The Dirty Independence Question

[eFestivals]

I just can't see how the numbers add up...

That's because they don't add up. Alex and Swinney know they don't. Swinney has even admitted it's the case.

But Salmond continues to lie to the Scottish people about it, to dis-respect the views of the Scottish people.

People like LJS say they've sussed this, and that they know they're voting to make Scottish society financially poorer (tho, he hopes, socially better). Which is a great honest approach.

But far too honest for Salmond, who will not make this admission and campaign on an honest basis. He plans to steal the sovereignty of Scotland for himself - as his constitution makes clear, and yes-ers have been too wrapped up in propaganda to even notice the most important thing of all.

Edited August 28, 2014 by eFestivals

[wee_insomniac]

Also, from what I've been reading this morning, only the Yes campaign thinks that they are going to be able to continue offering tuition fee free higher education to Scotland and all other EU members, except the rest of the UK... Maybe they'll raise funds by taking that away and blaming the EU for it?

[eFestivals]

Also, from what I've been reading this morning, only the Yes campaign thinks that they are going to be able to continue offering tuition fee free higher education to Scotland and all other EU members, except the rest of the UK... Maybe they'll raise funds by taking that away and blaming the EU for it?

There's not a chance in hell that iScotland will get any opt outs on the EU's core principles.

Those core principles include:-

1. no discrimination of people from other EU member states. Which means that iScotland will either have to give English students free tuition, or that they'll have to start charging everyone.

2. that a member state has to be 'financially independent' via having its own central bank (which iScotland wouldn't have with either of a CU or 'using the pound', or using the Euro outside of being officially accepted into the EuroZone [which first requires EU membership]).

Of course, these things only matter if iScotland wants to be an EU member - which it says it does. That means it will have to have these things in place before it will be accepted into the EU as a full member.

No new EU member state has every got even one opt-out (opt-outs have only ever been given to existing member states when the EU rules have changed).

All the same I wouldn't be much surprised if iScotland is granted a concession or two with opt-outs, given that it would be becoming a member after having been a part of the UK's membership - but any of the opt-outs it gets will be UK ones 'carried over' to iScotland and not any completely new ones (such as an opt-out of the fiscal rules [needed for a CU or 'using the pound'], or an opt-out on the free movement of people [needed to keep charging just English students]).

Salmond *KNOWS* that iScotland's *ONLY* currency option is a new Scottish currency, and he *KNOWS* that the Uni fees situation will have to change - but he'll never speak the truth about these things. The best result for Scotland in his eyes is for him to steal sovereignty from the Scottish people via lies.

And he likes to pretend that Westminster is the fucked up govt.

(it is of course fucked up, but it's still not stealing its people's sovereignty as Alex is doing, it's granting it!!!).

Edited August 28, 2014 by eFestivals

[Kowalski]

My postal vote has been sent in.

Very dismayed at the whole 'debate', it's been a terrible advert for Scottish politics.
Both sides should be ashamed of themselves.

The yes campaign have failed to delivery a good argument for independence, they've badly let themselves down over the currency issue - they should have proposed our own currency with our own central bank, not open up themselves to the mauling they have received by wanting to keep the pound. I genuinely do not believe there will be a CU but many Yes supporters have bought into it, perhaps not realising what damage Sterlingisation (assuming that is the Plan will do. Now that they have been caught out, instead of promoting the opportunities that a Yes vote might bring, they've turned into being a very negative campaign by focussing on people's fears about the Tories, the old Etonian establishment, making up some bullshit scare story about the fully devolved NHS etc... - basically anything they can find to slag off Westminister. The hypocricasy of labelling the No campaign as "Project Fear" is not lost on many of us.

However, the main problem is we don't know what we're voting for so I've voted no. We should be voting after negotiations are complete, because fuck knows what we we're actually getting at the moment.

It looks like it is going to be quite a close vote. Whatever happens we'll end up with a divided and angry country - well half of us will be angry anyway!

[kaosmark2]

However, the main problem is we don't know what we're voting for so I've voted no. We should be voting after negotiations are complete, because fuck knows what we we're actually getting at the moment.

Well said. The post overall, but this line in particular.

[eFestivals]

However, the main problem is we don't know what we're voting for so I've voted no. We should be voting after negotiations are complete, because fuck knows what we we're actually getting at the moment.

To be fair, until there's a solid body of opinion behind indy - and there's never been that in Scotland by any measure you might care to use to-date - it's a bit much to expect any govt to indulge the indy campaign with waste-of-time negotiations.

