Should I vote yes?

[Blaven]

No argument from me that the Tories are doing their best to dismantle the NHS and I hope that they get punted at the next UK elections. I know Labour seem to be out of favour on this forum but as I said earlier, I'm not sure exactly who Labour are supposed to be representing, Labour by its definition should be representing 'working class' but the differences have become very blurred and we now have a reasonably sized 'under class' who I suppose aren't 'working' (it's all very complicated) so should Labour represent the 'working' ones or the 'non working' (I'm not having a go, as I say, it's all a bit messy) ?

Edited because I don't know the difference between know and now

Can I ask you Chomper.

You seem like a level headed punter. When you come on here, are the YES voters on here to talk about independence and how to make it work?

And are the NO voters on here just to take the piss?

Or is it evenly balanced between the two?

[chomp my root]

Can I ask you Chomper.

You seem like a level headed punter. When you come on here, are the YES voters on here to talk about independence and how to make it work?

And are the NO voters on here just to take the piss?

Or is it evenly balanced between the two?

I've dipped my toe into the Indie debates a couple of times over the last couple of years and I'm not sure if I'm just a bit thicker skinned but I couldn't be bothered with the overwhelming YES and anyone who thinks otherwise is 'subhuman scum' (I jest for effect in this case). I've been posting for the last couple of days now and while I think the majority are YES, it doesn't seem as rabid as it did. The whole issue is obviously heartfelt by a lot of people and both sides seem to have their trolls but (and as a NAW I have my own bias to try and factor in) but think the YES side is still more 'critical' of the NAW side than the other way round. There's the attitude that you're somehow unpatriotic if you're not YES, and of course its not by all but it seems to me anyway that there is more of an edge to the YES side.

I hope this helps, I'm just a bit long in the tooth for the name calling.

[MarkoRaj]

I'm still not exactly gushing about all the acts that the Scottish Parlie have introduced. Again, colour me cynical but for me they have introduced bills just for the sake of it (to me). You say half are trying to feck the other half but surely by default the second half are doing the same (if you follow me) so it just comes down to personal views and prejudices on both sides.

I'm just very underwhelmed so far and it really is the devil I know to an extent. I've posted before that if things change like the (to me unlikely but not impossible) future UK referendum on staying in Europe going for an opt out, I'd be inclined to vote YES but we're stacking up the hypothetical's and the fact that we would of had a referendum debate a couple of years earlier (in this scenario) would make it unlikely to have another one so soon kind of ruins the SNP's chances of having a probably more successful one.

How can you not be impressed by the things brought in by the Scottish parliament? Bedroom tax v council tax freeze. Free prescriptions, free tuition fees. I don't know how anyone can possibly say "one shower for another" unless they vs had their eyes closed for the last 15 years

[chomp my root]

How can you not be impressed by the things brought in by the Scottish parliament? Bedroom tax v council tax freeze. Free prescriptions, free tuition fees. I don't know how anyone can possibly say "one shower for another" unless they vs had their eyes closed for the last 15 years

I'm not a fan of free prescription charges for all, I can afford to pay and had no problem with that, I'd rather they were reserved for people who can't pay or who struggle to pay. As for free tuition fee's, at the risk of upsetting some, again if the country is going to hand out money to some for for education, why not others who don't want to go to university. Even keeping to paying for university places, why isn't it targeted to what the country thinks it might need rather than just giving it to an increasing number of degree's that aren't likely to benefit the general population (we turn out too many in some area's and not enough in others, if we offered bursaries to X number of subject A and Y to subject B).

So again it comes down to opinions and I'm just not particularly inspired by the Parlie so far. The first thing they debated was clause 28, now I'm not saying it couldn't or shouldn't be up for discussion but I don't think it was the most pressing issue in the country, but it was very 'right on'. Hmmm.

[Baxter Parp]

I'm not a fan of free prescription charges for all, I can afford to pay and had no problem with that, I'd rather they were reserved for people who can't pay or who struggle to pay. As for free tuition fee's, at the risk of upsetting some, again if the country is going to hand out money to some for for education, why not others who don't want to go to university. Even keeping to paying for university places, why isn't it targeted to what the country thinks it might need rather than just giving it to an increasing number of degree's that aren't likely to benefit the general population (we turn out too many in some area's and not enough in others, if we offered bursaries to X number of subject A and Y to subject B).

