Scottish Independence thread

[Denzark]

As we are seeing in Scotland, you can't have a currency union without a political union - and that is why all serious euro politicians are always always trying for greater integration. Again, Europe is an issue wherein both sides throw insane figures around without any representation of the truth.

But I can't see what we would lose by leaving Europe - possibly financial - but that can be made up by saving the ridiculous sums we pour down the throat of Europe (is it something like £85m per day?). I don't see, not having the Euro - how we are standing so closely together that leaving would be a problem.

I think what Carswell is worried about is not whether or not Dave is true about a Y/N referendum - but to what extent he is willing to go to get reform - which loads of major Euros tell him is impossible - and what degree of reform will be insufficient to trigger the referendum promise - remember it will only happen if he fails to renegotiate various STUFF but what is the STUFF?

[Mr Mystery]

There do remain unknowns. But given Call Me Dave's general incompetence (look at the job he's managed persuading Scots unity is the way forward....) any attempt to negotiate seems destined to fail - unless he can pick up a thread other countries are unhappy with, and not just stamp his feet because he doesn't like the likely next president etc.

[Al Shut]

I wonder if English would remain a working language if the UK were to leave the EU

[Mr Mystery]

I'd imagine so.

English is a useful language legally speaking due to it being quite direct. With no inflection built in, it's a lot easier to write a contract or other legal type agreement in English than in other languages for instance.

Plus, computers are programmed in English. And you know, America. That helps.

[Denzark]

English is the language of NATO...just as well really...

[Mr Mystery]

Going back on topic....

Headlines today are a bit of a hoot.

And interesting that it's suddenly down to Gordon Brown to 'save the Union'.

I know this seems churlish, but surely if there is a yes vote, Cameron will have to go? He's palmed off responsibility for the independence thing to Labour anyways - whilst I appreciate that does make a certain amount of political sense given the Tories standing (or indeed lack thereof) in Scotland, it's not really what you'd expect from the Country's leader.

Now here I know I biased - I'm a lefty, and no fan of Cameron, so looking to get the impression of others.

[Denzark]

He thinks he won't - his reasoning sounded quite cogent. However there is already talk of a vote of no confidence.

Interesting details in the Economist. I don't know if it is rated as an SME - but reckons last year the Scottish deficit was £14Bn - 11% of GDP and thus more than your Italys, Greeces etc. With Salmond promising to increase government spending by 3% it will be interesting...

http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21606869-independent-scotland-would-be-rich-country-terrible-prospects-costly-solitude

[Wildeybeast]

Honestly, it's win win for Cameron. If Scotland votes no, it erodes Salmond's power and that can only be good for the Tories. If they vote yes, he's the PM that allowed the people of the UK to have a democratic say over their own future and it underlines the credibility of his promise for an EU referendum.

I don't think there is any significant opposition to his agreement for the vote in his own party or Tory grassroots and since the NO campaign has cross party support, no one party carries the blame. Perhaps most crucially, the British public don't seem to massively care about it. People may want them to stay or go, but most seem trap acknowledge it is up to them to decide. If Scotland goes, it's no one fault but Scotland.

[YorkNecromancer]

If Scotland leave the union, honestly, no-one knows what will happen. The chance to rebuild from scratch is rarely a bad thing though. Difficult and prone to mistakes - the USA is proof of this - but it often leads to much good.

England will be f***ed forever. Because of the way our voting system works, it basically means the Tories will stay in power forever. Not because they've got more votes, but simply because the have more votes in the areas with the most parlimentary seats. It will be a nightmare because the one universal truth of the Tory party is they don't give a s*** about you, your friends, your family, your problems, or anything except lining the pockets of the rich.

http://www.change.org/p/david-cameron-hold-an-inquiry-into-benefit-sanctions-that-killed-my-brother

When Boris Johnson eventually dethrones Cameron (and he will), we will be ruined. Not because he's an out-of-touch idiot - he's as much that as MArk Callaway is The Undertaker - but because he's such a ruthlessly self-serving sociopath. A man who would do anything, say anything to achieve power, and is clever enough at manipulating his public image ('Gosh, look at me, I'm such a buffoon, there's no way I'm faking any of this, gosh, what a buffoon I am with my silly hair and silly voice and silly, silly gaffes. I'm just an upper class twit, gosh gosh golly gosh.') that people genuinely believe he's a fool. He's a dangerous, dangerous man.

I really, really hope Scotland stay, because I don't want to have to emigrate. :(

[Kirsten]

it is all moot. once I take over in a few years I will be erasing the borders anyway.

