Scottish Independence

[scottish-guy]

Fair points gaymandenmark.

Incidentally (and completely off-topic), I went to yesterday's March & Rally for Scottish Independence which was attended by over 20,000 on the streets of Edinburgh ...

http://www.scottishsundayexpress.co.uk/ ... -Edinburgh (http://www.scottishsundayexpress.co.uk/news/uk/431204/The-Yes-campaign-is-not-flagging-as-thousands-march-in-Edinburgh)

...and, amongst all the banners, I was pleased to notice a number of Danish supporters waving the Dannebrog (national flag).

:hello2:

[timmberty]

Fair points gaymandenmark.

Incidentally (and completely off-topic), I went to yesterday's March & Rally for Scottish Independence

not bad for someone whos always banging on about intergration

[scottish-guy]

I don't even know what "intergration" is - I'll try Amazon for a copy of "The Moron's Dictionary".

[timmberty]

yes please do ... read the chapter on scottish-guy. its really rather interesting, if not a bit misleading.

[joe552]

I think it's clear that when Scotland votes for independence next year, Thai banks will stop charging this 150Bt fee. It's bleedin obvious. :dontknow:

[timmberty]

oh i forgot to ask scotty, did you slip out round the back way when alex salmon spoke about fighting for independance ?

not so much brave heart ... more wet fart !

[scottish-guy]

"Fighting for Independence" (note the spelling) involves nothing more than marking a ballot paper with an X.

You'd find it easy enough yourself - I expect it's how you sign your name.

:violent3:

Now if you would kindly butt out - I made a remark to gaymandenmark - you were not addressed.

[arsenal]

The banks in China will charge you if you use one of their atms in another city from where your branch is.

If Scotland votes for independence it will be interesting to see if their economy mirrors the Scandanavian model or that of the Irish.

[timmberty]

a cross, no fighting !! no need for mel gibson is there, whos playing your part in this one ? mister bean.

[scottish-guy]

It's true that Ireland has had it's economic problems - but she has now emerged from her recession, has met all her obligations, and will rejoin the markets in January 2014. I also have to make the point that I do not recall any sign of the Irish, even in their darkest days, clamouring to give up their Independence and re-visit the bosom of the UK. The attitude of the Irish could be summed up as "It may have been shite, but at least it was our shite".

I also struggle to see any valid comparison between the Irish economy - which is a overwhelmingly a knowledge economy - and the Scottish economy which is rich in natural resources (not least an estimated ┬г1.5 TRILLION worth of oil) and which would help to rank an Independent Scotland 6th in the world on GDP per head (according to OECD figures) - compared to what would be the UK's 16th place (on the same figures).

When the oil finally runs out (and despite UK Treasury scaremongering there's no sign of that - capital investment in North Sea Oil is running at record levels and those guys know a damn sight more that agenda-driven UK ministers) then Scotland is well placed to be a world leader in renewable energies - on target to generate 100% of all our requirements from renewable sources by 2020 and already a net exporter of energy (unlike the UK). Food and Drink exports are at record levels and, with the explosion in Asian markets, will only rise. Inward investment in Scotland is also a success story and Scottish Development International are judged one of the most successful international development agencies in the world.

So, if I were you, I would worry more about how England will manage to maintain the pretence of being a world power when it is effectively bankrupt (debts exceed assets even now - imagine when the major asset is gone) - and where to stick the nuclear weapons that you'll be getting back (Wales or NI would be my guess). I say "England" because Wales and NI will have absolutely NO influence and best get ready for decades of right-wing Tory/UKIP ideology, including being out of Europe after England votes NO after 2015. Of course, that will suit Timmberty right down to the ground - he never liked those foreign johnnies anyway.

:occasion9:

*Thanks to jinks for splitting the thread :love4:

[timmberty]

do you want scotland to leave europe as well as the u.k. ?

once you get your independence are you hoping to stop unchecked immigration, or will all borders be coming down ?

might i add all this scotland is great 'chitter chatter' you relentlessly churn out is all well and good, but boy do you sound like a racist.

[joe552]

I agree with you, scottish-guy - we Irish were the architects of our own misfortune. Our bankers and property developers were crooks, but at least they were OUR crooks. I hope Scotland votes yes next year to independence.

[scottish-guy]

Thanks, Joe. Interestingly enough, Iceland (another country poked fun at by UK Ministers) has emerged strongly from their troubles. They implemented a different plan - instead of bailing out the Banks and allowing their criminal Bankers to continue to collect millions in bonuses - Iceland let the banks fail, jailed the worst of the bankers, wiped out all mortgages and personal debt, protected the poor and disabled, and started from square one. They are now doing pretty well according to the IMF. Here we protected the Bankers, and chose to cut the wages of ordinary workers and benefits to the poor and disabled to make them pay for the bail out.

To answer Timmberty - the policy of the Scottish Government is to remain within the EU. As such, it is not possible to "control" immigration from EU countries - these people have a right to live and work here, exactly as now.

With regard to non-EU immigration - don't be silly - of course there won't be open borders to all. However what we will have is an Immigration policy designed for the needs of Scotland (rather than the overcrowded South-East of England). Remember Scotland has 33% of the land mass of the UK but only 8% of the population - we have plenty of space (some of it is even habitable!) and we currently have lower unemployment than the UK as a whole. We want to grow the country and the economy - and if there are skilled workers from outwith the EU who can help us do that they will be welcomed.