So again it comes down to opinions and I'm just not particularly inspired by the Parlie so far. The first thing they debated was clause 28, now I'm not saying it couldn't or shouldn't be up for discussion but I don't think it was the most pressing issue in the country, but it was very 'right on'. Hmmm.

Your train of thought puzzles me.

[Blaven]

Your train of thought puzzles me.

Garden path.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Stop being hung up on the idea that we will automatically be richer as a nation, and that you will automatically be richer as an individual.

Unfortunately though that is the line being pushed in Yes campaign literature and by many of your fellow Yes supporters.

[TheScarf]

There should be a 'Don't Care' option to tick on the voting card.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

How can you not be impressed by the things brought in by the Scottish parliament? Bedroom tax v council tax freeze. Free prescriptions, free tuition fees. I don't know how anyone can possibly say "one shower for another" unless they vs had their eyes closed for the last 15 years

Council Tax has nothing to do with Bedroom Tax.

The Council Tax freeze itself is a populist piece of pish dressed up as "getting value for money" but has effectively led to cuts in vital council services whilst letting the middle classes pay less tax.

[MarkoRaj]

Council Tax has nothing to do with Bedroom Tax.

The Council Tax freeze itself is a populist piece of pish dressed up as "getting value for money" but has effectively led to cuts in vital council services whilst letting the middle classes pay less tax.

Have to say with rising inflation and minimal wage rises I'm finding it a godsend tbh and my household is actually quite well off. Can only imagine how good an effect it has on those less well off.

Bedroom tax = wmg policy

Council tax freeze = sg policy. Just highlighting the difference.

[undecided]

Unfortunately though that is the line being pushed in Yes campaign literature and by many of your fellow Yes supporters.

I think it is even worse - this line of thoughts was championed by SNP for 40+ years as I just learned a few days ago by looking it up on Wikipedia.

"Oil for Scotland" has been used by SNP to make Westminster look bad and SNP to be the "FKUK fighters".

It looks like most people in Scotland believe now (after 40 years of this) that if we take over oil we will be as rich as Emirates.

This looks to me a deliberate policy of lying to people of Scotland for 40 years.

The real numbers show that we might only be richer by £100 a month.

This is still decent money of course but it would not help us to survive any real difficulties which might arise.

We seem to think that Scotland taking over oil and with all this FkUK slogans of SNP English will simply love us and allow us use their currency, Bank of England, all the services and so on?

I rather think this is like a divorce. It is already started getting nasty when Scotland claimed all the oil. This alone is probably big enough reason for the English to "take a piss".

Certainly if Independent Scotland feels like it can take 95% of one type of resource then people down south are entitled to think that other types or resources are for their taking.

I like to be prepared for the worst. Especially after being effectively unemployed for 2 years.

And in my view the worst might come easily enough if UK decides to do to Scotland what SNP is trying to do to them, i.e. follow the fkUK practice and claim whatever they think is theirs from UK assets. Obviously no one can stop them from doing so. And even worse - we are setting up an example, so you can't even blame them for doing it.

It is only natural for them to start their own fkSc campaign, I think.

Don't know if it already exists but would not be surprised if it appears "out of nowhere" tomorrow.

This oil money looked to me as our insurance against the worst. But it appears there is so little of it that it is pretty much irrelevant. Plus dangerous.

That's what I am thinking now. May be I am too pessimistic and no one is going to take a piss at us and just let us take over oil and let us be and effectively stay part of UK - apart from taxes.

But honestly - about currency - I can't think of any country to get independence as a part of a bigger country and still using original currency. Most of the time the original currency is actually withdrawn. Take Russia for example - Ukraine was in deep trouble for good part of 5 years after Russia disallowed their currency for use in Ukraine.

There are lots of countries where local currency is so weak that they use US$ everywhere instead. But this mostly means that those countries do not have any control over their finances, I think. :-(

[Confidemus]

I think it is even worse - this line of thoughts was championed by SNP for 40+ years as I just learned a few days ago by looking it up on Wikipedia.

"Oil for Scotland" has been used by SNP to make Westminster look bad and SNP to be the "FKUK fighters".

It looks like most people in Scotland believe now (after 40 years of this) that if we take over oil we will be as rich as Emirates.

This looks to me a deliberate policy of lying to people of Scotland for 40 years.