[Mr Mystery]

I just can't shake the feeling that Cameron is playing with fire.

To his benefit - he's a Tory, and a Tory led 'No' campaign in Scotland is pretty much doomed to failure from the outset - it's been predominantly Tory politics (including New Labour fact fans) that provided the drive for the referendum. So it's kind of understandable that the No campaign has been mostly Labour lead - to the point Gordon Brown has been called in for a last ditch attempt to solidify the No vote.

To his detriment - he's still PM, and as such his hands off approach to the No campaign, and his refusal to debate with Salmond could be seen as political cowardice, and an attempt to distance his own political career from a less than preferable outcome for his supporters.

It's just a horrible one to work out. I reckon if he tries to foist blame for a Yes vote onto Labour, it could blow up in his face horribly.

[40kGamer]

I'd imagine so.

English is a useful language legally speaking due to it being quite direct. With no inflection built in, it's a lot easier to write a contract or other legal type agreement in English than in other languages for instance.

Plus, computers are programmed in English. And you know, America. That helps.

...and Americans in general never learn any other languages. :p

Good to know that our fearless leaders in Washington don't look much past their own belly buttons.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/09/scotland-independence-vote-us-headache

[daboarder]

I'd imagine so.

English is a useful language legally speaking due to it being quite direct. With no inflection built in, it's a lot easier to write a contract or other legal type agreement in English than in other languages for instance.

Plus, computers are programmed in English. And you know, America. That helps.
Not quite all english. Australian is basically nothing but inflection

[40kGamer]

Not quite all english. Australian is basically nothing but inflection

Lawyers in the states are constantly arguing new meanings for the language... but I guess it keeps them in a job.

[Denzark]

It will be a nightmare because the one universal truth of the Tory party is they don't give a s*** about you, your friends, your family, your problems, or anything except lining the pockets of the rich.


I really, really hope Scotland stay, because I don't want to have to emigrate. :(

Yorky please.

Saying this is a 'universal truth' about all tories is just as much a piece of histrionic classism as a tory saying 'all benefits claimants are scroungers'.

Whilst I disagree with almost everything every labour wallah spouts, I can at least concede they are principled if misguided.

[Psychosplodge]

IDK 'Zark, I'm not sure more than a handful of principled MPs exist among the lot of them.

[Deadlift]

IDK 'Zark, I'm not sure more than a handful of principled MPs exist among the lot of them.

I think personally many MPs when entering politics do so with the idea of doing good and making changes. It's when they hit the reality, their hands get tied and the policies they support or introduce become bogged down in burocracy.

[Psychosplodge]

I'd love to believe that's true, but I'm far too cynical.
Toe the line, keep your head down and you get a very good wage, and a practically unmatched pension...

[Wolfshade]

Saying they don't care is a little odd.

All the parties do care, and what to bring about a better society and goverance. However, they do it differently.

Torries prefer small government low taxes so you get the services you want, but you have to pay for them
Labour prefer large government with higher taxes so you get the services you want, through the state
LibDems are like the torries but slightly more left wing and more social concious
Greens have a "green" agenda and believe is social responsibility which will again be brought about through higher taxation.

Or at least that is the traditional approach.

Having no dependents, reciving no governmental benefits I am better off in a torry led place. But I can totally see the arguments for both.

Take the spare room subsidy, this highlights the lib/con divide quite well. The argument is that people in private rental (even if the state pays their housing costs) do not get money to cover an unoccupied bedroom, however, if you are in a public rental despite reciving the same housing benefit you do get extra for the spare rooms.

My view is that in order of fairness you should either recieve subsidy for regardless of the sector or you shouldn't.

Now the truth lies somewhere in the middle, if a local authority has no (or not enough) smaller housing for people to move to that is an issue and people shouldn't be worse off because of a local government / national government failure to allow the growth of housing stock, which could arguably come back to the "right to buy". But the right to buy was a brilliantly aspirational achievement, though giving someone the assesst of a house at cut down price is totally not fair.

[Mr Mystery]

There's too much finger pointing in Politics. Indeed, it often feels like that's all there is.

Take the housing crisis - lots and lots of discussions about whose fault it is for selling what or failing to build that and so on and so forth, and nowhere near enough being done to fix the situation. Likewise national debt - I don't care for one blind second who did what and contributed to it - just get it fixed. Get our economy back on track.

Imagine if your workplace was like Westminster, a constant game of blame with nobody actually doing anything of any import to fix the glaring issues....

