# Independence



## davec

Just a simple question, yes or no to independence. Don't want reasons or debates just a one word answer. I'll go first:
No


----------



## The Cueball

No!!!!!!!


----------



## Method Man

One for the Scots really?


----------



## Captain Pugwash

No....and you have to put more as you get message to short


----------



## Kerr

I've not decided yet.

Don't expect this thread to run smoothly.


----------



## Captain Pugwash

Method Man said:


> One for the Scots really?


no doubt why its posted in the Scotland section:thumb:


----------



## The Cueball

Method Man said:


> One for the Scots really?


hence why it's in the the Scotland section?!? :lol: 

but you guys should get a vote too... and I think it would be bad for all the UK, not just "us" 

:thumb:


----------



## Shariain

No!!!


----------



## Mrizzle

I will be going straight for the "No" box!


----------



## Derekh929

How can we vote yes or no we don't know what they are going to do or what it will cost or how it is going to happen only 1 year to vote and all they will do is slag each other off without concrete info to make a balanced decision , but I just can't see it working big public service projects in Scotland have not got a great record to date


----------



## davec

It's ok Derek this vote won't count!


----------



## Derekh929

davec said:


> It's ok Derek this vote won't count!


Yes it will if a man along the road from me see's it Mr Salmond it is:thumb:


----------



## MartyMcFly

No from me 

Sick to the back teeth of salmond and all his ****


----------



## Will_G

Yes for me


----------



## mkv

No!!!!


----------



## Derekh929

Will_G said:


> Yes for me


Will glad someone said yes I think it will depend on the area of Scotland you come from how the votes will go:thumb:

Why do you think we should be independent and what benefits do you think it may bring


----------



## Mtpagey

Will be a Yes from me but think i'll have emigrated by then


----------



## StuartyD

Another vote for "No" from me!


----------



## stevie_m

It's gonna be a no from me.


----------



## RD55 DUN

Im in the "no" camp at the moment...mainly because i cannot see how we can support ourselves and where we will end up in 20 years time, also cant stand Alex Salmond & his sidekick.

Not heard a constructive debate with the pro's and con's of it, and i also find it quite worrying that schoolkids will be able to vote on this, easily brainwashed.


----------



## Will_G

Derekh929 said:


> Will glad someone said yes I think it will depend on the area of Scotland you come from how the votes will go:thumb:
> 
> Why do you think we should be independent and what benefits do you think it may bring


Derek, I just feel that being more self focussed will help. It'll stop people blaming Westminister for the position we are in. I also think they could kickstart the economy better than what George Osbourne is doing.

I think it was interesting in the budget that he put forward Peterhead as one of the two sites for possible CCS. Whilst I think its a prime location for it with its close links to the North Sea my cynical side sees it as a £1bn carrot to stay united.


----------



## The Cueball

http://www.detailingworld.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=215777&highlight=devolution

:thumb:


----------



## Derekh929

Will_G said:


> Derek, I just feel that being more self focussed will help. It'll stop people blaming Westminister for the position we are in. I also think they could kickstart the economy better than what George Osbourne is doing.
> 
> I think it was interesting in the budget that he put forward Peterhead as one of the two sites for possible CCS. Whilst I think its a prime location for it with its close links to the North Sea my cynical side sees it as a £1bn carrot to stay united.


Very good point the last part this was mutted about ten years ago at Peterhead along with energy park , never came of due to amount of goverment funding was not enough, it has been battled on and off for years sounds a great concept for me and will bring lot's of work into the area. My big feer with any break up is costs spiralling out of control as when you let perple spend other peoples money politicians just don't care.


----------



## Derekh929

RD55 DUN said:


> Im in the "no" camp at the moment...mainly because i cannot see how we can support ourselves and where we will end up in 20 years time, also cant stand Alex Salmond & his sidekick.
> 
> Not heard a constructive debate with the pro's and con's of it, and i also find it quite worrying that schoolkids will be able to vote on this, easily brainwashed.


That last part sums it up for me no contructive debate and the age of voting should be kept the same for vote as surveys show younger people more likely to vote yes, i think the timing in the middle of a recovery and with what is going on in Europe it's a dangerous game for sure


----------



## Jack

My ********** answer No


----------



## Derek Mc

No from me, I just don't think full independence is financially viable however much I might want it, or not. I do think we do get a raw deal from Westminster on sev eral fronts but this isn't the answer either.


----------



## gally

I just find it funny that about 75% of the people voting have no clue what either side of the implications are. Same with the General Election, people don't have a clue what they are voting for.

If I asked someone what Independence would mean for us they would probably say "Acht we'll get to keep all oor oil innat stuff". Some of "Great Britain" aren't intelligent enough to vote on anything imo!


----------



## polt

I'm not 100% sure on this sometimes yes sometimes no. I was actually thinking the other day what I'd be worried about waiting for "budget" speech if it was Independent Scotland.

There are other things to find out how the break in union would work, obviously being part of the union for so long we would still have "liability" for uk cost such as armed forces pension pots, % of national debt this would be a divorce so it won't be a case of wake up the next morning and have no obligations to finance. What they need to do and I know it hurts for political people is tell us the true implications and costings for independent Scotland. Give us factual data past 20 years of income and expenditure add in liabilities and then tell us what it'll cost. Let us make an informed decision for once.


I also agree with comment about 16 year olds voting, when I was younger I was very patriotic, I'm none the less now but I have matured a lot and I can say independent Scotland would be great IF it's run properly. It would require more money, but are we willing to pay more for it?


----------



## Deanoecosse

Those arguing against 16 year olds been given the vote, why the hell shoudn't they? At 16 they are old enough to marry and old enough to join the army and FIGHT for their country, so it would be morally wrong for that same country to deny them the right to vote for its future. If the government are happy for them to hold a gun, they deserve the same rights to hold a pen and put an X in a box.