:occasion9:

[timmberty]

so your boyfriend who has no skills, and there for no place in this great new world of yours ... you still trying to get him in?

8% of the population and less unemployment ... well done

[scottish-guy]

I see where you're coming from - when the intellectual argument goes over your head, it's time to get personal - right?

Don't you worry your empty little head about my BF - he attends University and is doing OK in his results. Whatever happens regarding his immigration status, I will deal with it - but thanks for your concern.

If I were you I'd just worry about your own (lack of) education - it's clear from your last sentence (if you can call it a sentence) that you must have been off school the day they did percentages - you clearly don't understand the concept.

Now, trot along and ask advice on what you've to say next.

[timmberty]

i wasnt getting personal, i just like to jump into the great big holes you leave in your arguments.
there is one thing so called clever people have, and its a lack of common sense. you might be able to spell the big words 'n stuff, sadly when somebody challanges your sort and you have to think outside the box ( i.e. not just quote the party line)
you struggle to do it ... its a bit like having a go at someone for being personal then attacking them for being stupid, you get the idea yet ?

[scottish-guy]

Don't flatter yourself - you didn't challenge anything I've written - you merely personalised the debate, like a little child, and now complain when you get some of your own medicine.

Now - if you'd like to point out some of these "holes" you see in my arguments, I'll gladly try to fill them in for you - but don't reduce the debate to cheap jibes about 3rd parties who are not here to defend themselves. Did I make any adverse comments on your father when you introduced him into a topic recently?

[timmberty]

your boyfriend is an example of how nuch rubbish you talk .. i.e.

With regard to non-EU immigration - don't be silly - of course there won't be open borders to all. However what we will have is an Immigration policy designed for the needs of Scotland

that would be one of the holes... like all good politicians, we dont allow people from non e.u. members into our country..
unless they happen to be cheap cleaners, or our boy/girlfriends.

and like all good politicians changing the subject might work with your own sort, sadly not with me .. i.e.

"Fighting for Independence" (note the spelling) involves nothing more than marking a ballot paper with an X.

You'd find it easy enough yourself - I expect it's how you sign your name.

nothing personal there huh ?

just out of intrest do you live in scotland ? or would that be giving away to much personal information.

[scottish-guy]

So, if I understand you correctly - you're saying we only allow non-EU immigrants into the UK if they are low-skilled lackeys?

Visited any NHS hospitals recently, have you? Been to your GP practice recently?

On the other matter - sure, if you want to get personal Timmberty I'll pay you back in spades - that comes with the territory. If you don't like it. don't start it.

Now, is there a sensible question you wish to ask?

:dontknow:

[timmberty]

please feel free to dish out as much shit as you like, i have seen how you lose it already, and i find it rather amusing to watch a grown man make himself look so silly.

'So, if I understand you correctly - you're saying we only allow non-EU immigrants into the UK if they are low-skilled lackeys?

what on earth does that mean ? i thought the exact oppersite was meant to be true.

i think it would be great if you get your independence, cause once all the free loading scumbags that you seem to love so much, get off the ferries at dover, they will be put on the first train to glasgow. see how long your new found wealth lasts then.

anyhow time to move on, you seem incapable of having a grown up conversation for to long.

[scottish-guy]

Toodle-oo then.

If I pass any "free loading scumbags" I'll give them your regards.

:hello2:

[latintopxxx]

U and the catalans are trhe same, selfish!!!! oh I'm rich so lets dump the poor cousins across the border, so much for the EU and all that crap. True colours do shine through after all.

[scottish-guy]

Well you are entitled to your opinion Latintopxxx - but I see it differently - I see it more as an issue of democracy and social justice.

On democracy - in my entire adult life Scotland has had the Government it voted for only TWICE - on every other occasion (5 times) a Conservative Government has been forced on us by English votes. No more!

Independence ensures Scotland always gets the Government she votes for.

On social justice - after 300 years of being told we are "better together" in the UK:

Men in some areas of Glasgow die sooner than if they lived in the Gaza strip!
Meanwhile in Kensington and Chelsea, men live to 82 years of age - just under an extra 30 years over some areas of the East End of Glasgow (54yrs). And guess who is generously allowed to contribute to the state pensions of these extended-life pensioners - workers who will never see their state pension or will be lucky to get if for a few paltry years. No more!

The UN says we have the most unequal society in Western Europe - as unequal as Nigeria and worse than Ethiopia. No more!

We have child poverty rates of 51% in Glasgow Springburn. No more!

Meanwhile all taxation and revenues flow from Scotland to the UK Exchequer - and less comes back than we pay in. No more!

So, I think we have been far from selfish - I think we have been very generous - but now it's time to stand on our own two feet and use the wealth of Scotland for the benefit of the Scottish people for a change.

As far the Catalans - well, I know about as much about their situation as you obviously do about the Scots - but I understand that polls show +80% want a Referendum and Madrid is denying them one. Maybe you should ask the Spanish Government if they understand the meaning of democracy.


[youtube:1a6bhsxm]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRQkKiFQIqw[/youtube:1a6bhsxm]

[joe552]

And what about the Basques, latintop?