The real numbers show that we might only be richer by £100 a month.

This is still decent money of course but it would not help us to survive any real difficulties which might arise.

We seem to think that Scotland taking over oil and with all this FkUK slogans of SNP English will simply love us and allow us use their currency, Bank of England, all the services and so on?

I rather think this is like a divorce. It is already started getting nasty when Scotland claimed all the oil. This alone is probably big enough reason for the English to "take a piss".

Certainly if Independent Scotland feels like it can take 95% of one type of resource then people down south are entitled to think that other types or resources are for their taking.

I like to be prepared for the worst. Especially after being effectively unemployed for 2 years.

And in my view the worst might come easily enough if UK decides to do to Scotland what SNP is trying to do to them, i.e. follow the fkUK practice and claim whatever they think is theirs from UK assets. Obviously no one can stop them from doing so. And even worse - we are setting up an example, so you can't even blame them for doing it.

It is only natural for them to start their own fkSc campaign, I think.

Don't know if it already exists but would not be surprised if it appears "out of nowhere" tomorrow.

This oil money looked to me as our insurance against the worst. But it appears there is so little of it that it is pretty much irrelevant. Plus dangerous.

That's what I am thinking now. May be I am too pessimistic and no one is going to take a piss at us and just let us take over oil and let us be and effectively stay part of UK - apart from taxes.

But honestly - about currency - I can't think of any country to get independence as a part of a bigger country and still using original currency. Most of the time the original currency is actually withdrawn. Take Russia for example - Ukraine was in deep trouble for good part of 5 years after Russia disallowed their currency for use in Ukraine.

There are lots of countries where local currency is so weak that they use US$ everywhere instead. But this mostly means that those countries do not have any control over their finances, I think. :-(

You really are going for this £100 a month thing aren't you?

Perhaps you missed the other article I provided for you which said that Westminster have deliberately downplayed the amount of oil in the North Sea ahead of the referendum.

But by all means, convince yourself the SNP have lied for 40 years. I think I can just about see the cut of your jib.

[MarkoRaj]

I think it is even worse - this line of thoughts was championed by SNP for 40+ years as I just learned a few days ago by looking it up on Wikipedia.

"Oil for Scotland" has been used by SNP to make Westminster look bad and SNP to be the "FKUK fighters".

It looks like most people in Scotland believe now (after 40 years of this) that if we take over oil we will be as rich as Emirates.

This looks to me a deliberate policy of lying to people of Scotland for 40 years.

The real numbers show that we might only be richer by £100 a month.

This is still decent money of course but it would not help us to survive any real difficulties which might arise.

We seem to think that Scotland taking over oil and with all this FkUK slogans of SNP English will simply love us and allow us use their currency, Bank of England, all the services and so on?

I rather think this is like a divorce. It is already started getting nasty when Scotland claimed all the oil. This alone is probably big enough reason for the English to "take a piss".

Certainly if Independent Scotland feels like it can take 95% of one type of resource then people down south are entitled to think that other types or resources are for their taking.

I like to be prepared for the worst. Especially after being effectively unemployed for 2 years.

And in my view the worst might come easily enough if UK decides to do to Scotland what SNP is trying to do to them, i.e. follow the fkUK practice and claim whatever they think is theirs from UK assets. Obviously no one can stop them from doing so. And even worse - we are setting up an example, so you can't even blame them for doing it.

It is only natural for them to start their own fkSc campaign, I think.

Don't know if it already exists but would not be surprised if it appears "out of nowhere" tomorrow.

This oil money looked to me as our insurance against the worst. But it appears there is so little of it that it is pretty much irrelevant. Plus dangerous.

That's what I am thinking now. May be I am too pessimistic and no one is going to take a piss at us and just let us take over oil and let us be and effectively stay part of UK - apart from taxes.

But honestly - about currency - I can't think of any country to get independence as a part of a bigger country and still using original currency. Most of the time the original currency is actually withdrawn. Take Russia for example - Ukraine was in deep trouble for good part of 5 years after Russia disallowed their currency for use in Ukraine.

There are lots of countries where local currency is so weak that they use US$ everywhere instead. But this mostly means that those countries do not have any control over their finances, I think. :-(

You don't sound very undecided. Read the mccrone report. There isn't even any dispute about the oil revenues?

[DeeTillEhDeh]

You really are going for this £100 a month thing aren't you?