----------



## jamie crookston

It's a no from me. I just don't trust the lying wee fat pie eating turd. Not that any of them in westminster are any better, but we need them as much as they need us. I'm a proud Scot but i'm also a proud Brit


----------



## RD55 DUN

Deanoecosse said:


> Those arguing against 16 year olds been given the vote, why the hell shoudn't they? At 16 they are old enough to marry and old enough to join the army and FIGHT for their country, so it would be morally wrong for that same country to deny them the right to vote for its future. If the government are happy for them to hold a gun, they deserve the same rights to hold a pen and put an X in a box.


IMO I don't think they should be able to vote, the voting age in the UK is 18 (although this could be argued about Scotland). Reason being imo is that many people don't have a full grasp of what they are voting for/ understand the deeper meaning of politics fully (I will include myself in this), never mind 16/17 year olds. Lack of political knowledge and interest/lifeskills/immaturity/living history etc all spring to mind. Personally I see it as a method of getting a load of "YES" votes from schoolkids that could be easily manipulated. This is a huge decision.

I agree with your point above totally about what can be done at age 16, especially fighting for the country! Could open a massive can of worms.


----------



## V3nom

No.

Absolutely bonkers idea. No good can come of this.


----------



## knightstemplar

Yes, then rebuild Hadrians Wall to keep you's oot!
Only joking fellas, most of my colleagues are Scottish and we get on great, being a geordie helps:thumb:


----------



## The Cueball

knightstemplar said:


> Yes, then rebuild Hadrians Wall to keep you's oot!
> Only joking fellas, most of my colleagues are Scottish and we get on great, being a geordie helps:thumb:


Ram it....

:lol:


----------



## DOBE

I'll be 40 this year and have never voted.

But I'll be voting a big NO to some "tartan trouser wearing celeb wannabe" aka Eck Salmond running my country. Not a fricking chance.


----------



## MaDGeoff

As the cast of Grange Hill once said 'Just say NO'
I for one don't wanna be changing my Scottish Euro's into English £'s when I go down south, that would take away the chance to say "I think you'll find it's legal tender"


----------



## Spoony

I'm a no.

And as for Fight for your country at 16. Afaik you have to be 18 to be sent anywhere to fight


----------



## Tank.

Alex salmond is a ******,

And my answer is no, better together i say


----------



## Tank.

:detailer:


Spoony said:


> I'm a no.
> 
> And as for Fight for your country at 16. Afaik you have to be 18 to be sent anywhere to fight


Yea you cant be deployed until your 18, can still serve from 16 though


----------



## Grommit

Yes....


----------



## shakysco

YES !!!!

Have a read

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion...ng-to-lose-going-the-indy-route/#.UU1meIwgGSM


----------



## cheechy

I'm probably a no but haven't fully made up my mind. However I dont like the way in which the tory / libdem coalition are taking us in relation to Europe. Yes maybe we have gone too far if we're not in the euro - BUT - coming out all together is not going to help anyone. Europe are our nearest business partners - so if it looks like the UK government want to pull us out all together then my no may become a yes.


----------



## Shug

If scotland gets independence, its highly likely the snp will break up as a party. There are hugely different viewpoints and they only stay together for the independence crusade.
I rather wish people would educate themselves on the pros and cons.
People who vote no just because they dont like salmond or the snp are rather missing the point in a massive way.
Likewise, people who will vote yes because they hate the tories. 
Unionists say independence introduces uncertainty, and then say they'll get more powers for scotland if the votes no but wont say what they are (other than a halfassed partial fiscal autonomy thats doomed to failure)
They claim scotland wont be in europe, but then theres a sizable bunch in england that want the whole of the uk out.
Theres the argument that scotland would be in deficit, and treasury reports show scotland would have been in deficit more years than surplus in the last however many. Ignoring the fact that as a uk share, they never have been in surplus but then as scotland doesnt have full budgetry control its a rather pointless comparison to make. 
Better questions would be on a realistic level as to what would improve under independence. New powers that scotland have recieved have only come about because the snp won a majority that was supposed to be impossible under a westminster designed system, and have brought forward a referendum. As a minority government they were told to **** off when the asked for control over drink drive levels, gun legislation etc. Now all of a sudden there is a great deal of "ooo, we want to help the scottish parliament get more powers"
When scotland faced a nursing shortage crisis and a request was made to grant visas to qualified nurses offered jobs in scotland they were told england didnt have a shortage so no. Similar response with other requests. 
Regardless of how much you hate the snp (and I'm no fan) there needs to be a realisation that the vast majority of things would never have happened had the snp not had a majority. Not that they are great at fighting for things, but that westminster will keep throwing treats northbound to try keep independence a distant dream.
When labour next get in charge at holyrood (cos lets face it, lib dems and tories will never see power in scotland) things will go backwards because they are spinless and more interested in following orders from the mothership back at westminster than representing the people that elected them.
And I'm sorry, but getting the rest of the uk to vote on scottish independence is ridiculous. Not to mention against self determination as specified by the UN. 
So in short, yes from me.


----------



## R5 MEE

Yes but too big an issue for one word answer Shall I continue....