[Psychosplodge]

Imagine if your workplace was like Westminster, a constant game of blame with nobody actually doing anything of any import to fix the glaring issues....

Imagine? It is...

[Mr Mystery]

Then sucks to be you, and you have my genuine sympathies.

Again I count my work environment lucky - even if it usually is me who just gets stuff fixed, then comes after those at fault. Certain department keep refusing to take calls despite having no right to refuse them. Get it fixed, then go after them - update consumer as much as I can, then get managers involved. Escalated now to the head of division who will hopefully crack some skulls in an efficient way, and get said departments head out of their posterior.

[Wolfshade]

Because finger pointing is easy.

It is easy to say "What you are doing isn't working" it is harder to get something to work and change. Indeed, historically, all opposition parties enjoy very high opinion polls when the party in power has to "make difficult decisions".

It is easier to say "We've been left this crap situation" than to address it, popular politics is about being popular, it is about fostering a cult of personality ala BroJo. It is less about what you stand for then how photogenic you are. It isn't about your plans for school meals it is how you look eating a bacon buttie.

With 5 year governments it is less about geninue long term projects just short term popularism.

[Mr Mystery]

Blech.

Not sure how I feel about career politicians. Always feel they're in it for entirely the wrong reasons.

[Mr Mystery]

So, this is sort of ish related. Polticial plea bargaining from Europe?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-29139503

[40kGamer]

Imagine if your workplace was like Westminster, a constant game of blame with nobody actually doing anything of any import to fix the glaring issues....

I worked for a few years in low level state government here in the US and I can promise you it sucks beyond belief. Constant meetings to discuss much to do about nothing. The last meeting of the year still having the same agenda as the first meeting from that year. Both mind numbing and soul crushing... and God forbid you actually do something because then everyone around you is miffed and you paint a great big target on your back. The only positive is ridiculously generous compensation at the taxpayers expense.... Life is too short for all of that nonsense!

- - - Updated - - -


Not sure how I feel about career politicians. Always feel they're in it for entirely the wrong reasons.

Or they don't have the moral backbone to maintain the right reasons as they are constantly exposed to corruption and temptation.

[Mr Mystery]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29140970

More on the oil issue - seems neither side is telling the entire truth, in a complete surprise to no one.

However, my Bro (who is pro-Yes, so be warned what follows is not impartial) says that Scotland will be on renewable energies entirely by 2030 (think that was the date), so all the Oil doesn't matter blah blah sovereign wealth fund cashmonies.

[Psychosplodge]

So he doesn't actually want to use electricity then? :rolleyes:

[Wolfshade]

The trouble is that if Scotland is then other countries will be so the price of oil would bottom out.

But oil forecasting is like coal or gold forecasting.

To quote erm that manchester football manger blokey "it's squeaky bum time".

[Mr Mystery]

I make no claims about the veracity of his claim, but I have heard other sources saying Salmond is very keen to exploit Scotland's natural weather for electricity.

On the upside to this - Scotland is not very densely populated, and does have very, very large open windy expanses - so it may be more practical a goal than in England.

[Wildeybeast]

I just can't shake the feeling that Cameron is playing with fire.

To his benefit - he's a Tory, and a Tory led 'No' campaign in Scotland is pretty much doomed to failure from the outset - it's been predominantly Tory politics (including New Labour fact fans) that provided the drive for the referendum. So it's kind of understandable that the No campaign has been mostly Labour lead - to the point Gordon Brown has been called in for a last ditch attempt to solidify the No vote.

To his detriment - he's still PM, and as such his hands off approach to the No campaign, and his refusal to debate with Salmond could be seen as political cowardice, and an attempt to distance his own political career from a less than preferable outcome for his supporters.

It's just a horrible one to work out. I reckon if he tries to foist blame for a Yes vote onto Labour, it could blow up in his face horribly.

He was on a hiding to nothing with the debate. Refuse to do and get called a coward and someone who doesn't care about Scotland, do it and spend the whole debate with Salmond telling him he shouldn't be there because he's English and has no clue about Scotland (you know nothing Dave Cameron). I think he chose the lesser of two evils there.


I think personally many MPs when entering politics do so with the idea of doing good and making changes. It's when they hit the reality, their hands get tied and the policies they support or introduce become bogged down in burocracy.

I heard a pleb on a radio phone in make an interesting point about why people become MPs. Their contention was that for the grief they get we don't pay them anywhere near enough, so the only people who want to do that job are those who are already wealthy and so don't care about the money, or demagogues with Visions and Ideals. Any competent, qualified and sane enough to do the job well can earn a lot more money for a lot less hassle elsewhere.