I don't don't doubt that Cameron has exploited the fact that the result is very likely to be no as the reason why he's allowed the vote to happen in the first place, but I don't think it's unreasonable of him to have refused to negotiate in advance - given the obvious non-majority support for indy at the time of the Edinburgh agreement.

As way of comparison, here's a list of how the indy-voting went for a bunch of other countries. It shows that Scotland is a political gambit, and not a national movement.

RESULTS OF SUCCESSFUL INDEPENDENCE REFERENDA

EUROPE

Yes% ... (Turnout%) ... Country

100 ... (85) ... Norway 1905

99 ... (98) ... Iceland 1944

96 ... (76) ... Macedonia 1991

95 ... (93) ... Slovenia 1990

93 ... (84) ... Croatia 1991

92 ... (84) ... Ukraine 1991

93 ... (85) ... Lithuania 1991

78 ... (83) ... Estonia 1991 (a third of Russians in population)

75 ... (88) ... Latvia 1991 (a third of Russians)

63 ... (64) ... Bosnia and Herzegovina 1992 (Serbs boycotting)

55 ... (86) ... Montenegro 2006 (a third of Serbs)

OTHER

100 ... (98) ... Mongolia 1945

100 ... (92) ... Algeria 1962

100 ... (77) ... Djibouti 1977

100 ... (95) ... Armenia 1991

100 ... (94) ... Eritrea 1993

99 ... (91) ... Georgia 1991

99 ... (98) ... Southern Sudan 2011

95 ... (86) ... Guinea 1958

95 ... (93) ... Comoros 1974

94 ... (97) ... Turkmenistan 1991

93 ... (88) ... Tuvalu 1974

91 ... (62) ... Zimbabwe 1964

85 ... (---) ... Samoa West 1961

79 ... (99) ... East Timor 1999

In all cases apart from Montenegro and Bosnia and Herzegovina, the result was >50% yes of the WHOLE electorate.

[Comfy Bean]

See, I think this argument is circular:

"I think Scotland should be an independent country so that it can have a government that is representative which I think it needs because I believe it should be an independent country".

The government should represent the people who vote for it, and many Westminster governments fail in that, however I don't think Scotland is particularly special in being failed by multiple governments, I think large areas of the UK are, and that we need better education, understanding and a better system to improve it across the whole of the UK, not just section separately into areas and pretend there's no ties and association.

As I said before, I hear your argument and I completely agree that large parts of England don`t get the Government they vote for. I`d guess they feel pretty much as if they have been hung out to dry by successive westminster govts and I feel their pain. Suppose it maybe just comes back to the fact that I very much see Scotland as a Country in it`s own right. Some people on here don`t ( I don`t mean you mate, not sure what your view on the whole " country " arguement is ).

I think Scotland is a Country that should be independent. That is the only question " we " are being asked to answer at this point. If everyone up here was to agree with me we would then get the government we voted for. This would either be Labour or SNP for the forseeable. I have no axe to grind with any of the other countries involved here and to be honest I would not be bothered which of the 2 parties won the first election as we have yet to see what their plans would be. For me that is stage 2 should we get that far.

For what it`s worth I would guess that the SNP would win our first election but would be surprised if a Labour party didn`t run them close by the 2nd one. Roughly speaking, Labour would have approx 5/6 years to get their act together if this was to be the case. The return of a "real " Labour party who had some policies that people would vote for may eventually be of benefit to more than just Scotland.

[Comfy Bean]

RESULTS OF SUCCESSFUL INDEPENDENCE REFERENDA

EUROPE

Yes% ... (Turnout%) ... Country

100 ... (85) ... Norway 1905

99 ... (98) ... Iceland 1944

96 ... (76) ... Macedonia 1991

95 ... (93) ... Slovenia 1990

93 ... (84) ... Croatia 1991

92 ... (84) ... Ukraine 1991

93 ... (85) ... Lithuania 1991

78 ... (83) ... Estonia 1991 (a third of Russians in population)

75 ... (88) ... Latvia 1991 (a third of Russians)

63 ... (64) ... Bosnia and Herzegovina 1992 (Serbs boycotting)

55 ... (86) ... Montenegro 2006 (a third of Serbs)

OTHER

100 ... (98) ... Mongolia 1945

100 ... (92) ... Algeria 1962

100 ... (77) ... Djibouti 1977

100 ... (95) ... Armenia 1991

100 ... (94) ... Eritrea 1993

99 ... (91) ... Georgia 1991

99 ... (98) ... Southern Sudan 2011

95 ... (86) ... Guinea 1958

95 ... (93) ... Comoros 1974

94 ... (97) ... Turkmenistan 1991

93 ... (88) ... Tuvalu 1974

91 ... (62) ... Zimbabwe 1964

85 ... (---) ... Samoa West 1961

79 ... (99) ... East Timor 1999

Just out of interest, did you ever work out the total number of Countries who had voted for Independence ( a few of them quoted here ) who eventually, or indeed at any point, voted to go back ?

[Comfy Bean]

My postal vote has been sent in.

Very dismayed at the whole 'debate', it's been a terrible advert for Scottish politics.

Both sides should be ashamed of themselves.

The yes campaign have failed to delivery a good argument for independence, they've badly let themselves down over the currency issue - they should have proposed our own currency with our own central bank, not open up themselves to the mauling they have received by wanting to keep the pound. I genuinely do not believe there will be a CU but many Yes supporters have bought into it, perhaps not realising what damage Sterlingisation (assuming that is the Plan will do. Now that they have been caught out, instead of promoting the opportunities that a Yes vote might bring, they've turned into being a very negative campaign by focussing on people's fears about the Tories, the old Etonian establishment, making up some bullshit scare story about the fully devolved NHS etc... - basically anything they can find to slag off Westminister. The hypocricasy of labelling the No campaign as "Project Fear" is not lost on many of us.

However, the main problem is we don't know what we're voting for so I've voted no. We should be voting after negotiations are complete, because fuck knows what we we're actually getting at the moment.

It looks like it is going to be quite a close vote. Whatever happens we'll end up with a divided and angry country - well half of us will be angry anyway!

Good to hear your vote is in Kowalski. It does seem to have been a long campaign.

We are on different sides but if we can get anywhere near the 80% turn out that is being talked about then I think that will show that the Scottish public have been engaged. It looks like you will be on the winning side and since part of my interest in all this has been that Scotland gets what it votes for then there will be no complaints from me if we vote No Thanks.

Just for fun we should keep an efest running result. That`s one nil to the " No " Voters.

p.s. You should maybe double check who originally named Better Together " Project Fear "

[Comfy Bean]

.

While I'm well aware that Cameron has made a political gamble over Scotland

I`m glad you are now well aware of this...................

I mentioned it before and gave him credit at that point for judging the situation really well. He had other options and he has been proven right...........well at the moment it looks that way.

[russycarps]

If scotland votes for independence I cannot wait to see the look on camerons fat, greasy, smug, chinless face. It will be glorious.

Being remembered as the prime minister who destroyed the union will hopefully wreck his families reputation for generations

[Comfy Bean]

There's not a chance in hell that iScotland will get any opt outs on the EU's core principles.

Those core principles include:-

1. no discrimination of people from other EU member states. Which means that iScotland will either have to give English students free tuition, or that they'll have to start charging everyone.

2. that a member state has to be 'financially independent' via having its own central bank (which iScotland wouldn't have with either of a CU or 'using the pound', or using the Euro outside of being officially accepted into the EuroZone [which first requires EU membership]).

Of course, these things only matter if iScotland wants to be an EU member - which it says it does. That means it will have to have these things in place before it will be accepted into the EU as a full member.

No new EU member state has every got even one opt-out (opt-outs have only ever been given to existing member states when the EU rules have changed).

All the same I wouldn't be much surprised if iScotland is granted a concession or two with opt-outs, given that it would be becoming a member after having been a part of the UK's membership - but any of the opt-outs it gets will be UK ones 'carried over' to iScotland and not any completely new ones (such as an opt-out of the fiscal rules [needed for a CU or 'using the pound'], or an opt-out on the free movement of people [needed to keep charging just English students]).

Salmond *KNOWS* that iScotland's *ONLY* currency option is a new Scottish currency, and he *KNOWS* that the Uni fees situation will have to change - but he'll never speak the truth about these things. The best result for Scotland in his eyes is for him to steal sovereignty from the Scottish people via lies.

And he likes to pretend that Westminster is the fucked up govt.

(it is of course fucked up, but it's still not stealing its people's sovereignty as Alex is doing, it's granting it!!!).

And there we have it. In amongst all that are a few little words that in my opinion prove that in post after post you have given your opinion on Europe and have backed it up with other people`s opinions.... that is all..... What we know for a fact is that as we sit here just now you are a member and so am I.