----------



## Derekh929

One thing that is important to me is an army and Navy as the Uk and America seem to get involved with every religous fight, and would be quite happy to pay 1p extra in the pound in tax to give our forces the best gear and help when they come out with housing and anything else. I did 6 years as an Engineer on trawlers in the North Sea and Atlantic and had a couple of ne'er death experiences that I would never like to repeat , but the boys and girls in Afghanistan are the real hero's and can't imagine what that would be like fighting the Taliban , they will just be a pawn in this debate


----------



## Mick

no from me. the OP really should have stuck a poll on this thread, would have made life easier 

If Jabba wants in the history books for something, he will have to think of something else because there is no way im signing up for independance. such a bad move for both sides in the medium-long term.



knightstemplar said:


> Yes, then rebuild Hadrians Wall to keep you's oot!
> Only joking fellas, most of my colleagues are Scottish and we get on great, being a geordie helps:thumb:


just clocked that... Si talia jungere possis sit tibi scire satis to you too :thumb:


----------



## Derekh929

Mick said:


> no from me. the OP really should have stuck a poll on this thread, would have made life easier
> 
> If Jabba wants in the history books for something, he will have to think of something else because there is no way im signing up for independance. such a bad move for both sides in the medium-long term.
> 
> just clocked that... Si talia jungere possis sit tibi scire satis to you too :thumb:


Mick I'm not keen but can't so No just yet but what are you basing your decision on? If I voted today it would be No for sure and we start to need the info coming out


----------



## Mick

it seems to me that most people (that I have spoken to) who want to vote yes, seem to be basing their decision purely on a finite resource based in the north sea, and not much else.

what happens in the not so distant future when this runs out (if indeed the resource does fall back to us - there's some dubiety over this point as well?), do we ask to come back in?

Thats before you consider the ramifications of a "british army", this would need complete restructuring as we (Scotland) will no longer be part of Britain, we will need to start our own defense system. it all begins to get very messy, very quickly.

Im not saying because something is hard work, it shouldnt be done. of course it should if there is a genuine benefit to be gained. but basing a decision as important as this one one income source which as I said is finite is just nonsense.


----------



## Derekh929

Mick said:


> it seems to me that most people (that I have spoken to) who want to vote yes, seem to be basing their decision purely on a finite resource based in the north sea, and not much else.
> 
> what happens in the not so distant future when this runs out (if indeed the resource does fall back to us - there's some dubiety over this point as well?), do we ask to come back in?
> 
> Thats before you consider the ramifications of a "british army", this would need complete restructuring as we (Scotland) will no longer be part of Britain, we will need to start our own defense system. it all begins to get very messy, very quickly.
> 
> Im not saying because something is hard work, it shouldnt be done. of course it should if there is a genuine benefit to be gained. but basing a decision as important as this one one income source which as I said is finite is just nonsense.


Fully agree Mick re oil and gas being another carrot for voters , I think we have a lot more life in the wells than people think by what I hear and massive oil reserves untapped on the west coast, and I think aScotland could become an engineering power house if we can train and educate for this area as massive in years to come , but have to say I pondered a yes vote it would have to be oil aside


----------



## DJ X-Ray

Probably a pointless post from me but my best pal brett's scottish and he says no,maybe because he's lived in england for 17 years.
He's from glasgow originally and i've been there with him 7 or 8 times over the years,and i've always got on with scottish people personally so i'd say to no to independence,but then i don't know the politics of it,but anyway that's my view on the subject.


----------



## Derekh929

DJ.X-Ray said:


> Probably a pointless post from me but my best pal brett's scottish and he says no,maybe because he's lived in england for 17 years.
> He's from glasgow originally and i've been there with him 7 or 8 times over the years,and i've always got on with scottish people personally so i'd say to no to independence,but then i don't know the politics of it,but anyway that's my view on the subject.


Very good point and that's why people are concerned re this vote, people are not voting on facts and a possible better future , they are voting some cause some don't like Salmond or because as you say moved away, I think 2014 is a big gamble for SNP I think people need confidence in there future to vote


----------



## The Cueball

THE OIL ISN'T SCOTTISH!!!!!!

:wall:


----------



## Mick

:lol:

subtle as ever Cuey :thumb:


----------



## Derekh929

The Cueball said:


> THE OIL ISN'T SCOTTISH!!!!!!
> 
> :wall:


I would like to see you debate that with Salmond:lol:


----------



## knightstemplar

Mick said:


> no from me. the OP really should have stuck a poll on this thread, would have made life easier
> 
> If Jabba wants in the history books for something, he will have to think of something else because there is no way im signing up for independance. such a bad move for both sides in the medium-long term.
> 
> just clocked that... Si talia jungere possis sit tibi scire satis to you too :thumb:


Ubi concordia, Ibi victoria :thumb:


----------



## Mick

royal arch? 

anyway, all rather OT there :lol:


----------



## davec

The Cueball said:


> THE OIL ISN'T SCOTTISH!!!!!!
> 
> :wall:


and also production rates are falling year on year (17% last year) there is talk of more oil still undiscovered but at the minute its just talk.


----------



## Derekh929

davec said:


> and also production rates are falling year on year (17% last year) there is talk of more oil still undiscovered but at the minute its just talk.


But surely price per barrel more important than amount, new tech will extend well , then on to renewables tide in pentland firth could power Scotland the current is amazing seen us full power in trawler and hardly moving , they will master this tech as they are recruiting some good engineers:thumb:


----------



## knightstemplar

Mick said:


> royal arch?
> 
> anyway, all rather OT there :lol:


Haha


----------



## Mrizzle

Shug said:


> They claim scotland wont be in europe, but then theres a sizable bunch in england that want the whole of the uk out.


This isn't really the argument relating to the EU. The argument is that we would not be granted automatic acceptance into Europe and that membership would force us to give up a greater degree of sovereignty as membership would almost certainly be conditional on the acceptance of accepting the Euro and thus losing financial autonomy. Salmond has lied and been caught out for making false claims about this. If we are not in the EU then we will lose out on huge subsidies and trading links and, in the current financial climate, this is a risk that we cannot afford (no pun intended to take).

What about the consideration of the Barnett formula which is used to calculate public services expenditure. Under the union we in Scotland actually do very well.

In monetary figures, this would work out as (per person) a spend of:
England £7,121
Scotland £8,623
Wales £8,139
Northern Ireland £9,385

There is NOTHING to suggest that we will be any better off in an independent Scotland.


