H_B Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 1/5th of the population in poverty is a success? Oh dear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFC90 Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Which banks would we have to move our money out of ? HBOS owned by Lloyds or RBS owned by the UK gov ? Anybody ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tubbs Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 http://www.scotsman.com/news/how-likely-would-run-on-banks-be-after-yes-vote-1-3511906 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Jack D Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Darling got stuck on the trident question. Saying he doesn't want it, then telling us why it's vital to jobs and the local economy, and moving it "just over" the border isn't the answer. Salmond missed a trick with that one, trident isn't a question just about jobs, it's a moral one and he could at least have asked him if he thought it was right to store these weapons within 40 miles of our largest city. Not half as stuck as he did on the extra powers question. Last night it was confirmed: We can use the pound We have 3 viable plan B's We have no confirmed useful additional powers from a No vote Re-financing Trident is a higher priority for the UK than bringing kids out of poverty Watching a Scottish Labour politician stand on a platform in Glasgow and defend Tory policies is absolutely tragic. Yes or No, I hope this abomination of a Political party get absolutely nowhere near any sort of power in this country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Oh and if you are interested, Panama is used in derogatory tones about what would happen if we are forced down the Sterlingisation route. Its so bad that 1) It is the fastest growing economy in Latin America with as near as makes no difference, full employment 2) It is regarded as a stable environment in which to do business 3) Its borrowing is 35% of GDP and falling (compared to around 100% in the UK) 4) They have had 5% growth in the last few years and expect that to grow to to 8/9% by 2016 5) They have found around 900 million barrels of oil in the Darien region and guess what? Everyone sees that as an asset instead of a burden! More than a quarter of the population live in poverty. Still silver linings and all that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Jack D Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Oh dear. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 More than a quarter of the population live in poverty. Still silver linings and all that. Despite the country’s strong economic growth, poverty levels remain high in Panama. Nationwide, according to 2008 data from the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), 28.6 per cent of the population is poor and 11.7 per cent is extremely poor. This is of course real poverty, not "I can't afford the next version of the XBox" poverty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Still, no matter what else has happened, at least H_B isn't seething about the utter bludgeoning Darling took last night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Without wanting to start the sames arguments again, I don't think you can make the moral argument while also advocating NATO membership. The financial argument is the easiest one to make against Trident from the SG's current position. Why not? 20 (I think) countries in NATO are non-nuclear. Why is hypocritical of Scotland to want to be a member? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thumper Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Bank runs today. Can't be long before "Social unrest". I wonder if Jim Traynor will be invited onto the television to talk about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Connolly Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 It doesn't answer my question. But yes, I think the rUK message could have been worded better and been more concilatory. I can understand the anger though the SNP's arrogance provoked. No, I think the BT campaign has been awful. Mired in fail from Day One and populated by incompetents. I don't think Darling has been a bad choice, thugh persoanlly I'd have gone for Charles Kennedy, assuming his health would allow. I think he is much more popular and a much better speaker. I'm not sure Salmond really has been the leader of the Yes campaign. I've seen Sturgeon a lot more than him. I think both have their weaknesses, but there's no question Salmond is the most talented of the SNP candidates. Again, Patrick Harvie is the most amiable and reasonable Yes politician, but the Greens aren't credible enough for him to get the gig. I'd agree with you on most of that. Patrick Harvie would certainly not have the effect on some people that Salmond has! I also think that Salmond not being so prominent in Yes would have damaged their campaign from a "Oh so he can't even back his own ideas" point of view. Far more damaging than not having Dave up front for BT. On the subject of Dave, I can see why he isn't there, but there is still the thought in the back of my mind that it is ridiculous that the PM is so hands off when 10% of the population and a whole load of assets might be about to disappear. I find myself wondering if Obama or any other leader would sit back and let someone else front it if one of his states wanted to leave. On your question that I thought I had answered- it was an arrogant stance which would have annoyed a lot of people whatever side it came from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 I'd agree with you on most of that. Patrick Harvie would certainly not have the effect on some people that Salmond has! I think that sums up the probelms Yes have in a lot of ways though. We are told it's not about the SNP... yet they continually parrot SNP policies even when they are comletely at odds with others in the borad church. For example, Harvie couldn't stand up and wax lyrical on a currency union he doesn't want, and he couldn't endorse NATO membership he is completely against. Yes is the SNP. They are lumbered with the SNP's policy decisions, for good or ill. it was an arrogant stance which would have annoyed a lot of people whatever side it came from. Yep, that's fair enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orlandoblue Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Listening to AS on Sky news and cringing. Telling the reporter that he can't go back to the debate and again refusing to state what the currency would be if there is to be no union. He was getting a bit tetchy which is not like him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Listening to AS on Sky news and cringing. Telling the reporter that he can't go back to the debate and again refusing to state what the currency would be if there is to be no union. He was getting a bit tetchy which is not like him. Tick tock sunshine, tick tock. The tide is rising. The momentum is building. Yes is coming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carl Cort's Hamstring Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Why not? 20 (I think) countries in NATO are non-nuclear. Why is hypocritical of Scotland to want to be a member? It's like saying "We think slavery is disgusting and abhorrent, but we'll join an organisation where the main powers are slave traders, and we don't mind if slave ships pop in every now and again. But we really strongly disapprove. Honestly." I understand why they're doing it, but it's not compatible with a moral objection to nukes. I've said it before, but if you actually genuinely object then do what New Zealand do, and don't allow any foreign warships to enter Scottish waters unless they state categorically that they're not nuclear armed. Anything else is window dressing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 It's like saying "We think slavery is disgusting and abhorrent, but we'll join an organisation where the main powers are slave traders, and we don't mind if slave ships pop in every now and again. But we really strongly disapprove. Honestly." I understand why they're doing it, but it's not compatible with a moral objection to nukes. Substitute slaves for "enemies of america" and this is what the UK government has already allowed to happen with rendition flights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRob72 Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Tick tock sunshine, tick tock. The tide is rising. The momentum is building. Yes is coming. I love a bet, but the odds still haven't changed much mate despite such a ' resounding win' for AS in last night's shambles of a debate!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 I love a bet, but the odds still haven't changed much mate despite such a ' resounding win' for AS in last night's shambles of a debate!! Whats that old saying "You can only piss on the cock your debating with" or something like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thumper Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 There are only so many undecideds to go around, and they didn't all decide last night just because Darling was blatantly unable to give an honest answer to any question. If I were a Unionist I'd be shitting myself if the needle moved even a fraction over the course of a day. It's only moving one way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orlandoblue Posted August 26, 2014 Share Posted August 26, 2014 Tick tock sunshine, tick tock. The tide is rising. The momentum is building. Yes is coming. I think you may end up disappointed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.