Should we get to the point where I still want to be a member and so do you but not under our current UK family then there will be a decision to be made. A pretty unique one that will have a few of the decision makers scratching their heads no doubt. I have never said with certainty that Scotland will or won`t get in as how could I possibly know as a matter of fact ?

For what it`s worth I would say Spain would be twitchy about giving Scotland the nod but that would hardly be for the right reasons. We are a friendly bunch with lots to offer. Whats not to like about having us at the party

So we " could " remain in the EU and we " could " continue to use the pound. I think we agreed before that Scotland " could " be an Independent Country. Your resistance is strong sir but there are still a few weeks to go

[Comfy Bean]

You sound like a man who lost the argument

Here`s the man who lost the argument the other night. He`s the man with the plan so his views are of interest to us all.

[eFestivals]

As I said before, I hear your argument and I completely agree that large parts of England don`t get the Government they vote for.

and that's called.....?

"Democracy".

Meanwhile, n glorious Scotland today with the system you think so brilliant, 56% of the people in Scotland didn't get the govt they voted for.

Edited August 29, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

Just out of interest, did you ever work out the total number of Countries who had voted for Independence ( a few of them quoted here ) who eventually, or indeed at any point, voted to go back ?

As you've failed to notice yourself, I'm going to have to point out that the countries I've listed had extremely good reasons to want to throw off discriminatory imperial overlords.

Scotland is neither subject to discrimination, imperialism, nor has overlords.

I doubt any of those will ever vote to go back, just as much as I doubt Scotland will vote to leave (at this time, at least). For the very reasons of discrimination, imperialism, and overlordship.

But in direct answer to your question, Newfoundland voted to rejoin its ties with the UK after having loosened them. There may be others too.

Meanwhile, plenty of the countries that have left a formal relationship with the UK are today very happy with a form of unionism. USA, Canada, India, Oz, various Caribbean states, etc, etc, etc.

And so there's nothing like the the win for your ideas within countries that have attained independence in the past that you want to think there is. Oh dear.

[eFestivals]

I`m glad you are now well aware of this...................

I've always been aware of it. It's nowt different to how he allowed a vote on AV that he knew would be lost, but wouldn't allow a vote on PR that would probably have been won.

There's a big difference between the AV vote and the indy vote in Scotland tho.

If Cameron accepted the democratic call for an electoral reform vote (which he did by allowing one), then he should have also accepted that the actual vote should have been for the stated electoral reform people had voted in favour of - which was PR. On the basis of that, it's clear that Cameron wasn't acting in support of democracy.

Unlike in Scotland, where Scotland voted for a party offering (only) an indy vote, and that's exactly what Scotland is getting. In regard to Scotland, he's acted in support of democracy.

Edited August 29, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

And there we have it.

Yes, there we have me recognising a completely different scenario to what Salmond claims will happen on the basis of nothing at all.

Salmond is so convinced that his scenario will play out that he even invented a lie about supporting legal advice he'd received, and fed that to the Scottish people in support of his campaign.

And then he was asked to show the advice.

And was proven to be a massive liar.

And was proven to say and do anything to try and steal the Scottish people's sovereignty from them.

And this man will lead a 'better' Scotland. :lol:

(Now, you might say "I'm not voting SNP". Perhaps. But you're certainly swallowing their lies, and lying to the people of Scotland no less than Alex).

In amongst all that are a few little words that in my opinion prove that in post after post you have given your opinion on Europe and have backed it up with other people`s opinions.... that is all..... What we know for a fact is that as we sit here just now you are a member and so am I.

I've repeated no one's opinions. I can think for myself.

What I have done is read the EU rules, which you clearly haven't (and you're back to the same evidence-less guesses you're making over currency).

Should we get to the point where I still want to be a member and so do you but not under our current UK family then there will be a decision to be made. A pretty unique one that will have a few of the decision makers scratching their heads no doubt. I have never said with certainty that Scotland will or won`t get in as how could I possibly know as a matter of fact ?

The fact of how Scotland might be treated can only be guessed at, but there's still plenty of facts.

1. the rules say Scotland will no longer be within the EU.

2. the rules say that Scotland will have to make a normal membership application.

3. every EU official who has made a comment on Scotland's entry has said it will have to follow the rules.

4. Scotland doesn't meet the entry criteria by a massive amount.

5. Without its own currency, Scotland does not meet the core-principle fiscal rules.

6. No new member state has even had even one opt-out.

7. iScotland says it will get more opt-outs than any other country, including opt-outs on 2 core principles (no one has opt-outs on core principles).