[scottish-guy]

I don't think he wears them Joe

[arsenal]

Scottish Guy verses Timmberty :old: . It's like watching a punch up between a heavyweight boxer and a girl guide. Pick on someone your own (intellectual) size Scotty.

As for independence. Impossible to say exactly what will and won't happen. It's unlikely to be the utopia you describe but nor will it be disasterous. It will almost certainly be fine, just like most other western countries.
Also, please remember that England was a world power long before Scotland unwillingly joined the party and will continue to be so long after you have left, if you choose to do so. You can be pro-independence without resorting to anti-Englishness.
The oil reserves are not proven and should not be counted upon in any future financial calculations. What is more, some of the figures you quote are wildly innacurate. This is from The Daily telegraph dated 30 Aug 2011.

In Scotland, the Government spent ┬г10,212 per person on average last year тАУ ┬г1,624 more than in England.

The revelation prompted calls last night for Ministers to review ScotlandтАЩs controversial funding formula, which sees families south of the border forced to subsidise more generous public services enjoyed by their Scottish counterparts.

The figures reveal that the gulf in spending rose by more than 15 per cent last year, and the gap is expected to widen further over the next four years.

Scots are entitled to a range of publicly-funded services free of charge including university tuition, long term elderly care and prescriptions, while English families incur fees for the same services.

It costs every family south of the border around ┬г420 a year to subsidise these services.


It isn't all going to be wine and roses Scotty, but in your heart, I'm sure you already know that.

[scottish-guy]

Hi Arsenal

Well, I don't think we shall ever actually agree - but I'm dismayed you think that anything I have said on this thread is "anti-English", as I don't believe I have said anything that remotely falls into that category.

As you rightly point out there can be no certainty over future events. The UK Government can't tell us what will happen in the future and neither can any Scottish Government. They irony of this though is the constant Unionist demands (within Scotland) for "certainty" when they themselves can give none.

Scotland has never had any pretensions of being a "world power" and that is why one of the first acts of an Independent Scotland will be to kick out the nuclear weapons of mass destruction placed on the Clyde by the UK Government (and that's not anti-English, that's just stating a fact), and place a constitutional ban on the future siting of such weapons (highly unlikely anyway). Now, if only the UK had similarly abandoned her pretensions, we would not have been embroiled in illegal wars recently.

As for figures - well we can bandy them about all day but all the ones I have quoted come from the OECD, so they are unbiased. You mention specifically future oil revenues and I would (respectfully) advise you to be very careful about accepting UK Govt figures on this as they have been proven to have consistently, deliberately, and systematically LIED about oil reserves, revenues, and forecasts since the 1970s - but don't take my word for it and certainly don't take the Daily Telegraph's word for it :

http://news168.co.uk/index/healey-admits-we-lied-about-oil-wealth
http://www.newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-news/7408-labour-party-lied-over-true-worth-of-north-sea-oil-admits-former-chancellor
http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-uk-underplayed-value-of-oil-1-2937003
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/scottish-independence-blog/2013/may/29/scottish-independence-oil-healey

You may also like to read the UK Govt report by Professor Gavin McCrone (a leading UK Govt economist) prepared in the 70's and suppressed for almost 40 years by the UK Govt until the SNP forced its release under FOI legislation.

http://www.oilofscotland.org/MccronereportScottishOffice.pdf

Here is the reason it was suppressed - whilst the Tory Govt of the day was telling us the Oil was already running out (40 yrs ago) MrCrone predicted that North sea oil revenue would have given an independent Scotland one of the "hardest currencies in Europe with the exception of the Norwegian kronor" and an "almost perpetual" large tax surplus that would be so large as to be "embarrassing", making Scotland "as rich as Switzerland". On this basis, it went on to say that officials advised government ministers on how to take "the wind out of the SNP sails". The incoming Labour administration classified the document as secret over fears it could give a further boost to the SNP's policy of Scottish independence.

Ok, that's historical - but the lying has never stopped, it continues to this day (only it's a little more sophisticated now). For example when it comes to the value and volume of North Sea oil. The oil price forecasts currently used to downplay the future value of the oil reserves and revenues are based on projections from the UK Office of Budget Responsibility. These forecasts are well below the current price and also far less than is being predicted even by the UK Government and international agencies.тАк

The OBR are currently forecasting a price of $92 per barrel of oil in 2017. But other forecasts for that year see WestminsterтАЩs Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) predict around $130 a barrel, and the OECD is expecting $150 or more per barrel.тАк Meanwhile investment in the North Sea reaches record levels - so what does that tell you? It tells me that International energy giants (who do not have a political axe to grind) certainly do not invest at record levels in a diminishing asset. Fact is there is at least 50 years of oil reserves left and I would far rather take the OECD's forecasts before figures from a Government which has been proven to have lied for 40 years. I also find it curious that we are told that Scotland "must not rely" on oil revenues. I would counter this by saying "Isn't that exactly what the UK govt is currently doing do underwrite foreign debts of FOUR TIMES GDP?" How come is perfectly OK for the UK Govt to rely on oil revenues but somehow Scotland should not take account of them?