----------



## Mrizzle

Mick said:


> Thats before you consider the ramifications of a "british army", this would need complete restructuring as we (Scotland) will no longer be part of Britain, we will need to start our own defense system. it all begins to get very messy, very messy.


Not only that but the Scottish regiments are comprised of British servicemen and women from all over the country and all the equipment has been purchased by central government to maintain the security of Britain. We have no entitlement to any of this. Starting out own defence force would cost billions and even then we would require collective security and would have to negotiate entry to NATO. This may well be granted but there are NO guarantees. We need cold hard facts not speculation, empty promises and false claims.


----------



## The Cueball

Mrizzle said:


> This isn't really the argument relating to the EU. The argument is that we would not be granted automatic acceptance into Europe and that membership would force us to give up a greater degree of sovereignty as membership would almost certainly be conditional on the acceptance of accepting the Euro and thus losing financial autonomy. Salmond has lied and been caught out for making false claims about this. If we are not in the EU then we will lose out on huge subsidies and trading links and, in the current financial climate, this is a risk that we cannot afford (no pun intended to take).
> 
> There is NOTHING to suggest that we will be any better off in an independent Scotland.


most of the people I speak to who want to vote yes, conveniently forget about the euro... several claim that we will just used the GBP.....(great BRITSH pound)

eh.... what!?!? :tumbleweed:

another classic is we'll use the scottish notes....:speechles

some people really scare the s**t out of me sometimes....

:wall:


----------



## Mrizzle

Tell me about it. I'm a modern studies teacher and have serious concerns about giving the vote to 16 and 17 year olds. Trust me, first hand experience has proven that the vast majority of them have little or no understanding of what is at stake, the importance of this vote and the potential significance and impact of it. Sadly, this is also true of a significant number of adults I speak to about it.


----------



## TheGooner84

nope!


----------



## TheGooner84

Mrizzle said:


> Tell me about it. I'm a modern studies teacher and have serious concerns about giving the vote to 16 and 17 year olds. Trust me, first hand experience has proven that the vast majority of them have little or no understanding of what is at stake, the importance of this vote and the potential significance and impact of it. Sadly, this is also true of a significant number of adults I speak to about it.


yeah the younger ones will probably think its a good idea. i know if tou were to have asked me around 10 year ago i would have been all for it. age has helped there


----------



## gerz1873

No, no and NO


----------



## brian walker

This whole independence thing scares me - Im not political but the independence vote Ill make an effort to go and vote as it is indeed something monumental indeed If we get this wrong then it will wreck scotland. This is what salmond misses - just glosses over the point that he has not worked out the finances. Simply put how the hell can can he balance the books ? Hes not come up and told us the full facts or even attempted to explain how it all works and how he intends to pay for it - keeps mooting this everlasting source of revenue called the north sea oil....

1. The north sea oil is not unlimited

2. The world is trying to move away from reliance on oil

3. Employment in scotland revolves around english companies - break away and this will have a huge effect on english companies - do you think they will remain in scotland and pay taxes to scotland as well as england ? Nope i dont think so either and they will move back south.

4.Our money

5. Our defence

6. Infrastructure

7. Financial systems ?

it wont work and we would fail. It would wreck the country.


----------



## moosh

It's a no from me.

I'm scared that the yes vote wins - then what I'm stuck in a country I was born in and hail from but don't want to be a part of.

What else I worry about is what happens when the English get pissed off with us deciding and they end up wanting to cut us off?!


----------



## moosh

The Cueball said:


> THE OIL ISN'T SCOTTISH!!!!!!
> 
> :wall:


Same as the wind farms!! They are all owned by foreign countries.


----------



## Subc

Too Bloody late,should have done it at the start of the OIl Boom we would be sitting pretty.


----------



## Bratwurst

No from me.


----------



## ShiningScotsman

No - I have nothing against Salmond or his crew but this is a bad idea anyway and even more so in this market/economy.

The world has gone mad and I cant help but think that politicians are out to make a name for themselves and go down in history no matter what.
We are a small island for chrissake!

A flake of snow is perhaps the most fragile thing in the world but just look at what it can achieve when it sticks together!


----------



## Bigstuff

nonono


----------



## verbarthe

Undecided as yet, as already said previously, too much slagging each other off, too much scaremongering from both sides, and a dire shortage of hard facts and common sense . Really is a sort of emotional freedom vs practicality type of thing. Don t really care for Salmond myself as any neepheed that despoils Scotland with windfarms is an A/hole IMO .


----------



## chrisc

Yes
If it means i can go over the border to get cheap ciggies


----------



## Derekh929

chrisc said:


> Yes
> If it means i can go over the border to get cheap ciggies


Aye but you will have to get in first lol and pay salmond tax:thumb:


----------



## shakysco

£331 million pound investment in one oil field today , I would say there is plenty Scottish oil left ....

I work for a company that makes bits for oil rigs and subsea stuff to and I know the money that is getting spend at the moment ain't getting spent for nothing ....


----------



## Mrizzle

But the point is that it's a finite resource and will run out at some point. It makes no sense to base our future economy on something that won't last. We should have done what Norway did and banked the money for the future and spent only the interest. We didn't and it is too late to do so now. Therefore, we are setting ourselves for a complete economic collapse in the future if we persist with this belief/argument.


----------



## Shariain

There was a study done back in 2008 about the revenue Scotland could make from its oil the study claimed that with the increase in oil prices the oil revenue totals £12.8 billion. 

Now skip forward to 2010. 
Total expenditure on the NHS in Scotland in 2009/10 was £11.1bn.

That doesn't cover unemployment or disability so here is the uk cost.

There are 2.5m long-term sick and disabled unemployed people in the UK. The cost to the taxpayer is £13bn a year.

So in the act of kindness lets split 50/50 and say Scotland's total is £6.5bn

£11.1bn health care costs 
£6.5bn sick, disabled & unemployed 

I make that £17.6bn give or take a few bn and the revenue is only £12.8 billion. 

Where does the difference come from that right our new tax band for Scottish workers.


----------



## Mrizzle

Good post and that just says it all really. It's an ill thought out plan based on nothing more than some romantic ideal dreamt up by someone with misplaced feelings of patriotism who is living in the past. It has no factual basis and will destroy this country. This isn't evolution...it's regression.


----------



## Bratwurst

Don't forget the terrific, stable, dependable Call Centre Economy lol


----------



## Shariain

Then you have English companies with offices/work shops in Scotland now if Scotland do get independence then we will have our own tax system so not only will the English company be paying tax to England but will also have to pay it to us. Now if it was your company would you pay 2 lots of tax were before you only had to pay 1. 

No you wouldn't so what will the English company do. Well they will pull out of Scotland driving up unemployment and further damaging the new Scottish economy.


Edit
Sorry not fair to just say English it could be any nation with offices in both England and Scotland.


----------



## Shug

Shariain said:


> There was a study done back in 2008 about the revenue Scotland could make from its oil the study claimed that with the increase in oil prices the oil revenue totals £12.8 billion.
> 
> Now skip forward to 2010.
> Total expenditure on the NHS in Scotland in 2009/10 was £11.1bn.
> 
> That doesn't cover unemployment or disability so here is the uk cost.
> 
> There are 2.5m long-term sick and disabled unemployed people in the UK. The cost to the taxpayer is £13bn a year.
> 
> So in the act of kindness lets split 50/50 and say Scotland's total is £6.5bn
> 
> £11.1bn health care costs
> £6.5bn sick, disabled & unemployed
> 
> I make that £17.6bn give or take a few bn and the revenue is only £12.8 billion.
> 
> Where does the difference come from that right our new tax band for Scottish workers.


So you're suggesting 25% of the scottish population is taking benefits for unemployment and disability?
I'm going to suggest your assumptions are a tad out


----------



## Shariain

Shug said:


> So you're suggesting 25% of the scottish population is taking benefits for unemployment and disability?
> I'm going to suggest your assumptions are a tad out


Prove it. Lol.

Like I posted before.

There are 2.5m long-term sick and disabled unemployed people in the UK. The cost to the taxpayer is £13bn a year.

So a 50/50 split would make 1.25 million Scottish people claiming now I know it's not a 50/50 split but like I said in the act of kindness take it as a fair split.


----------



## rossmuir1978

Madness to consider this when the economy is so bad- and salmond is a **** -100% NO!


----------



## weegaz22

Deanoecosse said:


> Those arguing against 16 year olds been given the vote, why the hell shoudn't they? At 16 they are old enough to marry and old enough to join the army and FIGHT for their country, so it would be morally wrong for that same country to deny them the right to vote for its future. If the government are happy for them to hold a gun, they deserve the same rights to hold a pen and put an X in a box.


While i can see your point the point i see is that 16 year olds are very easily led, like being led into joining the army which turns out to be nothing like they actually expected, but hey ho its too late now laddie your signed up, oh and watch out for those IED's while your at it...

while there are a good chuck of decent 16 y/o human being's out there are also a lot of ill informed neds and will want the seperation from England from a simply rebelious point of view without looking at the actual pro's and cons of what a split would do.

Hell i'll even bet that the night before the referendum Braveheart will be all over the telly to try and rally any patriotic feelings up for those a bit short of critical thinking.

currently my position is NO, until more discussion and debate on the issue is discussed.


----------



## Stevoraith

gally said:


> I just find it funny that about 75% of the people voting have no clue what either side of the implications are. Same with the General Election, people don't have a clue what they are voting for.


Sadly I feel the number is a lot higher than 75%, and to be honest I include myself in that number. Why? Because it seems impossible to get facts without a load of spin on top.

How can you possibly know what the real implications are if all you can get are biased opinions from either side?



Deanoecosse said:


> Those arguing against 16 year olds been given the vote, why the hell shoudn't they? At 16 they are old enough to marry and old enough to join the army and FIGHT for their country, so it would be morally wrong for that same country to deny them the right to vote for its future. If the government are happy for them to hold a gun, they deserve the same rights to hold a pen and put an X in a box.


Yeah, but the legal voting age in this country is 18. It's the same accross the vast majority of the world.
Why should it be any different for the independence referendum?



Shariain said:


> There was a study done back in 2008 about the revenue Scotland could make from its oil the study claimed that with the increase in oil prices the oil revenue totals £12.8 billion.
> 
> Now skip forward to 2010.
> Total expenditure on the NHS in Scotland in 2009/10 was £11.1bn.
> 
> That doesn't cover unemployment or disability so here is the uk cost.
> 
> There are 2.5m long-term sick and disabled unemployed people in the UK. The cost to the taxpayer is £13bn a year.
> 
> So in the act of kindness lets split 50/50 and say Scotland's total is £6.5bn
> 
> £11.1bn health care costs
> £6.5bn sick, disabled & unemployed
> 
> I make that £17.6bn give or take a few bn and the revenue is only £12.8 billion.
> 
> Where does the difference come from that right our new tax band for Scottish workers.


This is typical of the nonsense we see from both sides of the argument!
If you want to quote figures then don't just pluck assumptions out of the air. Scotland has about 8% of the UK population so why would they have 50% of the long-term sick/unemployed!?
If you use 8% of the £13bn you quote then the figure for Scotland becomes just over £1bn.
Add that to the £11.1bn healthcare costs and suddenly the figure is £12.1bn which is less than the £12.8bn revenue and suddenly your point is null and void.

Unless I can be convinced otherwise by a sound financial argument then I will vote no, but the example above perfectly illustrates my point about people spouting rubbish figures for their own agenda which just confuse matters.

I did read a good argument for independence written by Irvine Welsh. I can't find the link but it was along the lines of Scotland being better able to target it's spending as it doesn't have the same types of poverty as England.

Would I want Salmond running my country though? Not a bloody chance!


----------



## Mrizzle

Stevoraith said:


> Sadly I feel the number is a lot higher than 75%, and to be honest I include myself in that number. Why? Because it seems impossible to get facts without a load of spin on top.
> 
> How can you possibly know what the real implications are if all you can get are biased opinions from either side?
> 
> Yeah, but the legal voting age in this country is 18. It's the same accross the vast majority of the world.
> Why should it be any different for the independence referendum?
> 
> I did read a good argument for independence written by Irvine Welsh. I can't find the link but it was along the lines of Scotland being better able to target it's spending as it doesn't have the same types of poverty as England.
> 
> Would I want Salmond running my country though? Not a bloody chance!


That's not an argument for independence in my mind but one for either increased powers for the Scottish parliament or for a federal system. It's not even accurate to argue that we in Scotland have different types of poverty. Different regions even WITHIN Scotland have different priorities with regards to social and economic problems.

However, I totally agree with your point about unsubstantiated arguments and about the voting age. The latter is a desperate attempt by Salmond and the SNP to influence the outcome of this referendum.


----------



## insanejim69

RD55 DUN said:


> Im in the "no" camp at the moment...mainly because i cannot see how we can support ourselves and where we will end up in 20 years time, also cant stand Alex Salmond & his sidekick.
> 
> Not heard a constructive debate with the pro's and con's of it, and i also find it quite worrying that schoolkids will be able to vote on this, easily brainwashed.


I pretty much agree mate, and its a big "NO" from me.

James


----------



## Stevoraith

Mrizzle said:


> That's not an argument for independence in my mind but one for either increased powers for the Scottish parliament or for a federal system. It's not even accurate to argue that we in Scotland have different types of poverty. Different regions even WITHIN Scotland have different priorities with regards to social and economic problems.


Agreed mate, 'devo max' or whatever they call it may well be the best of both worlds.
I also may be doing Welsh's article a dis-service as I can't really remember it, I just remember thinking that it was the first pro-independence article I had read which had me nodding in agreement!


----------



## DW58

No

As far as Salmond is concerned it's not really a question of independence, it's all about power and personal gain. If Scotland were to gain independence in 2014, this would shortly be followed by a power struggle within the SNP as it's quite clear that Salmond's vile sidekick want's to be the main woman.

Most sixteen and seventeen year olds simply aren't mature enough to vote on such a critical issue and will be easily influenced which is exactly what Salmond wants.

We've done very well as The United Kingdom since 1707 and I see no reason to change things.

GOD SAVE THE QUEEN


----------



## DW58

Herewith an original and different outlook on Scottish independence from Mac and Rocket of Bluestone 42.


----------



## Mrizzle

Oh well...we can all be relieved that it'll only cost us(/waste) £13.3 million to run this referendum (£3.3 million more than estimated).


----------



## JenJen

1. Yes to independance
2. Only scottish residents should be allowed to vote, if this was about england scots would not be allowed to have a say.


----------



## DW58

I think you're going to be disappointed lassie - Fat Eck and his corrupt cabal are pissing into the wind at present as the people see right through his lies and deception.


----------



## Monkeyboy

Only a matter of time until some fool had a god save the queen SIG on a Scottish independence thread on a detailing website.


----------



## DW58

So I'm a fool am I, well if that's a case I'm proud to be a British fool - seems quite a few others agree with me. Perhaps you'd like to tally up the yes and no posts on this thread, it's pretty conclusive.

Never mind you won't be so arrogant in September next year, then perhaps we can re-evaluate who's the fool? Enjoy your delusion of independence while you can.

BTW it's not a signature, purely the final line in my post.


----------



## Bratwurst

Foolish to have love and respect for OUR nation's Queen?...

Yet Salmond and his lying/dodging crackpot cohorts deserve what you don't give the Queen?...


----------



## Monkeyboy

Damn this predictive text, I intended to type TOOL !

I still see no need for your close out line on a thread about SCOTTISH independence unless you are English. 

The only reason for it was to trigger a response which you have now received


----------



## Monkeyboy

Subc said:


> Too Bloody late,should have done it at the start of the OIl Boom we would be sitting pretty.


Like Norway have done !

And we all know how well they manage their business and look after their workers (union)


----------



## DW58

I am not English, I can trace my Scots ancestry as far back as records go. Despite my Scots heritage I'm proud to be British and that's what I wish to remain while you continue to demostrate your ignorance and bigotry. 

I'm not alone - many Scots are proud to be British and support the Crown and Her Majesty. That you choose not to is up to you, but there's no need to isult me and display your own inadequacy.

There will be a referendum next year which the SNP have gone out of their way to rig and manipulate to suit their preferred result, but the people will decide on September 18th 2013 and I suspect you'll be disappointed with the result.


----------



## Monkeyboy

DW58 said:


> I am not English, I can trace my Scots ancestry as far back as records go. Despite my Scots heritage I'm proud to be British and that's what I wish to remain while you continue to demostrate your ignorance and bigotry.
> 
> I'm not alone - many Scots are proud to be British and support the Crown and Her Majesty. That you choose not to is up to you, but there's no need to isult me and display your own inadequacy.
> 
> There will be a referendum next year which the SNP have gone out of their way to rig and manipulate to suit their preferred result, but the people will decide on September 18th 2013 and I suspect you'll be disappointed with the result.


I fail to see where my post demonstrated ignorance and bigotry.