8. Salmond has refused to ask Cameron to make an official request to the EU for how Scotland will be treated (because Salmond would rather you believed his made up version than Scotland found out he was talking bull).

9. Salmond has refused to enter offered discussions with at least one other EU member state about iScotland future membership.

If iScotland is going to get all it says, then you can be damned sure that the Cameron will get a complete reformation of everything about the EU - something which has almost no support amongst the other member states, because they have full belief in the current EU structure and rules. That's worth mulling over.

For what it`s worth I would say Spain would be twitchy about giving Scotland the nod but that would hardly be for the right reasons. We are a friendly bunch with lots to offer. Whats not to like about having us at the party

The "right" reasons don't come into it. Only the member states vetos do.

Yes-ers say they want Scotland to be sovereign, but those same people don't accept the right of sovereignty of other nation states.

Either those people don't understand the sovereignty they're voting in support of, or they don't support democracy.

So we " could " remain in the EU and we " could " continue to use the pound. I think we agreed before that Scotland " could " be an Independent Country. Your resistance is strong sir but there are still a few weeks to go

And Scotland " could " turn into a crock of shite compared to now.

Guess what the economic evidence strongly suggests?

Edited August 29, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

Here`s the man who lost the argument the other night. He`s the man with the plan so his views are of interest to us all.

And the video editors will inherit the earth iScotland (while the lied-to have to live in it).

The wonderful editing of the truth by the honest men of integrity on the yes side.

Perhaps find yourself the full interview, and correct the bullshit you're currently believing?

[LJS]

Victory now assured

http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/politics/referendum-news/scots-football-status-on-agenda-again-if-theres-a-no-vote-say-fifa-insiders.1409285056

[Kowalski]

Good to hear your vote is in Kowalski. It does seem to have been a long campaign.

We are on different sides but if we can get anywhere near the 80% turn out that is being talked about then I think that will show that the Scottish public have been engaged. It looks like you will be on the winning side and since part of my interest in all this has been that Scotland gets what it votes for then there will be no complaints from me if we vote No Thanks.

Just for fun we should keep an efest running result. That`s one nil to the " No " Voters.

p.s. You should maybe double check who originally named Better Together " Project Fear "

No worries man.

Whatever the result I just hope we don't end up a bitter and divided nation. The Scottish parliament will have to ensure we come together.

[eFestivals]

Victory now assured

http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/politics/referendum-news/scots-football-status-on-agenda-again-if-theres-a-no-vote-say-fifa-insiders.1409285056

.... are Scots really that numpty?

Latest poll shows no movement. Alex is wrong (just for a change) about momentum.

[Kowalski]

Victory now assured

http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/politics/referendum-news/scots-football-status-on-agenda-again-if-theres-a-no-vote-say-fifa-insiders.1409285056

Football shouldn't really play a part in this IMHO but it does as there are many Old Firm fans voting No because a Yes vote would final end any chances they have of playing south of the border.

[eFestivals]

No worries man.

Whatever the result I just hope we don't end up a bitter and divided nation. The Scottish parliament will have to ensure we come together.

Given the number of "no true Scot will vote no" comments I've seen, I'm not holding my breath. It looks like some are going to have great difficulty coming to terms with a no.

A yes vote would probably be less divisive, even tho the likielihood is that the nations views will be more evenly divided if there was a yes - and amusingly, they'll be more people living in a country they hadn't voted for than will be living under the govt that they voted for.

Edited August 29, 2014 by eFestivals

[Kowalski]

Given the number of "no true Scot will vote no" comments I've seen, I'm not holding my breath. It looks like some are going to have great difficulty coming to terms with a no.

Definitely. On social media there are a lot less "No" pictures than "Yes" because many No voters are fed up with the abuse. You post a genuine question somewhere, and you don't get answers, you get a lot of pish spouted back.

The "debate" has not reached out to the older generation. There are loads of people (on both sides) rightly pointing out that there are many blogs worth reading (and some which aren't!). How many pensioners are going to do this? The older generation will largely vote no as they won't want change and it'll be nothing to do with some of the nonsense we've heard from both sides.

[eFestivals]

You post a genuine question somewhere, and you don't get answers, you get a lot of pish spouted back.

The oddest thing is that yes-ers say they can win the debate, and then refuse to actually debate - which rather gives away even their own thinking.

It's a shame that there can't be parallel universes from 18th Sept, where one of yes and one is no. Observers like me could just sit back and watch the dropping jaws.