[eldargal]

So the latest poll has support for No back to 53% and the media is flailing about saying the Yes momentum is ended. Maybe you shouldn't have got so excited over one poll which had it higher than normal?

[Wolfshade]

Don't forget a lot of these are less the undecided which has been a fairly steady 20% ish

[eldargal]

Yup, but I can't imagine the majority of those will vote Yes given the amount of uncertainty about what the consequences will be when they are already uncertain by definition.

[Mr Mystery]

So the latest poll has support for No back to 53% and the media is flailing about saying the Yes momentum is ended. Maybe you shouldn't have got so excited over one poll which had it higher than normal?

I honestly do not know.

I still think we're on for a No vote - but it's going to be close. Current 'Don't Knows' are polling at around 8% - so those could swing it. As I think I mentioned before, I reckon most don't knows will become No vote - simply because better the devil you know etc.

However, as I know I've mentioned before - when it's this close, the motivation of the camps really comes into play. Yes votes have far more to gain by getting out and voting - this is their chance after all. No votes? No idea what the passion for that is like, as I've only been exposed to my Brother's gibberings about it for a sustained period.

[Wolfshade]

Regardless, if you get an 85% turn out won't that be a victory for democracy, rather than the current level of apathy

[Mr Mystery]

Indeed it would.

I do wonder what will happen in Westminster moving forwards, regardless of the outcome. Could we see a change? I'd like to think so, but suspect we won't.

[Wolfshade]

The single agenda party has been around for awhile.

I think that this referendum is more important to people than say who governs them.

Though I for one believe that Mercia should restore it's monarchy and seperate from the UK, after all we have more people than Scotland :)

[Psychosplodge]

The morning of the 19th

http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/2014-09/10/11/enhanced/webdr09/enhanced-26697-1410362194-24.jpg
http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/2014-09/10/12/enhanced/webdr01/enhanced-3096-1410367594-7.png
http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/2014-09/10/13/enhanced/webdr09/enhanced-18260-1410368923-2.png
http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/2014-09/11/9/enhanced/webdr04/enhanced-5936-1410442372-1.jpg
http://s3-ec.buzzfed.com/static/2014-09/11/9/enhanced/webdr01/enhanced-25280-1410442537-28.jpg

[Mr Mystery]

Sadly all to believable.

Spesh the Express.

[Mr Mystery]

97% of all eligible voters have registered.

[Al Shut]

That link is missing the url

[Denzark]

The morning of the 19th



Psycho - this would have been much funnier if the clearly lefty ikea shopping lettuce eater with good photoshop-fu had turned his wit to all papers and not just been biased against the right leaning ones.

[Mr Mystery]

Psycho - this would have been much funnier if the clearly lefty ikea shopping lettuce eater with good photoshop-fu had turned his wit to all papers and not just been biased against the right leaning ones.

There's a Guardian one.....

Also, according to Das Daily Fail, North Korea support independence. As they would.

[Wildeybeast]

Why? In what possible deranged delusion do they have anything to gain from it?

Also, I've already said the rebuilding of Hadrian's Wall will be an excellent boost to the economy, as well as bringing in tourism (lots of people pissing off the top of it into Scotland), not to mention being far more useful than HS2.

[Denzark]

There's a Guardian one.....

Also, according to Das Daily Fail, North Korea support independence. As they would.

Didn't spot that very droll. The North Korea link is the fact they (NK) think they will be able to import more malt whiskey (according to the Telegraph...)

[Wildeybeast]

Ah. It won't happen, but I can see why they might be excited about the prospect.

[Psychosplodge]

I did think the Daily mail one would probably be more suited to the mirror. It's got their kind of sensationalism about it.

[Mr Mystery]

Hertfordshire Radio Station throws teddy from the pram because reasons (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29157665)

Not really relevant, but funny all the same.

[Morgrim]

Alas, I cannot find the article online but if I have the time I need to transcribe the article from the west aussie newspaper. It was basically the reporter going: "Okay, this whole thing is getting ridiculous, both sides are pulling crazy stunts, and trying to accurately report the current moods is like chasing a runaway cart down a steep hill. I give up, I'm going to the pub and waiting for the result."

[Path Walker]

Psycho - this would have been much funnier if the clearly lefty ikea shopping lettuce eater with good photoshop-fu had turned his wit to all papers and not just been biased against the right leaning ones.

