Lose?
Lose??
Never!!!
Seen the latest polls? Where did that 30% "NO" lead go?
http://wingsoverscotland.com/a-casual-grenade/
The momentum is all one-way.
Result will be a YES vote of around 60-40 (unless Osborne makes another day trip to lecture us on what we can and can't do again - in which case it could end up more like 70-30)
It must be excellent news for the Scottish banking system to hear you'll be leaving your vast wealth in a Scottish bank http://leonclifford.com/2014/02/19/woul ... ependence/Originally Posted by scottish-guy
Seen the latest polls? Where did that 30% "NO" lead go?
http://wingsoverscotland.com/a-casual-grenade/
The momentum is all one-way.
Result will be a YES vote of around 60-40 (unless Osborne makes another day trip to lecture us on what we can and can't do again - in which case it could end up more like 70-30)
Interesting opinion piece from Leon Clifford (who?) and I'm amused that you find it credible enough to quote it - but "opinion" is all it is and he's entitled to it however ill-informed it may be.
The minute I saw the words "Tartan Pound" I knew where he was coming from - a position of ignorance and arrogance, derived from subscribing to the little Englander mentality with its inherent racist overtones.
Since you see fit to quote him - what exactly are Leon Clifford's credentials? A search on Google brings up very little of substance and nothing that would encourage me to pay attention to a word he says. Where does he stand in the ranks of world renowned Nobel laureate Economists - like Sir James Mirrlees or Joseph Stiglitz (both of whom sit on the Scottish Government's Economic Advisory panel). Do tell.
Now, if you (like Mr Clifford) would rather "put your money" into a rump UK with ┬г1.6 TRILLION debt, an eye-watering deficit, a populist and racist immigration policy which limits potential growth of the Economy, a central bank which simply prints money to cover it all up, which stands to lose 30% of its lad mass and a minimum of 10% of its income along with one of the main assets that underpins much of the borrowing - than into an Independent Scotland which would be free of debt and in chronic surplus (assuming, as Leon Clifford opines, there will be no monetary union - thus consigning every rump UK business into paying transaction charges every time they conduct business in Scotland) I'd suggest you'd be cutting off your nose to spite your face. But feel free my dear.
You might also want to take into account that failing banks are the responsibility of the Country they TRADE in rather than where they originate from (hence the bailing out of Barclays by the USA Govt rather than the UK Govt) - which totally nukes the argument coming from your so-called expert. You might also want to remind yourself that these UK Banks failed under UK regulation, and don't forget the one that kicked it all off - Northern Rock - which the UK Govt never seems to mention, because it doesn't fit with the anti-Scottish propaganda.
SURFCREST - I was initially replying to Arsenal on this issue, but since Kommie has now entered the fray you might consider moving these exchanges to the Scottish Independence thread in Open Discussion forum. Wouldn't want to be accused of gatecrashing anybody's thread you know.
SG: I think you can put your case for an independent Scotland without resorting to anti-English gutter stuff.
Do you really believe that the UK will let Scotland go with all the oil and no debt because I for one don't. Alex salmand has stated that Scotland could be full members of The EU within 18 months. Not if The UK blocks their entry you can't. You need to accept that even with a 'yes' vote there will be considerable negotiations to be completed. Who for example is going to be your head of state?
The possibility of using the pound has been taken away whatever Salmand says. The president of the EU said there are real problems for Scotland to join the EU and if HE says it then.....At some point in the future it will be made clear that HM Queen Elizabeth II will not reign over an independent Scotland. Other things will follow.
First of all, I'm anti the UK state, not anti English/Welsh/or N.Irish
But let's address your specific points - on every one you are simply wrong:
1. "The UK won't let Scotland go" - The UK Govt is already committed through the Edinburgh Agreement to respect the result of the Referendum and, more importantly, to act in good faith to implement it in the event of a YES vote. In writing. Signed jointly by Cameron and Salmond. In front of TV cameras. Are you seriously saying they would renege on that?? Seriously??? It would precipitate an International crisis - Salmond would be off to the EU (5 million EU citizens denied their rights) and the UN (a democratically expressed desire for self-determination being thwarted), and world opinion would heap opprobrium on the UK. Absolutely no chance.
