Meister Jag Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 (edited) Sorry to hear you'll be attempting to vote down this chance for Scotland to take responsibility for itself. One thing is for sure - as a people (collectively) we will get the government we deserve after the referendum. I personally feel we deserve better than the mediocrity we've had to endure up to now. (Sincerely.) Good luck! Thanks for the kind words. I take the CP line on this one. I see this as a bun fight between two neo-liberal factions with nothing new being on offer for the working man. Sorry, it's the way I see it. Old and cynical... but fear not; my frecking kids just cancelled out my vote! Both are happy to vote yes, have listened to my ramblings, I think see where I'm coming from, but want to give independence a go. I even posted their ballot papers for them... In terms of the press and what I believe. Very little actually... I was using this for illustrative purposes; but I've got to read something and I do like to make my own mind up; to add to the discussion and all that. Do I trust the SNP and the others in the yes campaign? No. Do I trust the yes no mob? No. Reasons as outlined. [sorry, just noticed my typo!] Edited September 15, 2014 by Meister Jag Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 For what it's worth I had a meeting with my Financial Advisor last Monday to review my pension plan.I was given the value of my pot and advised that it was now worth £2000 less than it was a fortnight ago all due to the possibility of a yes vote .It's a sad fact of life that the financial markets are no respecter of dreams and hopes On a serious point if your FA indicated the small fall in the stock market a few days ago was connected to our vote then I would change him/her.....the expected rise in UK interest rates, concerns over the US recovery , concerns over the ECB plans and the slowdown in china are the reasons for that Also note RBS shares still up 20% this year Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 I went to the lecture by Tom Devine at Glasgow Uni tonight ..... Absolutely mobbed c 400 there and it was excellent ....not sure it will be up on the GU website but well worth a watch....his description of Osbourne on the currency as demonstrating we had moved from a relationship based on partnership to one of master/servant was powerful.....and very entertaining.....the Uk as nearly failed state ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meister Jag Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 To get the Knuckle daggers to vote yes. You surely mean to get some of the electorate to vote NO? That is vote no to save the union; or yes to get rid of the royal family (as some seem to think might happen). But constitutionally, we can't get rid of the royals. Whatever way you look at it, sorry, she stays: corgis, big house, castles, flunkies, lands, probably still owns all the fishing rights, patronage - will still dish out gongs etc etc. Business as usual with a rush to knight a few worthies and hand out peerages to stick in any new second chamber that will be needed. Lord Gaz of Cathcart sounds good to me... Gaz, you're one angry man; speak to me on Friday and I'll explain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 Nadine Norris Tory MP today....' Why are we paying them to eat deep fried mars bars when we can't get a decent health service' Yes she really did say it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angry gaz Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 (edited) The act of supporting Thistle in Glasgow itself is a political statement so we don't need anymore. .............but vote yes. and any more pish from Meister Jag and I'll post the photo of you I took on Saturday. Edited September 15, 2014 by angry gaz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angry gaz Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 You surely mean to get some of the electorate to vote NO? That is vote no to save the union; or yes to get rid of the royal family (as some seem to think might happen). But constitutionally, we can't get rid of the royals. Whatever way you look at it, sorry, she stays: corgis, big house, castles, flunkies, lands, probably still owns all the fishing rights, patronage - will still dish out gongs etc etc. Business as usual with a rush to knight a few worthies and hand out peerages to stick in any new second chamber that will be needed. Lord Gaz of Cathcart sounds good to me... Gaz, you're one angry man; speak to me on Friday and I'll explain. When we have an independent parliament we can choose who we want as head of state.At the moment it's purely to appease sections of the electorate who would put having the Queen as head of state above any moral ,economic or social reasons for voting yes. Lord Gaz of Cathcart would be an excellent choice above any woman who only represents the top of an elitist class system that is right royally pumping us at the moment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BowenBoys Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 Nadine Norris Tory MP today....' Why are we paying them to eat deep fried mars bars when we can't get a decent health service' Yes she really did say it Brilliant. Link? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 Brilliant. Link? Not sure how to copy the link but it's in Bedfordshire On Sunday Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClydebankJag Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 You will never meet a wealthy gambler. Every startup business is a gamble. Every entrepreneur takes gambles. You achieve nothing by standing still. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClydebankJag Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2756338/Why-paying-eat-deep-fried-Mars-Bars-t-decent-health-care-Tory-MPs-demand-English-Parliament.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angry gaz Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 (edited) Brilliant. Link? COW http://www.dailymail...Parliament.html Edited September 15, 2014 by angry gaz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClydebankJag Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 On one hand they are subsidising us. On the other we are being greedy by wanting the money from oil. I'm so confused....... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 Devo plus it's a shoe in......not! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allyo Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2756338/Why-paying-eat-deep-fried-Mars-Bars-t-decent-health-care-Tory-MPs-demand-English-Parliament.html Wow. I thought that was a spoof until I found it through Google myself. That goes viral and it could turn a lot of people to yes. I've heard about the Mail but never read it. That's a disgrace. I can't believe they've published it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meister Jag Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 The act of supporting Thistle in Glasgow itself is a political statement so we don't need anymore. .............but vote yes. and any more pish from Meister Jag and I'll post the photo of you I took on Saturday. I'm not allowed to post anymore likes; so thanks for the response. (Even the forum is governed by quotas!) That photograph - smiling with a red and yellow yes poster held in front of me - has caused me no end of grief on Facebook. The number of "we knew you'd come round" comments have been too much for me to bear... hours of endless fun putting them right though. (Then again, time I'll never get back!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChewinGumMacaroonBaaaz Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 All factually correct although a rather moot point. There has never been a party in the history of UK politics who have been returned with 50% of the electorate. Only the likes of Robert Mugabe achieves such figures. Allegedly. Let's keep things proportional. The post I made earlier staked no claim that 50% of the electorate has been acheived previously, or should it be in order to govern. I made no question about the legitamcy of the current Holyrood executive or their right to call for a referendum. This is not an election. It is a single issue referendum with a yes/no choice. Ignore it if you like, but the facts you agree to be accurate suggest that a large part of "Team Scotland" did not think this debate was neccessary, illustrated by either not voting or voting for a party opposed to it. Now they are forced to make a huge choice whereby 50%+1 of fellow voters may decide against them or with them and change their nationality or not participate and let others choose for them. The likes of Mugabe would be rubbing his hands with joy at that opportunity. 80%+ turnout is predicted for friday. That is no gold star for political engagement in Scotland. Winning a debate makes one persuasive, not neccessarily correct or righteous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 I'm placing a great deal of faith in Nick Cleggs keeping his vow on more powers.....I've just spoken to some students.... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Devil's Point Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 I'm placing a great deal of faith in Nick Cleggs keeping his vow on more powers.....I've just spoken to some students.... I've noticed your wife has become pretty independent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 I've noticed your wife has become pretty independent. Yes ....your right Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meister Jag Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 When we have an independent parliament we can choose who we want as head of state.At the moment it's purely to appease sections of the electorate who would put having the Queen as head of state above any moral ,economic or social reasons for voting yes. Lord Gaz of Cathcart would be an excellent choice above any woman who only represents the top of an elitist class system that is right royally pumping us at the moment. Lord Gaz comment aside - and I'm sure Alex can arrange it for services to the party and HM will gladly oblige by bestowing you with whatever bauble you wish to choose from the catalogue; but she stays. Like it or lump it. She will even appoint the First Minister and there will no doubt be an arrangement for her to appoint the cabinet (as at Westminster where they're her Privy Counsellors i.e. special advisers on defence, treasury, work and pensions [D.Q. does she need advice on that???] etc.). Indeed, so secret is the Privy Counsellors oath that it was once a criminal offence to disclose what was in it! Similar oaths of allegiance to the Crown are taken by MSPs and even by the police. Think of the money mate and join the club. You won't be the first or the last; plus free food and bevvy! In that vein, I also presume that there will still be the Lord Lieutenants of 'here there and everywhere' appointed to represent her interests in matters mundane and not very interesting. But fair play to Her Maj', she's kept out of the debate and can't be accused of trying to influence anyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Jukebox Rebel Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 On one hand they are subsidising us. On the other we are being greedy by wanting the money from oil. I'm so confused....... In 2011/12, Scotland contributed £56.9 billion in tax revenue to the UK including a geographic share of North Sea oil. This is the equivalent of £10,700 per person and compares to £9,000 per person in the UK as a whole. The UK government and No Campaigners would rubbish this claim by the argument that the North Sea Oil revenues should be allocated "per capita" and not "by geographical share". They effectively classify the oil as a "shared asset" in their reporting figures, a skewed manipulation which creates confusion. Depending on what boundary line is used, Scotland has between 90-95% of the UK oil in its Waters. All talk of Scotlands oil riches, new discoveries and future potentials are to be hushed and disencouraged at every turn by the Telly and the Papers. You must dig for it yourself. They're trying to keep us docile and compliant. Luckily for us this is 2014, not 1974. We are aware. I don't think they're going to get away with it this time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Devil's Point Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 One of the great things about the forum is that I get to hear the views of oil industry experts every day. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Jukebox Rebel Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 The post I made earlier staked no claim that 50% of the electorate has been acheived previously, or should it be in order to govern. I made no question about the legitamcy of the current Holyrood executive or their right to call for a referendum. This is not an election. It is a single issue referendum with a yes/no choice. Ignore it if you like, but the facts you agree to be accurate suggest that a large part of "Team Scotland" did not think this debate was neccessary, illustrated by either not voting or voting for a party opposed to it. Now they are forced to make a huge choice whereby 50%+1 of fellow voters may decide against them or with them and change their nationality or not participate and let others choose for them. The likes of Mugabe would be rubbing his hands with joy at that opportunity. 80%+ turnout is predicted for friday. That is no gold star for political engagement in Scotland. Winning a debate makes one persuasive, not neccessarily correct or righteous. I did say you were correct. Just not sure why this argument is levied against the SNP or the Referendum campaign in particular. % of electorate share is a cross-party issue which affects every party proportionately - that's all I'm saying. The argument could be used to rubbish every result, ever. Incidentally, Team Yes were the only side to run an active voters registration campaign. Seemed to work very well - I think 97% registered is absolutely amazing myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Incognito Posted September 15, 2014 Report Share Posted September 15, 2014 COW http://www.dailymail...Parliament.html http://youtu.be/W9_nXlvY6Io 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.