You talk about insults and inadequacy however you can't spell 'demonstrate' or 'insult' .

You are indeed entitled to support the crown and her majesty if that's what makes you happy but I doubt very much that the majority of Scottish people on this detailing forum who are siding to the 'NO' vote on independence give a toss about supporting the crown and god saving her !

And as for being disappointed on Sept 18th I'm afraid I will be giving not one toss either as it's my birthday the day before and will more than likely be lying in a puddle of my own **** and puke !

Hope your not disappointed


----------



## DW58

Monkeyboy said:


> Hope your not disappointed


Don't you mean "Hope _you're_ not disappointed"? My errors were typos, yours isn't


----------



## Monkeyboy

Why didunt I fink of that !


----------



## rossmuir1978

NAW ,
And come the 18th September I expect a pumpin of fat Eck


----------



## Monkeyboy

Fat Eck will come good


----------



## The Cueball

DW58 said:


> I am not English, I can trace my Scots ancestry as far back as records go. Despite my Scots heritage I'm proud to be British and that's what I wish to remain while you continue to demostrate your ignorance and bigotry.
> 
> I'm not alone - many Scots are proud to be British and support the Crown and Her Majesty. That you choose not to is up to you, but there's no need to isult me and display your own inadequacy.
> 
> There will be a referendum next year which the SNP have gone out of their way to rig and manipulate to suit their preferred result, but the people will decide on September 18th 2013 and I suspect you'll be disappointed with the result.


whilst I don't share your love of the German crown and majesty..

I do hope we get the smarter people voting NO when the time is right...

:thumb:


----------



## rossdook

Hope this works? Hopefully may lighten up the mood for the doomsayers...


----------



## Gruffs

As a Briton from England. 

Can I ask why Scotland would benefit from leaving the UK? It must be significant but it seems you would gain little more than you would lose and it would cost a huge amount to do. 

And if Scotland votes to leave the UK, does it remain part of Great Britain or are you out of that by default?


----------



## T.E.D. Jordan

It saddens me that this vote has came about, it's fair to have it as it will decide (fairly) what the Scottish people want, but it's sad to think of what we'd both loose as nations, more than what we'd gain as the United Kingdom. 

On a sidenote as its been discusses allready - I'm no monarchy lover, but I'm certainly not a hater of it. The cost to the individual taxpayer is minimal and the tourist industry that so many people rely on gains massively from it. It's also something other countries love about us, however quaint or behind the times it may make us look to ignorant foreigners who think her majesty 'rules the UK people', it's still something that makes us individual and an attraction!

Jordan


----------



## JenJen

Im not saddened at all. Scotland needs this vote to go yes. Im not going to sit here and type long winded opinions on why I believe it's for the best. 

My only points I will mention are:-

Self determenation. Do you really want england having a say in scotlands business when we arent allowed a say in englands business. England has NEVER given a hoot about anyone barr england...

Power over defence and foreign policy meaning us scots have our own say if we get involved in war etc.

And then the main bit... in the 1970s the english parliament was happy to call the north sea oil "scots oil" but now we threaten to go independent they create false misleadong documents putting scots off independence. 

But Scotland will benifit massively from being independent from England.


----------



## Mrizzle

JenJen said:


> Im not saddened at all. Scotland needs this vote to go yes. Im not going to sit here and type long winded opinions on why I believe it's for the best.
> 
> My only points I will mention are:-
> 
> Self determenation. Do you really want england having a say in scotlands business when we arent allowed a say in englands business. England has NEVER given a hoot about anyone barr england...
> 
> Power over defence and foreign policy meaning us scots have our own say if we get involved in war etc.
> 
> And then the main bit... in the 1970s the english parliament was happy to call the north sea oil "scots oil" but now we threaten to go independent they create false misleadong documents putting scots off independence.
> 
> But Scotland will benifit massively from being independent from England.


Point 1 isn't terribly accurate. You have probably heard of the West Lothian question. Our Scottish representatives regularly make decisions about issues that relate to England...sometimes even solely England.

I don't find your second point particularly persuasive I'm afraid. I don't think you'll find the views of those in Scotland varies tremendously from those in the redt of the UK about entering into armed conflict. No government has to listen to its people about which conflicts they enter into.

As for point three, misleading in what way? There's little evidence to back that we would either be better or worse off in regards to oil revenue. Neither side has accurate figures. However, one thing is for certain....it WILL run out. Then what? It is a gross error to build an economy around a finite resource. When that happens we will be worse off...a LOT worse off.

JenJen, I respect your opinions but merely challenge them.


----------



## JenJen

Challenge away but I have a life away from forums so prepare for along wait for me to consider replying.


----------



## TooFunny

A great response to a decent reply to your post! :wall:

Personally I hope Scotland votes yes! We might start seeing a reduction in our NHs prescriptions then without all the subsidies


----------



## Mrizzle

JenJen said:


> Challenge away but I have a life away from forums so prepare for along wait for me to consider replying.


Just as well your post count isn't almost 15 times that of my 113 post or that would seem like a very strange response. Oh no wait...hang on...it is.  :eusa-think:


----------



## stevie_m

Monkeyboy said:


> Like Norway have done !
> 
> And we all know how well they manage their business and look after their workers (union)


Yes but they never sold their souls to the Americans to get a quick buck like the government did.

I just pray to god that we get a NO vote as there is no turning back, we will be like Greece, Portugal and Italy within a generation.



TooFunny said:


> A great response to a decent reply to your post! :wall:
> 
> Personally I hope Scotland votes yes! We might start seeing a reduction in our NHs prescriptions then without all the subsidies





Mrizzle said:


> Just as well your post count isn't almost 15 times that of my 113 post or that would seem like a very strange response. Oh no wait...hang on...it is.  :eusa-think:


Give the lady a chance she is bloody pregnant and need her sleep, Atleast she was honest enough to reply that she has seen your comment.