Now, none of that information I've given you is intended to be "anti - English" and I am personally not "anti - English" myself - I have many friends who know English people (that was a wee joke!). What I am is anti -UK and I reserve my worst disdain not for the English but for those Scottish MPs who have allowed their own vested interests to come before the wellbeing of their country. They are so used to lying they don't even think about it any more.

Now, let's move on to those expenditure figures - yes, more is spent per head Scotland - and that is widely publicised, but what is not publicised and what you need to dig to find out is that more is also raised per head. In fact, for each of the last 30 years, Scotland has been a net contributor to the UK - getting back less than she contributes. I don't have a problem with that - I only have a problem when people are misled into thinking it's the other way round. Similarly I also have a little bit of a problem when people in England (yes, I said it!) complain about free prescriptions, free personal care, free University tuition fees etc - IT'S OUR MONEY we are spending on these items - out of the block grant we receive from Westminster (less than we pay in remember). If people elsewhere want these things, demand them from your representatives - don't moan and groan at us (infact - moan at Wales, they have free prescriptions too!)

Of course I realise that if Independence comes not everything will be perfect. Scotland will not be transformed into Shangri-La. We will (initially at least) still have some of the worst poverty levels in Europe, the worst health outcomes in Europe. What we will gain is the opportunity to use the wealth of Scotland for the benefit of the people of Scotland. And if we don't take that opportunity, and if instead we vote "No", we will never have the opportunity again and we shall be (and shall deserve to be) the laughing stock not only of Europe but of the World - "all talk and no kilts"

:hello2:

[timmberty]

Scottish Guy verses Timmberty :old: . It's like watching a punch up between a heavyweight boxer and a girl guide. Pick on someone your own (intellectual) size Scotty.

this is what i love about you arsenal, you tell him what a great interlect he is, then disagree with everything he says.

if i wanted an intellectual conversation i wouldnt bother having it on a gaythailand forum. forums like this are for sharing things about gay thailand etc etc. even if you've not been here for 2 years you can look on the net for a bar showing a game of football and get called a legend by someone who couldnt be bothered to do it themself.

but i guess i could do what you did and have a look at a few different websites about scotland, rip it off and call myself clever.
but id rather not, cause it just dont impress anyone other than a s..o like you.

i do wonder tho have they already had the vote ? i would have thought someone as clever as you wouldnt be saying its not going to be all wine and roses would atleast wait until the ballot boxes have been filled and emptied.
i dont care one way or the other as to how the vote goes, but if they dont get independence i do look forward to scotty post on the subject.

one thing i must point out .. grrr i said i wouldnt ..

scotty you say you want to see scottish money spent on scottish people.. what a good idea, do tell me then why you think english people who want to see english money spent on english people are racists when they object to billions of english tax payers money being spend on benifits for eastern europeans, somalians etc etc. many of whom shouldnt even be in the country.
many of whom wouldnt be the the country is it wasnt for the bleeding hearts who think leaving a cat behind would deprive them of their human rights. an extreme example maybe, but it happened.

[scottish-guy]

Thats the trouble with some people - they only see what they want to see.

Because I'm not a racist, I very deliberately did NOT post (as you allege) that I wanted Scottish money to be spent on Scottish people. That would indeed be a racist comment, and one I would therefore never make.

What I actually posted was:


... What we will gain is the opportunity to use the wealth of Scotland for the benefit of the people of Scotland.:

"The people of Scotland" is everyone who lives here - irrespective of their race, creed, or colour.

And yet you invite comparison with what YOU posted - so let's compare what I have posted with what YOU have posted:


.. english people who want to see english money spent on english people ....

You then compound it with:


....billions of english tax payers money being spend on benefits for eastern europeans, somalians etc etc. many of whom shouldnt even be in the country....

And you are seriously trying to say that's the same as I posted? I'm afraid it's quite a different message altogether, a quite sinister one.

Now go away and get more advice on what to say next - and please try to provide something that stands up to scrutiny next time.

:occasion9:

[timmberty]

sorry i dont need advice on what to say, i say what i mean... and i also say it so it is what i mean it to mean.
i dont feel the need to say somethng that can be interpretated anyway you like.
just who are the people of scotland ? anyone who lives in scotland .. so you must then agree that any scottish people, say someone like sean connery, who doesnt live in scotland, so in your eyes is no longer a person of scotland, has no right to vote for independence as he would like to, and seems to think he has the right to do so?
or can someone who you claim to be a non person of scotland have the right to vote ?

and you are racist, lets not forget you are anti u.k. so that makes you anti english, welsh and n.irish.

we can all jabba shyte and pick out bits to change around, like you say those lying politicians do it without even having to think about it.
but i guess being anti u.k. isnt the same as being anti anything cause thats not really what you said, even tho you did say it, its not what you meant to say, even tho you did say it.
vote scotty, the party that doesnt know its arse from its elbow.

oh before i forget, i also said i wasnt over keen on tax payers money going to african schools, now after you slagged me off for saying that, am i right in thinking you have now changed your mind, as im sure the scottish tax payers money which you want to be used for the people of scotland, would have no place being sent to africa!!
the joy of words huh, either say what you mean or dont bother.

[scottish-guy]

Where to start?

1. Yes "the people of Scotland" means everybody who lives here - I've already told you that.
2. No, people who do NOT live here ought not to have "the wealth of Scotland" spent on them - I've already told you that. International aid excepted.
3. No, the people who do NOT live here ought not to have a vote - and they won't! The franchise in the Independence Referendum is determined by residency alone. Hence, Sean Connery (whom you cite) will not have a vote whereas an English person who lives in Scotland will (and quite rightly).
4. Being "anti-UK" cannot be racist - the UK is not a race - hello! - it is a man-made entity and I am against the entity rather than the nationalities within it.
5. I am a Nationalist - I am pro-Scottish. If I was a racist I would be against people who shared my nationality but who were of a different race or ethnicity - you know - like YOU are.

Now, the last time you made a fool of yourself I generously told you to go get some advice and come back with some comments which stood up to scrutiny - but you've failed again, and I think I know why:

I suggested that you ought to go off and consult your mentor.
But it's clear you misunderstood me - obviously you went off and consulted somebody mental-er.

However, I'll give you brownie points for perseverance. To borrow Arsenal's analogy, you're like the boxer who's already been on the canvas several times but keeps struggling to his (shaky) feet because he doesn't know when to throw in the towel.

And I'll give it only a very short time before you re-appear with more barely literate outpourings. Despite saying you were leaving 3 comments ago (I count the last comment as actually being 2 comments because you went back and added more drivel to it)

:occasion9:

[timmberty]

my drivel isnt any worse than your drivel ...
the is no difference between being a nationalist and a racist.
still im glad to know you are happy to get out of this man made entity called the u.k. but are more than happy to remain within the man made entity called the e.u.
bty who is my mentor?

oh added on bit.. people who live in scotland, i.e. people of scotland, the ones who are there as illegal immigrants, they get to vote too being as they live there ? or is it racist to stop them from doing so ?

p.s. you almost forgot to add the ' except for international aid' woulda been a bit racist.
what is the snp's view on international aid ?

[scottish-guy]

No difference between a Nationalist and a Racist?

Are you sure?

Was Thatcher a racist then? In your expert opinion.

To answer your point on illegal immigrants voting in the Referendum - what an idiotic question! They're hardly likely to be on the Electoral Roll.

:occasion9:

[timmberty]

the u.k. and the e.u. ??? come on stop answering the easy ones ... i throw them in to make you feel clever ..
but as always you only answer the bits you want to.
explaine the difference between the u.k. and the e.u.?

and illegal immigrants .. no they aint on the electrol roll, cause they shouldnt be there ... you might make out you are happy for tax payers money going to them, but somehow i dont think you will be winding down your window to give the scum bags money at the traffic lights when they make the screen filthy.

[scottish-guy]

What's the difference between the UK and the EU?

You're peddling the UKIP argument.

Anyone who believes that Brussels would exert greater control over an independent Scotland than Westminster currently does also believes that a person who joins a darts club loses more personal autonomy than a granny whose arm was twisted into giving power of attorney to an avaricious relative who proceeded to raid the bank account and flog off the family inheritance before putting arsenic in her Ovaltine.

The only difference between Scotland under Westminster and a whodunnit is that we already know whodunnit. We don't need Hercule Poirot to tell us it was Westminster.

1. Brussels does not collect all UK taxation and then decide how much it's going to give back. Westminster does that to Scotland.

2. Brussels doesn't even set the rate of VAT, Westminster does that.

3. Brussels doesn't have the power to insist we keep nuclear warheads on the Clyde. Westminster does that.

4. We wouldn't have had to ask Brussels for permission to regulate our broadcasters, but we had to ask Westminster's permission to set up a Gaelic language TV channel, because Conservative MPs from Surrey need to be consulted before punters in Portree can watch Gaelic soaps.

5. Brussels wouldn't have been able to commit a Scottish defence force to the invasion of Iraq, but Westminster tells us what countries we'll go to war with (illegally).

6. Brussels doesn't have the power to tell us how much the state pension for the elderly would be or what administrative hoops disabled people have to go through in order to get benefits, only Westminster does.

7. If the UK (via Cameron) goes ahead with plans to hold a referendum on leaving the EU, there would be an outcry if Brussels decided it would determine the timing and question of the vote, yet that's exactly what Westminster wanted to do in Scotland.

Is that enough? Want more?

Here's some - you asked what was the SNP policy on International Aid:

http://www.snp.org/media-centre/news/2012/oct/scotland-will-be-leader-tackling-world-issues

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/snp-aims-to-make-an-independent-scotland-a-world-leader-in-aid.19897958

When you've digested that - could you please answer my previous question - do you think Thatcher was a racist?

:occasion9:

[timmberty]

no thats fine ... the e.u. is a man made entity that you like because in your opion would favour scotland
whilst the u.k. is a man made entity that you dislike because in your opion it doesnt favour the scots.
so the fact its man made really isnt the point what-so-ever, its more about what you will get.

bty, you have told me i dont have a clue what im talking about .. well you are right not only do i not know i also dont care,
i just knew you wouldnt be able to let go, like a rottweiler. but thanks for the laugh.
so easy to wind up.. good luck with your vote win or lose, i shall be many miles away from this spetic isle.
just for you :occasion9:

sadly i just had to look .... HUMZA Yousaf, the man who would be Scotland's foreign secretary.... local lad? now i know why you are so proud to be scottish !!!!! :party

[Surfcrest]

I also struggle to see any valid comparison between the Irish economy - which is a overwhelmingly a knowledge economy - and the Scottish economy which is rich in natural resources (not least an estimated ┬г1.5 TRILLION worth of oil) and which would help to rank an Independent Scotland 6th in the world on GDP per head (according to OECD figures) - compared to what would be the UK's 16th place (on the same figures).