2. The UK blocking Scottish membership to the EU: Under the terms of the Edinburgh Agreement, Cameron can not do this and hey, THIS JUST IN, has today ruled it out:
http://news.stv.tv/politics/265247-d...eu-membership/
3. Head of State: Queen Elizabeth II will obviously remain Queen of Scots.
4. Using the Pound: sorry to burst your bubble, but even the Financial Times admits you can't stop us!
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/23adb32c-9...#axzz2uGsy2qmB
The pound sterling is a fully tradeable/convertable currency. We would prefer a currency union but (and this IS Plan B - you heard it here - SGT exclusive
5. Barroso (who is NOT the President of the EU - only of the Commission which is subservient to the Parliament) has been backtracking for the past week - where have you been. He made a major blunder in his statements and in comparing Scotland to Kosovo (to gain Cameron's support for his bid to be the next Secretary General of NATO when he leaves his current post - see below) and has been publicly rebuked by the European Commission and by his own deputy.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politi...eputy.23525055
As mentioned above, Barroso will not be in post when any negotiations take place, he demits office in this Autumn - so his (disingenuous) view is immaterial. More significantly, Dr Fabian Zuleeg, Chief Executive of the European Policy Centre gave evidence to the Scottish Parliament on 20th February. Even the UK state broadcaster was forced to admit "European expert says vetoing Scotland's EU membership 'very difficult' "
http://www.bbc.co.uk/democracylive/scotland-26272055
The Spanish Prime Minister has also said that Spain would not seek to veto an application from Scotland, before you toss that one in. So, the UK Govt have said they won't veto, and the Spanish have said they won't veto - so who do you imagine has a reason to use any veto?
And the over-riding factor - approx 5 million Scots are EU Citizens right now, and will continue to be EU Citizens immediately after a YES vote. As EU Citizens we have rights under ECHR laws which cannot be taken away as there is no mechanism to remove EU Citizenship (and no desire to create such a mechanism). The EU is about pragmatism and expansion, and a way will be found to accommodate Scotland - in the same way as 16 million East Germans suddenly became EU Citizens almost overnight, with a minimum of fuss.
6. Queen Elizabeth II is the Head of State of 16 sovereign countries including Tuvalu and St Kitts & Nevis. She is directly descended from Robert the Bruce and Mary Queen of Scots. Her mother was Scottish for Christ's sake! It is utterly inconceivable that given her sense of duty she would not wish to remain Head of State in an Independent Scotland. Given that the UK has no written constitution, there is nothing Cameron can do to prevent her accepting the role - nor will she.
NEXT!
:ymparty:
SURFY: Please move these exchanges to the existing Scottish Independence thread in Open Discussion forum.
SG. Everything you say is conjecture. But if you think Alex Salmand is the man to lead you to the promised land then be my guest and follow him wherever he wants to go. But please, tone down the anti-English rhetoric. This is not the place for it.
Why oh why is this on gay Thailand page. I come here to read about Gay Thailand not to enter into a political argument......there are many other sites I can do that
They are limited where they can post now that Baht Stop is defunked.
"In the land of the blind the one eyed man is king"
There was that poster not so long ago who claimed that a "gay" forum was no place to discuss politics. Yet here we are, happily discussing the future of a country best known for the fact that its menfolk wear skirts.
I do not know what Stevehadders is moaning about - as a blind man can see, I personally asked Surfy to move these exchanges out of the Topman topic - and he now has.
So...whats the problem?
Kommy - see above - and additionally, if you think there is no politics involved in gay issues, what have some of us spent 30/40 years marching for?
I'll ignore the slur about kilts, it's very poor and very cheap "Daily Mail" type shit.
Contrary to your assertion, I could post a very long list of Scots academics, innovators, scientists, business tycoons, who have made major contributions to the world in very many different areas.
Arsenal - How come when I assert something it's "conjecture", but when you make assertions you expect them to be accepted as cast-iron fact and get pissed off when you're challenged on them?
I don't believe there is anti-English rhetoric in anything I've said - see the first sentence of my last post.
People who take the least criticism of the UK state so personally, clearly have a chip on their shoulder (sound familiar?)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote