och i the naw (maybes)

[fuctifano]

I voted to delete the topic

[czefski]

I had to look up what Soar Alba meant. I'm fed up with getting bombarded with 'Yes' campaign stuff on my Facebook page, I certainly don't want to see it here.

[fuctifano]

I had to look up what Soar Alba meant. I'm fed up with getting bombarded with 'Yes' campaign stuff on my Facebook page, I certainly don't want to see it here.

Me too. that's why I brought it up

VOTE F'OFF

[Jackie]

I don't know what it means either but I can guess.
  I can understand why independence is such an appealing idea because every time Cameron or one of his cronies opens their mouth I feel more disenfranchised myself. However I am fed up with the idea being put about by some quarters that because I'm English I can't possibly share Scottish values of socialism and putting people first, etc, etc.  Its divisive bullshit.
I voted delete topic too

[Kimmers]

I don't have a say either way since I'm newly immigrated. 

[DemonInDisguise]

I don't know what it means either but I can guess.
  I can understand why independence is such an appealing idea because every time Cameron or one of his cronies opens their mouth I feel more disenfranchised myself. However I am fed up with the idea being put about by some quarters that because I'm English I can't possibly share Scottish values of socialism and putting people first, etc, etc.  Its divisive bullshit.
I voted delete topic too

Never thought I'd post on this topic...

Jackie, I bought a book years ago (about 100 pages long) by the writer Alasdair Gray (of Lanark fame) called 'Why Scots should rule Scotland'. To be honest, I don't remember much regarding the arguments put forth except that he begins the book by defining what a Scot is, for the purposes of his discussion, and the short version is if you are resident in Scotland (by birth or emigration) and living and paying tax, then it doesn't matter where you were born - you get a say in the future of the country. It's not a foolproof idea, but it's a good starting point. I'm sick to death of people like Sir Sean of Connery, Earl of Marbella constantly harping n about it when he's probably lived in Scotland for about a quarter of his life, and that was probably the first quarter. The Big Yin isn't much better either!

I got the YES campaign paper through the letterbox the other day and had a look at it. Some of the 'arguments' are so thin it's unbelievable. I'm not against the idea of independence but I have yet to see a serious argument that we could afford to do it. As far as I am concerned, it's like buying a house. You might like the house but can you afford to buy it? Can you afford to maintain it? Can you afford to run it? I've yet to see a solid financial argument that supports independence. The sooner people remember it's not an emotional decision the better, it's a business decision.

Can we get Lord Sugar to interrogate Salmond and Sturgeon? (something fishy there), what about Dragon's Den? It's all very well the YES campaign criticising the Better Together lot (Not Much Better campaign would be more accurate) but I think the onus is on the YES campaign as they are seeking to change the status quo.

Good grief, there's a real chance that this time the turkey's will vote for Christmas! Gobble Gobble!

Right, enough of that nonsense, back to the important stuff - it's now February, don't forget to send your SAE to kwaing for the next 'zine, I'll be sending mine away today.
Cheers,

DiD

[czefski]

I don't know what it means either but I can guess.
  I can understand why independence is such an appealing idea because every time Cameron or one of his cronies opens their mouth I feel more disenfranchised myself. However I am fed up with the idea being put about by some quarters that because I'm English I can't possibly share Scottish values of socialism and putting people first, etc, etc.  Its divisive bullshit.
I voted delete topic too

Never thought I'd post on this topic...

Jackie, I bought a book years ago (about 100 pages long) by the writer Alasdair Gray (of Lanark fame) called 'Why Scots should rule Scotland'. To be honest, I don't remember much regarding the arguments put forth except that he begins the book by defining what a Scot is, for the purposes of his discussion, and the short version is if you are resident in Scotland (by birth or emigration) and living and paying tax, then it doesn't matter where you were born - you get a say in the future of the country. It's not a foolproof idea, but it's a good starting point. I'm sick to death of people like Sir Sean of Connery, Earl of Marbella constantly harping n about it when he's probably lived in Scotland for about a quarter of his life, and that was probably the first quarter. The Big Yin isn't much better either!

I got the YES campaign paper through the letterbox the other day and had a look at it. Some of the 'arguments' are so thin it's unbelievable. I'm not against the idea of independence but I have yet to see a serious argument that we could afford to do it. As far as I am concerned, it's like buying a house. You might like the house but can you afford to buy it? Can you afford to maintain it? Can you afford to run it? I've yet to see a solid financial argument that supports independence. The sooner people remember it's not an emotional decision the better, it's a business decision.

Can we get Lord Sugar to interrogate Salmond and Sturgeon? (something fishy there), what about Dragon's Den? It's all very well the YES campaign criticising the Better Together lot (Not Much Better campaign would be more accurate) but I think the onus is on the YES campaign as they are seeking to change the status quo.

Good grief, there's a real chance that this time the turkey's will vote for Christmas! Gobble Gobble!

Right, enough of that nonsense, back to the important stuff - it's now February, don't forget to send your SAE to kwaing for the next 'zine, I'll be sending mine away today.
Cheers,

DiD

The biggest issue I have is that the 'policies' in the White Paper, get rid of Trident, repeal the Bedroom Tax etc. are SNP party policies. When I tell my Yes voting mates that I don't want to have Salmond as PM any more than I want Cameron, they tell me that there will be an election that the SNP might not win. In that case will the Labour government or Labour/Tory coalition carry out the white paper policies? I haven't seen Labour coming out against Trident and suspect Miliband wouldn't let them. Too many unanswered questions.

Cheers for the 'Zine' reminder I'll get onto it today as well.

[lolsmit]

I had to look up what Soar Alba meant. I'm fed up with getting bombarded with 'Yes' campaign stuff on my Facebook page, I certainly don't want to see it here.

Isn't this down to how one "uses" facebook?  I don't get bombarded with "yes" or "better together" campaign stuff (or anything come to that) on facebook?!

I voted as I don't think this poll is brought to us via the 'yes', or any other, campaign.

And, DiD, well said.

[czefski]

I had to look up what Soar Alba meant. I'm fed up with getting bombarded with 'Yes' campaign stuff on my Facebook page, I certainly don't want to see it here.

Isn't this down to how one "uses" facebook?  I don't get bombarded with "yes" or "better together" campaign stuff (or anything come to that) on facebook?!

I voted as I don't think this poll is brought to us via the 'yes', or any other, campaign.

And, DiD, well said.

To not get bombarded I'd need to unfriend the friends who do the bombarding and other than their Yes onslaught they are worth keeping in touch with. I just scroll past it now.

[Deegers]

The biggest issue I have is that the 'policies' in the White Paper, get rid of Trident, repeal the Bedroom Tax etc. are SNP party policies. When I tell my Yes voting mates that I don't want to have Salmond as PM any more than I want Cameron, they tell me that there will be an election that the SNP might not win. In that case will the Labour government or Labour/Tory coalition carry out the white paper policies? I haven't seen Labour coming out against Trident and suspect Miliband wouldn't let them. Too many unanswered questions.

Cheers for the 'Zine' reminder I'll get onto it today as well.

It's easy to shoot fish when they are swimming around in the barrel.

The white paper has to be the policies of the government, currently in situ, as they are bringing forward the proposal.  That is not to say they will be a reality but rather try to paint a picture, one possible alternative of a starting point for self governance.

Without a tangible alternative document to compare it against, a no vote is a real step into the unknown.  What will things look like if we say no?  At least the white paper presents one side of the argument we are yet to see what the other side looks like, and it is unlikely that we will see it.  It is difficult to argue the cause when the opposition put up nothing and cast continuous aspersions against everything you say.

The question at the end of the day is whether or not the people who inhabit Scotland believe that with the right infrastructure they could govern their own destiny, peaks and troughs.  DiD said it is like business, correct, do we believe that we have the confidence to be entrepreneurs or are going to forever be the workforce of the management?

[funky_nomad]

The sooner people remember it's not an emotional decision the better, it's a business decision.

I'm equally uncomfortable with the debate surrounding the referendum being a "business" decision as opposed to an emotional one, to be frank. Yes, economics are an important part of many peoples' consideration but, fundamentally, it should be a decision about governance - the economics comes later.

If the Yes campaign were to lay on the table that a Yes vote will cost, say, between 5p and 10p in the pound, but here's a list of things that you then get to make a decision on - welfare, defence, taxation, energy - that would be a basis for people to judge whether the kind of things that they want Scotland to have control over are worth the hassle. But they won't, because all the No campaign have ever come up with is variations on the "that willnae work, by the way" argument, which plays well with those sections of the media that the Yes campaign don't want to piss off.

The No campaign have brought nothing to the table, but the Yes campaign have been weak in setting out the philosophical argument, which will result in the Yes campaign struggling to win over the "mibbes aye, mibbes naw" majority. It's no wonder that Salmond wants Cameron to join the debate - that's their best (only) hope of victory!

[Deegers]

The sooner people remember it's not an emotional decision the better, it's a business decision.

I'm equally uncomfortable with the debate surrounding the referendum being a "business" decision as opposed to an emotional one, to be frank. Yes, economics are an important part of many peoples' consideration but, fundamentally, it should be a decision about governance - the economics comes later.

If the Yes campaign were to lay on the table that a Yes vote will cost, say, between 5p and 10p in the pound, but here's a list of things that you then get to make a decision on - welfare, defence, taxation, energy - that would be a basis for people to judge whether the kind of things that they want Scotland to have control over are worth the hassle. But they won't, because all the No campaign have ever come up with is variations on the "that willnae work, by the way" argument, which plays well with those sections of the media that the Yes campaign don't want to piss off.

The No campaign have brought nothing to the table, but the Yes campaign have been weak in setting out the philosophical argument, which will result in the Yes campaign struggling to win over the "mibbes aye, mibbes naw" majority. It's no wonder that Salmond wants Cameron to join the debate - that's their best (only) hope of victory!

Get your own post. 

[czefski]

It's no wonder that Salmond wants Cameron to join the debate - that's their best (only) hope of victory!

The bookies cut the odds on a Yes vote from 9/2 to 100/30 last week, which is a fairly significant drop.

[funky_nomad]

It's no wonder that Salmond wants Cameron to join the debate - that's their best (only) hope of victory!

The bookies cut the odds on a Yes vote from 9/2 to 100/30 last week, which is a fairly significant drop.

100/30 in a 2-horse race - the odds would need to come in much further than that for me to start thinking about EU membership or currency unions at anything beyond a passing level...

[czefski]

It's no wonder that Salmond wants Cameron to join the debate - that's their best (only) hope of victory!

The bookies cut the odds on a Yes vote from 9/2 to 100/30 last week, which is a fairly significant drop.

100/30 in a 2-horse race - the odds would need to come in much further than that for me to start thinking about EU membership or currency unions at anything beyond a passing level...

The trend is that the odds are shortening is what I'm saying. 100/30 is about the same odds that Stan Wavrinka was to beat Nadal in the Aussie Open Final or what Stephen Gallacher was to in Dubai going into the back 9 on Sunday.