When the oil finally runs out (and despite UK Treasury scaremongering there's no sign of that - capital investment in North Sea Oil is running at record levels and those guys know a damn sight more that agenda-driven UK ministers) then Scotland is well placed to be a world leader in renewable energies - on target to generate 100% of all our requirements from renewable sources by 2020 and already a net exporter of energy (unlike the UK). Food and Drink exports are at record levels and, with the explosion in Asian markets, will only rise. Inward investment in Scotland is also a success story and Scottish Development International are judged one of the most successful international development agencies in the world.


Unfortunately, if you were to closely study the Oil issue as you present it (In terms of Scottish wealth) you are in a unique location in terms of marketing. It would be difficult, if not problematic to believe that from a geographical stand point your most likely best customer (in the event of independence) would not be.....England. And because they most likely have a sizeable investment in the projects in Scotland already...with other international firms...the best you could hope from the resource would be tax revenues and unfortunately again...these percentages are based capped or limited by the international price of crude oil.

Next, with respect to oil prices....is that we are currently surfing on yesterday's demand for crude, with existing reserves. Todays, or more importantly tomorrow's demand will take into consideration all of the adjustments that have been made in primarily the auto sector since 2008 to reduce consumption. Maybe I am wrong, but I see demand for crude and especially prices to stall...if not fall somewhat over the coming years. Unless you can remain competitive for the Chinese demand for oil or refined products through the Grangemouth Refinery, I don't see the most promising market for you. Even though Grangemouth is quite an aging refinery (2nd oldest in the UK), heavy Chinese investment in the past 5 years...combined with the fact that the refinery only really serves Scotland, Ireland and North England (With the exception of refined chemicals going to China Petrolneas), means some significant re-investment is going to be required

And so, while the resource...where it sits represents a promising future for Scotland in terms of future revenues and economic spin-offs (Especially Aberdeen)...it will require refineries and a transportation infrastructure to get it to market. All of these costs will off-set the direct benefits...putting money in the pockets of the multi nationals, such as China, Germany, Canada (Suncor)...and indeed England.

This whole independence question is not unique to the UK or even Spain. We too struggle with the very same question in terms of our French province Quebec. Certainly, both Canada and Quebec realize the tremendous costs and economic uncertainty for both of us if we head down the path of Quebec Independence someday. Quebec, believes they have the upper hand in terms of the hydro electric impact they provide to the region and indeed to the North American power grid. What they sometimes fail to see is that this market was created by the government they want to succeed from and that investment into these projects didn't necessarily come from Quebec.

From Scotland's independence, I can see there might be quite some debate as to who really has the rights to North Sea Oil, once independence happens...which will only create uncertainty for investors in both Scotland and the UK...which could very well make this dream of independence all the more unaffordable.

Where we in Canada have found the most success with this question is in allowing Quebec to feel more a part of our National Government, to feel represented in the say of the greater good of the country, rather than to remain focused on their own plight. We, the rest of the country does indeed spend a great deal of money appeasing the French....making decisions for the good of their economic health...than say what is good for Canada (And some of these decisions were quite wrong), but it was for the good of our combined economic health...both Canada and Quebec.

For many of us, especially in the business sector....realize that if we did not make these sacrifices...for the sake of our own less advantaged family member (Quebec), that our own economic fortunes would be adversely affected...so it remains, the right thing to do. Hopefully, whether it's the Scots, or the Basques or the Catalans...or even Taiwan, to a certain extent....will see it that way.

Any good investor wouldn't put all of his / her chips into one Sector, oil. Investment has to be diversified to create real long term wealth, jobs and tax revenues. If Scotland really believes she has the potential to go it on her own, beyond the oil she sits above....then let's show the world the bigger vision!

Surfcrest

[scottish-guy]

Bye Timmy.


[attachment=0:225jlglr]timmyonthecanvas.jpg[/attachment:225jlglr]

[timmberty]

very good .. after 2 years you finally made me laugh ..
a solid left hook from, HUMZA Yousaf.

[scottish-guy]

Thanks for that Surfcrest - only in the minds of the UK Govt and SGT admins does a trillion dollar national asset become a liability.


:sign5:

[Surfcrest]

They implemented a different plan - instead of bailing out the Banks and allowing their criminal Bankers to continue to collect millions in bonuses - Iceland let the banks fail, jailed the worst of the bankers, wiped out all mortgages and personal debt, protected the poor and disabled, and started from square one. They are now doing pretty well according to the IMF. Here we protected the Bankers, and chose to cut the wages of ordinary workers and benefits to the poor and disabled to make them pay for the bail out.

Again, from Iceland's example...I can't see allowing the banks to fail would create any long term stability to investor confidence. The instability in the banking Sector over here in North America is a shining example of that and the continuing sluggish response of the American economy to the last 2008 downturn. If you actually study the North American banking sector, or indeed the entire banking Sector in the Americas...it has actually been the Canadian banks that have done well through our regulatory system....vs the US, "anything goes" methodology.