What do shopping in Ikea and eating lettuce have to do with leftist politics?

[eldargal]

Obviously lettuce undermines traditional conservative values.

[Mr Mystery]

In a boost to the Yes campaign, apparently Nigel Farage is now campaigning in Glasgow for a 'No' vote....

And, according to Nigel 'Mr Self Delusion 2014' Farage?


Mr Farage, whose party got 10% of the vote in Scotland and gained an MEP at the European Parliament elections earlier this year, said: "People say 'of course Scotland is not as Europsceptic as England'. I tell you something, it is not that far behind."

So from that, we can either conclude he really is insane, or is tacitally admitting little more than 10% of voters care what he or his party say...

[Wolfshade]

Nigel Farage

[Mr Mystery]

Huh?

[Kirsten]

http://i1216.photobucket.com/albums/dd380/KirstenIGMB/thehorror_zpsfa8494e8.jpg (http://s1216.photobucket.com/user/KirstenIGMB/media/thehorror_zpsfa8494e8.jpg.html)

[Morgrim]

Obviously lettuce undermines traditional conservative values.
Is it Egyptian lettuce?

(Reference to Horus and Set and a nifty bit of mythology that is unlikely to make it past the profanity filters.)

[Mr Mystery]

http://i1216.photobucket.com/albums/dd380/KirstenIGMB/thehorror_zpsfa8494e8.jpg (http://s1216.photobucket.com/user/KirstenIGMB/media/thehorror_zpsfa8494e8.jpg.html)

Call Me Dave looks like a grown up Tory Boy in that one!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/220000/images/_220139_harry_enfield_tory_boy_300.jpg

[Kirsten]

the issue I have with the referendum is basically Alex Salmond. he has put no thought into any of it, he is simply convinced that he will get everything he wants. belligerence and denial over any actual political ideas. his whole campaign seems to be based on some terrible stereotype of scottish people arguing with the english and going 'I'll have you pal!' it is nearly impossible for the people of Scotland to actually know what they are voting for, nobody can be certain what Scotland will actually get from independence, so how can anyone know if they are in favour of it? I have seen quite a few interviews with prominent Yes campaign people basically saying they wish Salmond would shut up and clear off and let the grown ups talk. When asked about keeping the pound and how Salmond was convinced they would keep it, one yes campaigner rather pointedly said that Salmond was not in charge of the Yes campaign, was not ruler of Scotland, and it wasn't up to him.

[Wildeybeast]

Agreed. The worrying thing is so much of Scotland seems to be buying his Braveheart tosh.

[Kirsten]

I know that the better together side has been pretty belligerent as well, Westminster has pretty much refused everything, but they at least do have some knowledge of what is going on. also, it is less important really, because if Scotland does vote no, they already know where they stand, nothing really changes, and they can always vote again, whereas the yes vote is the unknown factor.

[Mr Mystery]

A 'Yes' shop, due to open tomorrow, has been daubed in Graffiti comparing them to the German National Socialist Party.

Honestly? 50/50 whether that's an inside job.

[YorkNecromancer]

Yorky please.

Saying this is a 'universal truth' about all tories is just as much a piece of histrionic classism as a tory saying 'all benefits claimants are scroungers'.

I didn't say 'Tories'. I said 'The Tory Party. There is a difference between the two.

The Tory Party demonstrably hate the poor, demonstrably favour the rich and demonstrably do not care about the common people. We can see this through the fact they've slashed welfare; bailed out the banks, yet kept banking profits private; cut benefits to the point that the poor are genuinely dying of starvation and lack of medicine (http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/killed-benefits-cuts-starving-soldier-3923771).

The Tory Party do not care about anyone except the rich.

[Denzark]

Well I must confess I will concede the difference between 'Tories' and 'Tory party'.

The rest of it is almost into tin foil hat territory so I won't go into off topic territory except to say that writing off the entire Tory party in this way is also histrionic classism.

[Mr Mystery]

I'm concerned entirely with modern politics.

In the duration of my life (1980 to present), The Tory Party have been all about putting the boot into those with the least, and rewarding those with the most.

[Denzark]

Oh yeah. The labour party's record is much betterer. Hand the premiership from Bliar to Broon on the basis of a dodgy backdoor deal. Bliar exits left with his £10m property portfolio and his witch wife representing terrorists on Legal Aid. Meanwhile Broon stays centre stage and royally f*cks the economy. The tories scrape in and start to try and stem some of the cash haemorrhage - lucky labour can rest assured its acolytes will only see it as 'putting the boot in'. Then Miliband stabs his brother up on the basis of the union votes. Yes, the unions with its leaders like the late Bob Crowe, earning a six figure sum whilst living in social housing.