----------



## a8tdi

Yes or No, i doubt the average Scot will notice any changes. We will continue to get shafted, fuel prices, state of the roads.. etc...

Apologies for not answering simply yes or no !


----------



## taylor8

I for one are not looking forward to the massive tax hikes, you think its bad now, wait till we go independent. that's why i will be voting 'NO'


----------



## davec

A glimpse of the future?!!!


----------



## Dave KG

No, unequivocally no. I wont repeat the reasons why, they have already been discussed at length in this thread... I'm proud to be Scottish, but I am also proud to be British and the very thought of Alex Salmond running the country sends a true shiver down my spine and not in a good way.


----------



## DW58

Well put Dave :thumb:

There's no hope of a democratic Scotland under Salmond & Co., he's a dictator now and there's no likelihood of any change were his cabal to get their wish.


----------



## TooFunny

Give the lady a chance she is bloody pregnant and need her sleep said:


> Sorry but that was not how the reply comes across at all, it was a simple case of 'you don't agree with me so I can't be bothered to reply to you' plain and simple and detrimental to a half intelligent thread.


----------



## Shariain

+1 with Dave KG.


----------



## Monkeyboy

Dave KG said:


> No, unequivocally no. I wont repeat the reasons why, they have already been discussed at length in this thread... I'm proud to be Scottish, but I am also proud to be British and the very thought of Alex Salmond running the country sends a true shiver down my spine and not in a good way.


Dave, what about independence under the command of someone else ?


----------



## TooFunny

So so you mean having a separate government but being a part of another country?....


----------



## Monkeyboy

DW58 said:


> Well put Dave :thumb:
> 
> There's no hope of a democratic Scotland under Salmond & Co., he's a dictator


The only leader In the UK with a democratic majority ! GSAS !


----------



## Gruffs

Seeing as all Scottish people have a British passport and British citizenship currently, would you have to declare yourself Scottish to be 'on the list' as it were? 

Or, do you need to be born in Scotland?

Would you have to do this before voting in the referendum?

There seems to be so many unknowns that making an informed decision is very difficult. 

So how can you know what is for the better?

What significant national resource does Scotland have besides oil?


----------



## Dave KG

Is my "no" based purely on Salmond? No, certainly not. I wouldn't want him or his party governing anything more than a tea bag, but there are deeper reasons for me voting no and to be honest, they are discussed at length in this thread, but I will highlight one key point from Cueball...



The Cueball said:


> THE OIL ISN'T SCOTTISH!!!!!!
> 
> :wall:


Owned by companies that are not Scottish, though they may have "bases" in Scotland. And this is the resource we hear time and time again getting banged on about.

Please, someone in the SNP show us some serious figures, not scratch the surface to swing the argument in favour of what we want figures (we all know our way round statistics enough to know how to mould them) that show Scotland would be better off and survive as an independent country. I don't see any that convince me, and for that reason, it is a "no" - certainly until I see good evidence that would support Scotland being able to survive as an independent country.


----------



## DW58

There's confusion between "Oil" and "Oil Revenue" in many cases.

I never cease to be amazed at the naivety shown by many so-called Scottish Nationalists and the idyllic view of an independent Scotland they have painted for themselves, not least of these is _Alexander Elliot Anderson Salmond_.

Has any real consideration been given to how they would set up all the government departments and agencies need to run an independent Scotland in less than two years. Where is the expertise going to come from, who is going to run them? How is Scotland going to set up and run embassies overseas, where will she get her diplomats?

It's long past time someone ran an exposé of Salmond's exploits, abuse of privilege etc., time the wee toad was brought to account for his abuse of public funds for his overseas junkets like the one in New York this weekend.

Sits back and awaits a broadside from a certain simian member.


----------



## The Cueball

Yes, show me the true costs for becoming a totally independent nation...

all this chat of our own defense, our own this, our own that... having to either join the euro or make up our own money -cant use the Great British Pound anymore eh???

all these deluded people must think it will cost nothing to sort all that out...

or shall the tax payers just lay for it for the next 5 generators???

yeah, let's get our amazing country deeper into debt than we can possible imagine...

or are the Engerlishshes just going to hand assets over to us, pay rent for us, help us out pull away from them???

if this BS was a film, it would be called the Darien Scheme revisited... and wouldn't even get money to make it... :wall:

maybe some of the "yes" people would like to remind themselves of how bad an independent Scotland really was.....

:thumb:


----------



## Dave KG

JenJen said:


> But Scotland will benifit massively from being independent from England.


What I would like to see is *proof* (not massaged statistics) of this. Hard evidence that Scotland can financially handle being independent and moreover, actually be better off.


----------



## Dave KG

The Cueball said:


> all this chat of our own defense, our own this, our own that... having to either join the euro or make up our own money -cant use the Great British Pound anymore eh???
> 
> all these deluded people must think it will cost nothing to sort all that out...


Presumably while they are getting all dewey eyed about Scotland not being run by Westminster and running all of its own affairs with the vast amounts of oil that we have in the North Sea to see us through.......

In seriousness, this is why I would like hard evidence and the true costs (not propaganda from either side) to be put forward so people can make an informed choice and see what would really happen to Scotland if it was independent. Do we have the money to pay for the changes required, pay for the defence, how would it affect trade etc etc etc.... let us see, in proper facts, how an independent Scotland would really fare.


----------



## Mrizzle

DW58 said:


> Has any real consideration been given to how they would set up all the government departments and agencies need to run an independent Scotland in less than two years. Where is the expertise going to come from, who is going to run them? How is Scotland going to set up and run embassies overseas, where will she get her diplomats?


This is an excellent point. The true cost of creating this level of political infrastructure and foreign relations would be astronomical!


----------