Perhaps you missed the other article I provided for you which said that Westminster have deliberately downplayed the amount of oil in the North Sea ahead of the referendum.

But by all means, convince yourself the SNP have lied for 40 years. I think I can just about see the cut of your jib.

The point is I think that the Yes campaign (stupidly imho) have allowed this to be an economic campaign instead of focussing on the political where, imho, they actually stand a better chance if winning the argument.

[undecided]

You really are going for this £100 a month thing aren't you?

Perhaps you missed the other article I provided for you which said that Westminster have deliberately downplayed the amount of oil in the North Sea ahead of the referendum.

But by all means, convince yourself the SNP have lied for 40 years. I think I can just about see the cut of your jib.

Thanks Confidemus.

We talked about it already, but I will reiterate:

The £100 /month is based on the document by Scottish Government you so kindly provided a link to me yourself. It is about 5bn /year revenue from oil (number from SNP government report) and if you divide this by number of people in Scotland you get £1000 /year or £100 a month give or take. I did not make that up - Scottish government supplied the data.

I also replied to your post about the other article you provided as well - which rightly says that the value of oil to UK economics is indeed 35bn /year. Article says that this is value of all the oil contracts shared between 3000+ UK companies already.

As I pointed Scottish companies already get some of these money (probably a big share) anyway and the rest are just contracts to other companies in UK.

I can't see how this private money can be taken over by Scottish government short of a "socialist revolution" - can it?

As I understand an actual oil field might be developed by say a Norway company. The company then works with a number of British companies (some of the 3000+) who actually do the bits of work for them. Some of them are Scottish and some may be not.

I can't see how after independence we can suddenly make the original (Norway in my example) company to direct all of their business to Scottish companies exclusively.

I mean this is a private business decision and in a free economy it is out of our control really?

That's why I think the original distribution of £35bn worth of business will stay the same after Independence and will not make us better off.

I know this is greatly simplified but I think it is basically correct.

[chomp my root]

Thanks Confidemus.

We talked about it already, but I will reiterate:

The £100 /month is based on the document by Scottish Government you so kindly provided a link to me yourself. It is about 5bn /year revenue from oil (number from SNP government report) and if you divide this by number of people in Scotland you get £1000 /year or £100 a month give or take. I did not make that up - Scottish government supplied the data.

I also replied to your post about the other article you provided as well - which rightly says that the value of oil to UK economics is indeed 35bn /year. Article says that this is value of all the oil contracts shared between 3000+ UK companies already.

As I pointed Scottish companies already get some of these money (probably a big share) anyway and the rest are just contracts to other companies in UK.

I can't see how this private money can be taken over by Scottish government short of a "socialist revolution" - can it?

As I understand an actual oil field might be developed by say a Norway company. The company then works with a number of British companies (some of the 3000+) who actually do the bits of work for them. Some of them are Scottish and some may be not.

I can't see how after independence we can suddenly make the original (Norway in my example) company to direct all of their business to Scottish companies exclusively.

I mean this is a private business decision and in a free economy it is out of our control really?

That's why I think the original distribution of £35bn worth of business will stay the same after Independence and will not make us better off.

I know this is greatly simplified but I think it is basically correct.

It looks like you came to the wrong conclusions after Confidemus gave you a point in a certain direction In all honesty I'm not sure I'd be coming on here for steerage, its mostly haggling over the same points and no-one is going to convince anyone else here so it amounts to bickering basically. Oh and a fair bit of name calling too

I've only been posting in the Indie forum for a few days now but the novelty is starting to wear off.

[Confidemus]

I've only been posting in the Indie forum for a few days now but the novelty is starting to wear off.

Stick around, it's all sorts of fun. You p***k.

[chomp my root]

Stick around, it's all sorts of fun. You p***k.

I'm confused now, is the smiley because you're trying to be nice or is it guilt for calling me a p***k ?

[Confidemus]

I'm confused now, is the smiley because you're trying to be nice or is it guilt for calling me a p***k ?

Neither. And both.....

[Blaven]

You really are going for this £100 a month thing aren't you?

Perhaps you missed the other article I provided for you which said that Westminster have deliberately downplayed the amount of oil in the North Sea ahead of the referendum.

But by all means, convince yourself the SNP have lied for 40 years. I think I can just about see the cut of your jib.

This ROOT is a waste of time.