TD, a big player across the US Eastern seaboard is actually an acronym for the Toronto Dominion Bank. Any if you've been anywhere south of the US, you'll know Scotiabank or as it has always been know, The Bank of Nova Scotia.

From a business perspective...while many citizens might not agree, the bonus structure is a necessary requirement to attract the right talent and to keep them there. You can't be a strong company without strong people resources steering the ship or bringing in revenue. Are the bankers really criminal, or is it really a crime as to how certain countries have allowed their banking structures to go unregulated for so long? Sorry, but I can only blame the politicians for creating this mess, not the bankers with their bonuses.

Surfcrest

[Surfcrest]

Thanks for that Surfcrest - only in the minds of the UK Govt and SGT admins does a trillion dollar national asset become a liability.

:sign5:

I wouldn't say it's a liability, but more so the expanded version of the little boy who finds a dollar in his pocket, thinks he's rich and sets his site on leaving home.
Take this from your pals across the pond who have more oil than we'd ever know to do with, but who keep our feet firmly planted on the ground.

Surfcrest

[timmberty]

surfcrest i agree with you about the bankers .. just imagine if you didnt pay out those billions in bonuses .. you could end up with people who had no clue about banking .. they could have bought countries to their knees ...
for sure you need people who know what they are doing.

[scottish-guy]

I don't think we need to obsess on the oil - the revenues make up only around 15% of the Scottish economy - but it is a major asset.

What's important is have control over future revenues - which for the last 40 years have been completely squandered.

Norway did not waste her windfall and now has an Oil Fund worth some ┬г450 billion - the largest sovereign wealth fund in the world - ┬г90,000 for every man, woman, and child. What does the UK have to show for 40 years of revenue? Fuck all - it's all been blown.

It's a finite resource - we need control NOW or the remaining revenues will be similarly squandered.

[giggsy]

Ha Ha Reading this reminded me of a Catherine Tate sketch, perhaps we could re-make it with Beachlover as the grandson, Timmberty as Nan , Scottishguy as himself and Monty as Bombay Mary.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMDg4oVAR8E

[scottish-guy]

I took this photo of Christianpfc at the rally - isn't he cute in his lederhosen.....

[attachment=0:4vqt6j76]rally 032 - resize2.JPG[/attachment:4vqt6j76]

So those who pay taxes in Scotland but have no UK citizenship (because they're EU nationals, for example) have no right to vote even though the decision will undoubtedly impact them. I wonder what the American colonists ("no taxation without representation") would make of that.

[scottish-guy]

No, it's very fair and simple - it's basically a residency qualification - so, if you live in Scotland, are 16+, and are on the voters roll, you have a vote in the referendum.

The only exceptions (nationality-wise) would be persons who are non-British, non-EU, non-Commonwealth, and non British Overseas Territories or Crown Dependencies. People of at least 100 different nationalities will be eligible to vote provided they are resident in Scotland. Even the English.

But not Americans?

[scottish-guy]

You're correct - Americans (who elected George W Bush not once but twice) are excluded.

:kap:

[daf4]

I love the union and being brought up in the thatcher era really think she was the greatest ever PM we had

[scottish-guy]

I think it's great that you're allowed a computer, but tell me - do you have a release date or are you in there until the Doctors say otherwise?

:hello2:

[giggsy]

I am not usually into politics especially Scottish politics but could I ask, what if Scotland voted to leave the union and gain independence and in a couple of years a few of the islands got together and decided they wanted independence from Scotland. They would also I presume want a 12 mile radius around their island which would perhaps take in half the oil and gas platforms in the north sea. Would independent Scotland allow these islands to have a vote for independence? or those islands could want to re-join the UK. There seems a lot of questions that have not been even asked yet. One thing for sure is there would never be a labour government in the UK again. I blame this mess on the Labour party who for some reason thought it would be a good idea if they gave Scotland and Wales their own parliaments. It seems to me if you give 'em an inch they take a mile. But like I said I am not really into politics.

[scottish-guy]

I am not usually into politics especially Scottish politics...

Obviously.

A mish-mash of hypothetical nonsense, which makes about as much sense as suggesting the Isle of Wight will declare UDI next Tuesday.

I think you should give up your attempts at political analysis and just stick to those racist jokes you like to quote - after all it was my reply to you on another thread which prompted your post above. So, just to keep you happy I've posted what must undoubtedly be one of your favourite Bernard Manning jokes below.


:ymparty:


[attachment=0:1dxhyben]hmm.jpg[/attachment:1dxhyben]

[scottish-guy]

For anybody dropping in from the Vietnamese/Cambodian Bar Boy thread - where Old Git derailed the thread to stick his unwanted nose in to the matter of Scottish Independence.... he then sent me a PM which I wont reproduce (as its a PM).

However, it's fair to assume he disagreed with me on everything I had said - and posited that all the Oil and Gas thats left in the North Sea is basically just a burden now, with Scotch whisky about as popular as a fart in a spacesuit :D

Below is my response to him (which I CAN reproduce since I wrote it):

Hello

1. It would be either a very brave or a very foolish person who would predict what the Oil price will be in a year or two - never mind what it'll be forever more as you seem to be able to do with absolute certainty. Perhaps you read Tarot cards and do crystal ball predictions in your pub in between selling all that Irish whisky?

