Independance Referendum

[Jaggernaut]

why havent the yesvote/snp put all this info?

 

one of two reasons jump to mind, they dont want us to know or the scary one which is that they havent checked it would work, come on Jaggernaut tell us which one it is.

 

either way its damaging your cause

 

What info are you talking about? And why should your british nationalist info be taken as the truth? Like Bliar's weapons of mass destruction?

 

Actually, I don't think anything is damaging the cause of independence. Folk like you, I imagine, are completely closed to the notion that Scotland should fully govern itself in the same way as other democratic countries. That's up to you, of course. But it seems to me, as a supporter of Scottish independence, that just about every utterance from british nationalists, whether Tory, Liberal, or what is laughingly called New Labour, does much more damage to possibility of the UK existing much longer beyond 2014.

Edited October 21, 2012 by Jaggernaut

[hamiltonjag]

Really? Other than call people who want independence a childish name, and calling Alex Salmond an even more childish name, and demanding "figures", and claiming to speak the "truth", you haven't contributed any kind of debate.

OK show us the figures then. And what have you contributed to the debate? And if you read back I wasn't claiming to speak the truth. I opined that another poster had spoken much truth. What way would you like me to treat independence-seekers? With awe and reverence? How is that deserved?

 

Listen to your own Mr Salmond. The guy is a liability to your cause, and as such I truly hope he stays as leader of your party. I have yet to hear him answer a question. And before you say "all politicians are the same" and, worse, make ludicrous assumptions about my political allegiances by flinging names like Cameron, Clegg or Miliband around, take a look at the evidence for my assertions. If Mr Salmond were ever to appear on a quiz show I have no doubt it would go something like this:

 

Q: What is your name?

Salmond: Why should you, a patsy for Westminster, have the right to ask me my name? You have no authority in Scotland to ask such a question.

 

Q: What is your chosen specialist subject?

Salmond: Look. That sort of question should be asked of Cameron and his Westminster toffs. What really matters is that Scotland become independent and see an end to London tyrrany.

 

Think I'm being unduly flippant and/or contributing little to the debate? Go listen to Salmond.

[Jaggernaut]

OK show us the figures then. And what have you contributed to the debate? And if you read back I wasn't claiming to speak the truth. I opined that another poster had spoken much truth. What way would you like me to treat independence-seekers? With awe and reverence? How is that deserved?

 

Listen to your own Mr Salmond. The guy is a liability to your cause, and as such I truly hope he stays as leader of your party. I have yet to hear him answer a question. And before you say "all politicians are the same" and, worse, make ludicrous assumptions about my political allegiances by flinging names like Cameron, Clegg or Miliband around, take a look at the evidence for my assertions. If Mr Salmond were ever to appear on a quiz show I have no doubt it would go something like this:

 

Q: What is your name?

Salmond: Why should you, a patsy for Westminster, have the right to ask me my name? You have no authority in Scotland to ask such a question.

 

Q: What is your chosen specialist subject?

Salmond: Look. That sort of question should be asked of Cameron and his Westminster toffs. What really matters is that Scotland become independent and see an end to London tyrrany.

 

Think I'm being unduly flippant and/or contributing little to the debate? Go listen to Salmond.

 

Yes.

 

You seem to be, let's say "negatively preoccupied", with Salmond. Has he done something that you find especially hurtful, more so than other politicians? My own feeling is that you possibly recognise that he can wipe the floor with just about any politician when it comes to debate, and also rhetoric, which unfortunately is what much of what passes for political debate these days.

 

Again, you are calling for "figures". I don't have access to figures any more than you do. Which ones do you believe? The ones that Ms Lamont of "Scottish" Labour uses to call Scotland a "something for nothing country"? Or maybe the ones that Ms Davidson of the "Scottish" Tories uses to claim that only 12% of Scots are net contributors to the country's wealth? If so, may I ask why you believe them? These figures are presented by unionists with an obvious agenda, and are fiercely contested, so why would anybody take them to be true?

 

And even if they were true, does it then make any sense to continue under a regime that has led to Scotland being in such a chronically miserable economic and social situation?

 

And I think I'll leave it there.

Edited October 21, 2012 by Jaggernaut

[hamiltonjag]

Yes.

 

You seem to be, let's say "negatively preoccupied", with Salmond. Has he done something that you find especially hurtful, more so than other politicians? My own feeling is that you possibly recognise that he can wipe the floor with just about any politician when it comes to debate, and also rhetoric, which unfortunately is what much of what passes for political debate these days.

 

Again, you are calling for "figures". I don't have access to figures any more than you do. Which ones do you believe? The ones that Ms Lamont of "Scottish" Labour uses to call Scotland a "something for nothing country"? Or maybe the ones that Ms Davidson of the "Scottish" Tories uses to claim that only 12% of Scots are net contributors to the country's wealth? If so, may I ask why you believe them? These figures are presented by unionists with an obvious agenda, and are fiercely contested, so why would anybody take them to be true?

 

And even if they were true, does it then make any sense to continue under a regime that has led to Scotland being in such a miserable economic and social situation?

 

And I think I'll leave it there.

Why leave it there? Ah...wait....I think I understand. It's the usual tactic adopted by the pro independence movement.

I'll take your transparent attempt to deflect from the difficult questions and reply: no Salmond has not done anything I find "hurtful". I simply disagree with what he has to say. And I'm pretty sure he can be seen to "wipe the floor" with other politicians. Especially when it comes to question dodging. He is absolutely superb at that. Could it be that if he actually answered the SNP would be exposed for what they really are? A pressure group with (at best) dodgy calculations they don't really want anyone to see?

Yes I want to see figures. Don't you? And I'll make my own mind up either way based upon my perceptions of said figures irrespective of their source's "Scottish" credentials (and this means I am still willing to be swayed by the Nats.....but in the absence of any form of considered argument based upon any sort of fiscal/economic calculations provided by the nationalists I have to conclude that the balance of probability is that even their own figures must make for scary reading...if not SHOW US THE F****N SUMS) So instead of just "fiercely contesting" figures produced by pro-union politicians (yah-boo London lackies yadda yadda) come up with some of your own. Might even manage to sway a skeptic like me.

Thanks for taking the time to debate this. And thanks for "leaving it there". I'm sure other undecided voters are in awe too.

[Jaggernaut]

Why leave it there? Ah...wait....I think I understand. It's the usual tactic adopted by the pro independence movement.

I'll take your transparent attempt to deflect from the difficult questions and reply: no Salmond has not done anything I find "hurtful". I simply disagree with what he has to say. And I'm pretty sure he can be seen to "wipe the floor" with other politicians. Especially when it comes to question dodging. He is absolutely superb at that. Could it be that if he actually answered the SNP would be exposed for what they really are? A pressure group with (at best) dodgy calculations they don't really want anyone to see?

Yes I want to see figures. Don't you? And I'll make my own mind up either way based upon my perceptions of said figures irrespective of their source's "Scottish" credentials (and this means I am still willing to be swayed by the Nats.....but in the absence of any form of considered argument based upon any sort of fiscal/economic calculations provided by the nationalists I have to conclude that the balance of probability is that even their own figures must make for scary reading...if not SHOW US THE F****N SUMS) So instead of just "fiercely contesting" figures produced by pro-union politicians (yah-boo London lackies yadda yadda) come up with some of your own. Might even manage to sway a skeptic like me.

Thanks for taking the time to debate this. And thanks for "leaving it there". I'm sure other undecided voters are in awe too.

 

OK, I'm still in!

 

Figures? OK, me too; I want to see them. I've not seen figures from the unionists, but I would like to see them. Where are they? Can you point me to them, and persuade me why I should believe them? However, I have heard pronouncements by british unionist politicians that are clearly aimed at scaring people like yourself into believing that somehow, uniquely, Scotland could not afford to pay her own way in the world. But again, I haven't actually SEEN figures from unionists. Where are they?

 

In recent weeks I've also read british unionist spokespeople claiming that what's left of Britain might be minded to bomb Scottish airports, and that we will not have access to the BBC (though you can get it pretty much all over the word!!) As you say, undecided voters like yourself must be pretty much in awe.

Edited October 21, 2012 by Jaggernaut

[P-R]

Reading around, various sources seem to talk of November 2013 before the SNP publishes a white paper on the workings of an independent Scotland.

 

Regards the arguments on all the figures/statistics etc. guess it depends on what experts you read/listen to.

 

One thing I can't understand is the £500 better/worse off thing mentioned in some places that appararenly would have a major influence on the votes for yes/no. Is that really all it will take for some people to change their minds?

[hamiltonjag]

Reading around, various sources seem to talk of November 2013 before the SNP publishes a white paper on the workings of an independent Scotland.

 

Regards the arguments on all the figures/statistics etc. guess it depends on what experts you read/listen to.

 

One thing I can't understand is the £500 better/worse off thing mentioned in some places that appararenly would have a major influence on the votes for yes/no. Is that really all it will take for some people to change their minds?

Glad to see you're still in.

The unionist figures in terms of the unionist debate is the status quo and are there in black and white for all to read and debate over. This is simply due to the fact that we currently exist within the UK. Is it incumbent upon the anti-independents to provide figures for Scotland post independence? Hmmm....maybe you could argue that it is, but it would surely be a weak argument given that anything the anti-independence side come up with is/would be seen as "scaremongering" irrespective of the veracity (or otherwise) of said figures. So it leaves us as the Scottish electorate in a stalemate position until the pro-independence squad (and it IS a squad made up not only of SNP activists but also some Labour activists with a smattering of assorted radicals like the SSP) come up with verifiable figures of their own.

 

I don't buy into all the keech about bombing Scottish airports or denying access to the BBC. Its all peurile nonsense imho. But what I really want to know (and again imho its down to the nationalists to provide this) is a detailed post-independence financial/fiscal plan. For example: taxation, health & welfare, infrastructure including capital projects, SROI programmes, housing, social work, police, fire service, vehicle licencing, pre-tax revenue (if any) from sold-off assets like oil, gas and whisky, growth predictions from any government investment in renewable energy, and any effect it would have on the (Scottish) national grid. Imports, exports.... I could go on and bore you to death, but this is what we all need...no...we all DESERVE and should DEMAND of our politicians before we make any historic decision. I would like nothing more than to simply believe the nationalist hype that we are a nation capable of severing ties with Wales, NI and England and, in doing so, we would thrive. I'd REALLY love to believe that. It's such an attractive prospect. BUT in going it alone are we simply just creating the conditions for an economic and social wasteland? This is why I may be boring you with my persistence in demanding the sums. And again I stress that these calculations MUST come from those trying to convince us to vote for independence.

[Jaggernaut]

 

I don't buy into all the keech about bombing Scottish airports or denying access to the BBC. Its all peurile nonsense imho. But what I really want to know (and again imho its down to the nationalists to provide this) is a detailed post-independence financial/fiscal plan. For example: taxation, health & welfare, infrastructure including capital projects, SROI programmes, housing, social work, police, fire service, vehicle licencing, pre-tax revenue (if any) from sold-off assets like oil, gas and whisky, growth predictions from any government investment in renewable energy, and any effect it would have on the (Scottish) national grid. Imports, exports.... I could go on and bore you to death, but this is what we all need...no...we all DESERVE and should DEMAND of our politicians before we make any historic decision. I would like nothing more than to simply believe the nationalist hype that we are a nation capable of severing ties with Wales, NI and England and, in doing so, we would thrive. I'd REALLY love to believe that. It's such an attractive prospect. BUT in going it alone are we simply just creating the conditions for an economic and social wasteland? This is why I may be boring you with my persistence in demanding the sums. And again I stress that these calculations MUST come from those trying to convince us to vote for independence.

 

Here are some figures. Of course this is a speech largely to the converted, but also aimed at the "undecided". It's no more open to criticism than anything you'll get from unionists and their incessantly negative statements about Scotland's wealth.

 

http://www.snp.org/blog/post/2012/oct/john-swinney-msps-conference-address

[jaggybunnet]

Glad to see you're still in.

The unionist figures in terms of the unionist debate is the status quo and are there in black and white for all to read and debate over. This is simply due to the fact that we currently exist within the UK. Is it incumbent upon the anti-independents to provide figures for Scotland post independence? Hmmm....maybe you could argue that it is, but it would surely be a weak argument given that anything the anti-independence side come up with is/would be seen as "scaremongering" irrespective of the veracity (or otherwise) of said figures. So it leaves us as the Scottish electorate in a stalemate position until the pro-independence squad (and it IS a squad made up not only of SNP activists but also some Labour activists with a smattering of assorted radicals like the SSP) come up with verifiable figures of their own.

 

I don't buy into all the keech about bombing Scottish airports or denying access to the BBC. Its all peurile nonsense imho. But what I really want to know (and again imho its down to the nationalists to provide this) is a detailed post-independence financial/fiscal plan. For example: taxation, health & welfare, infrastructure including capital projects, SROI programmes, housing, social work, police, fire service, vehicle licencing, pre-tax revenue (if any) from sold-off assets like oil, gas and whisky, growth predictions from any government investment in renewable energy, and any effect it would have on the (Scottish) national grid. Imports, exports.... I could go on and bore you to death, but this is what we all need...no...we all DESERVE and should DEMAND of our politicians before we make any historic decision. I would like nothing more than to simply believe the nationalist hype that we are a nation capable of severing ties with Wales, NI and England and, in doing so, we would thrive. I'd REALLY love to believe that. It's such an attractive prospect. BUT in going it alone are we simply just creating the conditions for an economic and social wasteland? This is why I may be boring you with my persistence in demanding the sums. And again I stress that these calculations MUST come from those trying to convince us to vote for independence.

 

bloody hell again agreeing with you

[jaggybunnet]

What info are you talking about? And why should your british nationalist info be taken as the truth? Like Bliar's weapons of mass destruction?

 

Actually, I don't think anything is damaging the cause of independence. Folk like you, I imagine, are completely closed to the notion that Scotland should fully govern itself in the same way as other democratic countries. That's up to you, of course. But it seems to me, as a supporter of Scottish independence, that just about every utterance from british nationalists, whether Tory, Liberal, or what is laughingly called New Labour, does much more damage to possibility of the UK existing much longer beyond 2014.

 

Jaggernaut, its your group that want to change everything, its up to you to provide info to prove it can work.

 

its a bit like a party saying they will put out there manafest just after the vote has been done.

 

get on the phone and tell eck to pull his finger out as it will damage there cause

[hamiltonjag]

Here are some figures. Of course this is a speech largely to the converted, but also aimed at the "undecided". It's no more open to criticism than anything you'll get from unionists and their incessantly negative statements about Scotland's wealth.

 

http://www.snp.org/b...ference-address

Cheers. I'll give it a read.

[hamiltonjag]

bloody hell again agreeing with you

Away and lie doon mate. 7-0 victory and agreeing with the sanest person in the history of Humankind all in the one weekend cannae be good for the old blood pressure

[dougie247]

am i not right in thinking that David Cameron has such little regard for us as a country that he deployed Scottish forces against Libya without even consulting Alex Salmond.. who found out through the media?

 

edit: when i say Scottish forces i obviously mean our combined forces

Edited October 21, 2012 by dougie247

[jaggybunnet]

am i not right in thinking that David Cameron has such little regard for us as a country that he deployed Scottish forces against Libya without even consulting Alex Salmond.. who found out through the media?

 

edit: when i say Scottish forces i obviously mean our combined forces

 

em, thats because it has sod all to do with eck and never has been, nones of the regiment will automaticly pass over to scotland if they ever got independance.

[Jaggernaut]

Jaggernaut, its your group that want to change everything, its up to you to provide info to prove it can work. its a bit like a party saying they will put out there manafest just after the vote has been done. get on the phone and tell eck to pull his finger out as it will damage there cause

 

Jaggybunnet, I seem to remember a similar exchange at the last election when you were rubbishing the SNP's chances and claiming that they had to "prove" their case. Political parties can't prove anything; all they can do is set out their positions (and of course, they often twist things or blatantly lie) to try to persuade, not prove.

 

I take it that you believe that Scotland is too poor to be able to govern itself? Who has proved this to you?

[jaggybunnet]

Jaggybunnet, I seem to remember a similar exchange at the last election when you were rubbishing the SNP's chances and claiming that they had to "prove" their case. Political parties can't prove anything; all they can do is set out their positions (and of course, they often twist things or blatantly lie) to try to persuade, not prove.

 

I take it that you believe that Scotland is too poor to be able to govern itself? Who has proved this to you?

 

no it was about independance

 

are you seriously saying eck doesnt need to put any info and we just take what he says as gospil!!

 

Ok where is your info to "persuade" us then?

 

untill proven persuaded otherwise i dont think scotland can go alone in the present climate which i think will be a problem for eck in that if things emprove in scotland people wont be bothered if we are independant or not

Edited October 21, 2012 by jaggybunnet

[Jaggernaut]

no it was about independance

 

are you seriously saying eck doesnt need to put any info and we just take what he says as gospil!!

 

Ok where is your info to "persuade" us then?

 

untill proven persuaded otherwise i dont think scotland can go alone in the present climate which i think will be a problem for eck in that if things emprove in scotland people wont be bothered if we are independant or not

 

Ha ha, and do you really believe that financially things are going to magically improve in Scotland over the next two years?? What financial gospel do you adhere to then, George Osbourne's?

 

Is your refusal to support independence for Scotland purely based on economics? I get the impression that it goes beyond that, much more emotional (nothing wrong with that, as many pro-independence folk don't care about the economic consequences, as long as Scotland regains the independence that the people never voted to surrender).

 

For info, see the link above that I provided for Hamilton Jag. But I wouldn't actually expect you to look at it objectively.

[jaggybunnet]

Ha ha, and do you really believe that financially things are going to magically improve in Scotland over the next two years?? What financial gospel do you adhere to then, George Osbourne's?

 

Is your refusal to support independence for Scotland purely based on economics? I get the impression that it goes beyond that, much more emotional (nothing wrong with that, as many pro-independence folk don't care about the economic consequences, as long as Scotland regains the independence that the people never voted to surrender).

 

For info, see the link above that I provided for Hamilton Jag. But I wouldn't actually expect you to look at it objectively.

 

my refusal to support independence at the moment is to do with having nothing to show it would be better.

 

i will look at it but if thats your idea of info for independance good luck, it cant be that hard for them to put out a wee sheet with all the pros and neg for independace

[jaggybunnet]

 

For info, see the link above that I provided for Hamilton Jag. But I wouldn't actually expect you to look at it objectively.

 

right then read it,

 

sooooooooo the bad boys did it and ran away but because we are good boys we will sort it for you, we dont as yet have anything to fix it with and cant tell you where we are going to get it but dont worry its sorted.

 

that about sums that up, and i did look at it objectively

[mrD]

 

 

One thing I can't understand is the £500 better/worse off thing mentioned in some places that appararenly would have a major influence on the votes for yes/no. Is that really all it will take for some people to change their minds?

 

If thats the case all salmond needs to do is get a whip around from all his buisness chums to give everyone in the population of scotland 500 quid and its a done deal.

 

Or just take control of our own currency and go for hyper inflation - make everyone millionaires!!

[Jaggernaut]

my refusal to support independence at the moment is to do with having nothing to show it would be better.

 

i will look at it but if thats your idea of info for independance good luck, it cant be that hard for them to put out a wee sheet with all the pros and neg for independace

 

Oh really?

 

Are you looking forward to the next post-colonial war leading to hundreds of of British troops killed for vanity and big business, not to mention possibly thousands of others (usually "suspected insurgents", as if that is enough to justify murder, or else "collateral damage", likewise)?

 

Are you looking forward to the continued presence of nuclear submarines on the Clyde?

 

Are you looking forward to all of the continued benefits that the SNP has fought to keep for people in Scotland being destroyed as the Westminster government punitively squeezes the pocket money it reluctantly gives us back from the larger amount that we give it?

 

Let's all know what is going to be "better" for us with a continuation of being owned and governed by London, in a parliamentary system in which Scottish MPs are outnumbered 10 to 1 ? There are even some politicians on record saying that the UK Prime Minister should never be Scottish, because of devolution. That is the kind of mindset that exists in much of the British establishment. What actually shows us that we're "better together"? You ask for proof, so what is the proof of that?

[Jaggernaut]

right then read it,

 

sooooooooo the bad boys did it and ran away but because we are good boys we will sort it for you, we dont as yet have anything to fix it with and cant tell you where we are going to get it but dont worry its sorted.

 

that about sums that up, and i did look at it objectively

 

That's precisely the response I anticipated.

[jaggybunnet]

Oh really?

 

Are you looking forward to the next post-colonial war leading to hundreds of of British troops killed for vanity and big business, not to mention possibly thousands of others (usually "suspected insurgents", as if that is enough to justify murder, or else "collateral damage", likewise)?

 

Are you looking forward to the continued presence of nuclear submarines on the Clyde?

 

Are you looking forward to all of the continued benefits that the SNP has fought to keep for people in Scotland being destroyed as the Westminster government punitively squeezes the pocket money it reluctantly gives us back from the larger amount that we give it?

 

Let's all know what is going to be "better" for us with a continuation of being owned and governed by London, in a parliamentary system in which Scottish MPs are outnumbered 10 to 1 ? There are even some politicians on record saying that the UK Prime Minister should never be Scottish, because of devolution. That is the kind of mindset that exists in much of the British establishment. What actually shows us that we're "better together"? You ask for proof, so what is the proof of that?

Oh really?

 

Are you looking forward to the next post-colonial war leading to hundreds of of British troops killed for vanity and big business, not to mention possibly thousands of others (usually "suspected insurgents", as if that is enough to justify murder, or else "collateral damage", likewise)?

 

wee ecks rubbish

 

Are you looking forward to the continued presence of nuclear submarines on the Clyde?

 

dosent bother me

 

Are you looking forward to all of the continued benefits that the SNP has fought to keep for people in Scotland being destroyed as the Westminster government punitively squeezes the pocket money it reluctantly gives us back from the larger amount that we give it?

 

wee ecks rubbish with bells on

 

Let's all know what is going to be "better" for us with a continuation of being owned and governed by London, in a parliamentary system in which Scottish MPs are outnumbered 10 to 1 ? There are even some politicians on record saying that the UK Prime Minister should never be Scottish, because of devolution. That is the kind of mindset that exists in much of the British establishment. What actually shows us that we're "better together"? You ask for proof, so what is the proof of that?

 

 

wee ecks rubbish with massive bells on

 

 

 

can you not find anything of substance to say, i have asked why there is no information out there from snp/yesvote, you have given us a link to a snp propaganda speech where at no time does he explain how it would be paid for in an independent Scotland.

 

seriously Jaggernaut can you not see where we are coming from, we want information and it isn't there.

 

There plan for Scotland should have came out at the same time as there launch not we will tell you next year

Edited October 21, 2012 by jaggybunnet

[jaggybunnet]

That's precisely the response I anticipated.

 

what do you expect where does that tell you anything about what would happen in an independant scotland and how they will finnance it

[Jaggernaut]

can you not find anything of substance to say, i have asked why there is no information out there from snp/yesvote, you have given us a link to a snp propaganda speech where at no time does he explain how it would be paid for in an independent Scotland.

 

seriously Jaggernaut can you not see where we are coming from, we want information and it isn't there.

 

There plan for Scotland should have came out at the same time as there launch not we will tell you next year

 

 

 

What a shame, Jaggybunnet. No elaborated argument from you; it's almost just "rubbish", "wee Eck" and "not bothered", and so on. You are coming across as a closed-minded individual who point blank refuses to even consider that you or your preferred politicians might be wrong.

 

Edited to add: And before you even think about suggesting that I'm an "Eck worshipper", there are numerous aspects of SNP policies with which I disagree, not least their energy policies. But the independence referendum is not about Alex Salmond or even the SNP; it's about Scotland and it people regaining their dignity and being put in charge of their own affairs, and an end to the "too wee, too poor, too stupid" mentality that has been fostered for so long by Westminster and that unfortunately so many people on both sides of the border seem to believe is true.

Edited October 21, 2012 by Jaggernaut