Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
xbl

Scottish Independence

Recommended Posts

Because the paper has more holes than a block of Swiss cheese and doesn't address the fundamental issues in any reasonable manner. The press conference merely highlighted the major flaws.

You are a quick reader.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because the paper has more holes than a block of Swiss cheese and doesn't address the fundamental issues in any reasonable manner. The press conference merely highlighted the major flaws.

What holes?

What fundamental issues does it not address?

The press conference highlighted nothing more than that Salmond and Sturgeon were comfortable answering all the questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because the paper has more holes than a block of Swiss cheese and doesn't address the fundamental issues in any reasonable manner. The press conference merely highlighted the major flaws.

You've already read it all?

Thought not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only a tinted specked numbnuts would think that didn't go well, regardless of who I decide to vote for the pair of them came across very well, much better than the usual say a lot and explain nothing we get surrounding UK politics.

How they "came across" isn't what I'm concerned with. I prefer to look at the detail of what is said rather than admiring Alex Salmond's choice of attire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only reason I'm here and willing to dip my toe into the debate on here now is that it's being divvied up into threads that can be followed, so won't as easily get lost in petty squabling.

For the record, my general stance is "no is my starting point, but please convince me otherwise". As I believe everyone should be. If we're not substantially worse off, then it'll be a yes from me. It's beginning to look more and more like a yes from me.

The reason I use the word substantially is that for me, it's firstly all about if it makes financial sense then secondly if it doesn't, but we're not substantially worse off, then I would take this as our best ever opportunity of government reform and that Scots deciding Scottish matters would be the best way forward.

So, I'm still a no (I obviously haven't read the entire report), but I'm getting nearer a yes.

Edited by Spain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was a genuine laugh out loud moment.

XBL- get on with it and Div, for fairness, can we have Swampy back? I'm clueless to the ban, but he's generally sensible.

I would probably agree on Swampy's return, his contribution would enhance the discussions on the white paper so long as he manages to steer clear of his fondness for dipping into tedious mode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because the paper has more holes than a block of Swiss cheese and doesn't address the fundamental issues in any reasonable manner. The press conference merely highlighted the major flaws.

Any particular points you take issue with? What are your examples of these 'holes'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How they "came across" isn't what I'm concerned with. I prefer to look at the detail of what is said rather than admiring Alex Salmond's choice of attire.

It was you that started it.

Give us the details you disliked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only reason I'm here and willing to dip my toe into the debate on here now is that it's being divvied up into threads that can be followed, so won't as easily get lost in petty squabling.

For the record, my general stance is "no is my starting point, but please convince me otherwise". As I believe everyone should be. If we're not substantially worse off, then it'll be a yes from me. It's beginning to look more and more like a yes from me.

The reason I use the word substantially is that for me, it's firstly all about if it makes financial sense then secondly if it doesn't, but we're not substantially worse off, then I would take this as our best ever opportunity of government reform and that Scots deciding Scottish matters would be the best way forward.

So, I'm still a no (I obviously haven't read the entire report), but I'm getting nearer a yes.

Not to be presumptuous but sounds like you will be a Yes the day you tick the box.

Nice one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was a genuine laugh out loud moment.

XBL- get on with it and Div, for fairness, can we have Swampy back? I'm clueless to the ban, but he's generally sensible.

Swampy hasn't been banned ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not to be presumptuous but sounds like you will be a Yes the day you tick the box.

Nice one.

It really depends on the facts and figures. But I'm nearing the tipping point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Swampy hasn't been banned ?

Option B then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It really depends on the facts and figures. But I'm nearing the tipping point.

I'm teetering myself, don't know why but that conference filled me confidence and enthusiasm, makes a change from the usual turgid same old same old feeling I get when I listen to politicians.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm teetering myself, don't know why but that conference filled me confidence and enthusiasm, makes a change from the usual turgid same old same old feeling I get when I listen to politicians.

Haven't seen it yet as I'm at work, but will give it a look later. Had a quick scan through the White Document, and while it's missing a number of important things from my perspective, (CTRL+F can help you look for bits that pique your interest) I never really expected them to be in there. The things I'm referring to would be more party manifesto specific anyway I'd assume.

Edited by Spain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

barrysnotter pretending to have read a 600+ page document in 2 hours :lol:

I think his general direction has been to criticise the paper, be asked why he takes issue with it, and then he scrambles for a point from the paper that he can try and whittle some negative pish out of. It would certainly explain his 'make a point and run away' tactic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any particular points you take issue with? What are your examples of these 'holes'?

Let's start with currency. 100% reliant on the UK accepting a currency union on Salmond's terms. No real acknowledgement of the risk involved and no alternative.

That is one hell of a big hole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...