legal] analysis states that the division of liabilities and assets would have to be negotiated."

The fact that you justify your lie by saying "uhh, the SNP definitely claimed this" is most amusing. That bastion of the truth the SNP

[renton]

How convenient. This work requirement didn't seem to prevent you answering Lex's post, which was several minutes after mine.

The trials of a lengthy "trawl" through the news sites is actually resolvable easily via a simple google search.

"a 62-page report by the UK Government accompanying the [legal] analysis states that the division of liabilities and assets would have to be negotiated."

The fact that you justify your lie by saying "uhh, the SNP definitely claimed this" is most amusing. That bastion of the truth the SNP

I feel like you are looking for a motivation in my post that simply isn't there. I was recalling, hazilly, what was in the press at the time, and I seem to recall that there was some intimation that we would not get access to certain 'stuff' The SNP certainly intepreted it that way, hence why they repsonded the way they did. Which is what I mentioned in my post. Certianly, my own opinion has always bene that most thigns are negotiable. It really was nothing more than that.

Honestl

[H_B]

I feel like you are looking for a motivation in my post that simply isn't there. I was recalling, hazilly, what was in the press at the time, and I seem to recall that there was some intimation that we would not get access to certain 'stuff'

I was more irritated because it's not your style. The SNP did indeed claim this, but what they did was try and claim, as Ad Lib says, that things which aren't assets are assets. For example EU membership.

The British government have always said that both assets (for example, gold, foreign embassies etc) and liabilities will have to be negotiated post-Indy. Assets are pretty easily defined.

What the SNP morons have said, like the liar Sturgeon, is "wah, the UK wants to keep all the rights and give us none but saddle us with the debts" whereas in fact as the UK is a continuing entitity it is de facto and de jure the continued state and will retain memebership rights to organisations. These aren't assets. The UK have always said Scotland will have rights to a share of the assets and will have to inherit a share of the debts.

[renton]

I was more irritated because it's not your style. The SNP did indeed claim this, but what they did was try and claim, as Ad Lib says, that things which aren't assets are assets. For example EU membership.

The British government have always said that both assets (for example, gold, foreign embassies etc) and liabilities will have to be negotiated post-Indy. Assets are pretty easily defined.

What the SNP morons have said, like the liar Sturgeon, is "wah, the UK wants to keep all the rights and give us none but saddle us with the debts" whereas in fact as the UK is a continuing entitity it is de facto and de jure the continued state and will retain memebership rights to organisations. These aren't assets. The UK have always said Scotland will have rights to a share of the assets and will have to inherit a share of the debts.

Well yeah. That sounds about right, sinc eit was the time of the co-successor malarky. For what it's worth, yeah we'll have to negotiate entry into these organisations but it wouldn't be a huge issue. Neither side came out well form that particular debate. The Yes guys claiming we were already in while the No guys were claiming we'd be in for along wait. The truth is, I'd imagine, somewhere in between. we'll have to apply to get in but it'll be a formality for the most part.

An interesting side point here: Of the UK EU opt outs, how many are directly relevent today and ho many does anyone actually think we'd miss, if swift application to the EU were at stake? Not including the Euro opt out, becuase we can say we are 'transitioning' towards adopting it, and never do so - I think other nations have adopted this policy.

[~British Patriot~]

[doulikefish]

Bettertogther.jpg

10 YEARS

[DeeGas]

Bettertogther.jpg

Loving it!

[Mr Rational]

I attended a Yes Scotland indoctrination meeting last night. It was interesting and instructive. I am still looking forward to voting Yes on 18 September 2014 because I believe that Scotland has the chance to be more democratic, more prosperous and fairer, with a government in Edinburgh rather than London.

To those on this thread who share that view I say this. If you are prepared to spend time on here debating details with folk that won't listen, then the Yes campaign needs you. You're clearly committed to Yes and whilst forums like this have their place, maybe you could also take part in a different way by attending and supporting events, doing a bit of leafleting or even canvassing.

As for me, I've said my piece on here numerous times and whilst it's fun to drop in now and then to pull the tail of certain posters, I think you will see less of me from now until September 2014.

Great call to arms but unfortunately I'm a lazy b*****d.

As a history teacher I'll get my own opportunity to brainwash the young people of Dundee into voting Yes next year...

Ive been to a few Yes 3 towns meetings and have been asked to help out by becoming a Yes ambassador, its something I would love to do but its hard to find the time.

Glad to be of help, do what you can and get yer erse along to a meeting pronto.

[xbl]

So, St. Mirren watch:

Lex - you never answered the question. Care to do so?

Reynard - what is the source of your pension figures? Was it the 2010 figures that have been posted? You seem to keep missing my posts, despite claiming you were enjoying and "having fun" with this particular issue?

[Todders]

That's it. The Yes campaign might as well pack its bags. The game is up. THe referendum is lost.

It's official. Susan Boyle will be voting NO!

Well, that's sure changed my mind then.

[SodjesSixteenIncher]

The oil revenue between 2018 and 2041 will only be £56billion, you say?

Sounds shite like.

[Rudolf Skácel]

The oil revenue between 2018 and 2041 will only be £56billion, you say?

Sounds shite like.

Indeed, Sodje. I mean how the f**k do certain nations lucky enough to have large supplies of one of the worlds most sought after commodities manage to become utterly fucking loaded when it is apparently so worthless? Only us Scotch, eh.

Still, if ever proof was needed that the majority of unionists/Brit-nats are self-loathing, anti-Scottish c**ts, then this is it.

Even without oil, Scotland still produces its fair share of tax per head within the CDU and it is still the wealthiest part of the UK outside London and the South East. Let's also just forget the fact that we have other things going for us which are only going to become more important in the future like having up to a quarter of Europe's offshore renewables. Oh the humanity.