Furthermore, now that your glorious Union has squandered every penny of the North Sea bonanza (quite unlike Norway which has an oil fund worth getting on for £900,000,000 and therefore is to an extent immunised against oil price fluctuations) I'd suggest it ill behoves you as an advocate for said Union to tell us in Scotland how poor we'd be in future now that you've fucked us over on it for 40 years AND covered it up (read McCrone Report). The very best case scenario is that the UK has taken 100% of any revenues and given us less than 10% back

2. Moving on to whisky - again, are you seriously trying to suggest that Scotland gets to keep ALL of the taxes raised on Whisky? You say the revenues are "accounted for in Scotland" and we could have an argument about that - but we both know where +90% of them end up.

In both cases what you have failed to mention is that whilst anybody can argue about statistics - the undeniable FACT is that in an Independent Scotland whatever the future revenues from Oil or Whisky (and Scotland is dependent on neither of them) - we'd be keeping the lot - NOT less than (at the very most) the 10% you deign to give us back.

Finally, I'm well aware of the fact that in UK pubs Scotch whisky is unfashionable - but it's extremely popular all over the world and I'm sure you know this

As to UK sales, I'll hazard a guess (and I don't have figures on this) that most whisky consumed in the UK is not in fact sold in pubs anymore. Main reasons I'd suggest being a) the high price of drinks in UK pubs generally (publicans raking in £80-120 from a litre, which people can buy for £18 in a supermarket), b) the smoking ban changing the nature of the public house offering generally, and c) the fact that younger drinkers are far more likely to drink Vodka or other spirits. No doubt you can tell me different of course because you're clearly an expert on everything under the sun.

[Nirish guy]

Perhaps you read Tarot cards and do crystal ball predictions in your pub in between selling all that Irish whisky?

I think you'll find that it was probably Irish Whiskey he might have been selling though :-p

[Old git]

1) You don't need tarot cards to predict the oil price. For a long time the oil industry only chased liquid oil reserves - they knew full well about tar sands and oil shales, and the fact that those reserves dwarf the global stock of liquid oil, but also knew that only a sustained period of high oil prices would create the impetus to develop the technologies necessary to extract non liquid reserves.

That Rubicon has now been crossed, and it appears that extraction costs are significantly lower than expected. Given the enormity of those reserves, and their wide geographic distribution, the oil price is no longer dependant on the whim of the Saudis, so forward price prediction is vastly safer now than it was a decade ago. What is also apparent is that difficult offshore oil fields such as the North Sea are very unlikely to ever yield significant revenue again.

So the Norwegians have put 900 mil away for a rainy day? - I don't know if you're right or wrong, but that's a chicken feed sum in the overall scheme of things.

And how typical, 309 years after the Act of Union, when Scotland begged a union with England because (through their own vain incompetence) they were broke - you now cry unfair over the thirty odd years when Scotland managed to actually make a financial contribution - and entirely by luck rather than judgement I might add..

2) There is no credible argument to support the notion that tax revenues attributed to Scotland significantly understate the real deal - most tax generation from Whisky is in the form of Income tax and NI paid by distillery workers, and that will certainly be correctly attributed. Remember that exports carry no home duty..

The decline in Scottish whisky sales in English pubs cannot be put down to home consumption - it's a relative thing - Bourbon styles of Whisky are now vastly more popular than traditional ones in the UK, and you can't bank on that trend not migrating to export markets. The current boom enjoyed by the Scottish distillers is in no small part fuelled by the notoriously faddish Chinese market - a market that created a boom in Bordeaux that is now fizzling out as fast as it started.

All Scots should remember the classic line from Hilaire Belloc:

"Never to let a'hold of nurse, for fear of finding something worse"

[arsenal]

900 million isn't that much. We spent more than that on the Dome and another 400 million on the Scottish Parliament. However I personally do believe that the price of oil and other fossil fuels will drop for two reasons. Newer (and in fact older) energy sources such as wind, water and sun are moving forward quite rapidly in their use and technology. Secondly I think that fossil fuels are coming to the end of their usefulness because they probably can't do what we (mankind) want them to do.

My final word on Scottish Independence. It's all fine telling the world you want to be like Norway but one glaring problem with Norway is that they can't defend themselves so were virtually taken over and bullied by Britain in WW1 and invaded by Germany in WW2. And if WW3 kicked off they would be highly vulnerable again as indeed would an independent Scotland. I am happy to hear any argument against my reasoning apart from WW3 won't happen. Because it will.

[fountainhall]

So the Norwegians have put 900 mil away for a rainy day?
Wrong. Norway's sovereign wealth fund from oil revenues is close to $900 BILLION!

[arsenal]

Giggsy has actually made an awesome point. The argument that Scottish is using for another referendum (ie: that the Scots voted to remain in the EU) is the same one that Orkney could use to secede from Scotland and remain as part of the UK. Orkney voted 10004 to 4883 to remain as part of the UK in the referendum. Bloody good point Giggsy, which I am sure that Scottish, being the democratic flag bearer he is will no doubt concede. That oil and those fish aren't looking quite so tartan clad now are they Scottish.