Two legs bad, four legs good eh comrades?

[Psychosplodge]

Did anyone see that debate other night with the teenage voters? I saw last half an hour and seriously what was the point? They just shouted over each other again, what a waste of time.

[Denzark]

When I think back to how little I knew when I was 16, I wonder why they have been given the option in this...

[Psychosplodge]

I can't imagine why...

[Mr Mystery]

Oh yeah. The labour party's record is much betterer. Hand the premiership from Bliar to Broon on the basis of a dodgy backdoor deal. Bliar exits left with his £10m property portfolio and his witch wife representing terrorists on Legal Aid. Meanwhile Broon stays centre stage and royally f*cks the economy. The tories scrape in and start to try and stem some of the cash haemorrhage - lucky labour can rest assured its acolytes will only see it as 'putting the boot in'. Then Miliband stabs his brother up on the basis of the union votes. Yes, the unions with its leaders like the late Bob Crowe, earning a six figure sum whilst living in social housing.

Two legs bad, four legs good eh comrades?

You know it's funny. The right of wing are always going on about Gordon Brown being unelected blah blah, but never mention anything about John Major (benefactor of an internal political coup of sorts), or indeed Call Me Dave not actually being elected either, but giving it all a good shafting nonetheless.

And the economy getting it hard? That was international, and really kicked off in the USA. But it's always Labour that get the blame in the press.... They also like to skip over that when the Tories initially got in, things got worse. Economic Recovery? Economies naturally recover anyway, so there is an argument that Osborne isn't himself responsible.

National Debt? Largely from bailing out banks - because the alternative was to let them fail causing far more harm. And all those shares? Who exactly is selling them off for less than we paid?

Wages remain stagnated. Cost of living continues to increase. Too few are benefitting from the improving economy.

And lets look at that benefits bill shall we?

Swathes of the country left without employment because of Thatcherite policies. No provision for the future, no attempt to help. Yet Labour get blamed.

Lack of social housing means parasitic landlords up their rent, and the government coughs up. Caused by a decent policy (Right To Buy) being badly implemented (no replenishment of social housing stock). Tory policy again. Labour somehow blamed in the press.

Immigration? Such a non-issue it's not funny. Multiple reports show people immigrating to Britain are far less likely to be a burden on the tax payer than someone born here. Also more likely to start their own business up, creating jobs and aiding the economy. But of course, some of them are Darkies, and though the Daily Mail can't outright say 'ARRGH! DARKIES WILL EAT MY CHILDREN AGAIN!', it hasn't stopped them blaming everything on immigration.

Deregulation of Banks? That's on both parties. But who arranged for The Financial Ombudsman Service to come into being, providing the populace with a free complaint resolution service, regardless of outcome? Here's a hint - it wasn't The Tory Party.

http://static.businessinsider.com/image/528221c969bedd732e60db2c-640/image.jpg

Call Me Dave there, explaining his vision for permanent austerity. From a gilded chair, wearing clothes the average wage likely couldn't afford.... Not that they're completely out of touch or anything. Oh no. Not at all. Nor is it at all insulting to be told to work hard by a bunch of people who have never, ever worked a day in their life and come from a background of luxury and riches.

Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not Class Warrior here. They can't help the family they were born into any more or less than someone born into abject poverty. What I object to are those, like Call Me Dave, like George Osborne, and all their little cretins, that seem to feel anyone not in the same boat is there by choice.

[Denzark]

Very eloquent MM, can't be arsed to go massively off topic to challenge this.

[Mr Mystery]

Rumour that old Rupert Murdoch might be about to back Scottish Independence.

Yet another example of him doing a Lion El'Jonson, and just sitting on the fence until it's clear which way the wind is blowing, then claiming to be the driving force behind a win.

Loathsome little man, and for me, if I had a vote, damned good reason to vote No, or indeed, the opposite of what he favours.

[Psychosplodge]

Is the wind blowing that way though?
What with the angry mob protesting "BBC bias" and the complaints about the release of business decisions in event of a yes,
sounds like the SNP are already lining up excuses for a no.

[Mr Mystery]

I honestly think it is.

As I said when I was actually up in Edinburgh, it feels like it's going to be a Yes. That campaign are being more vocal, and with it too close to call, I think their backers are more likely to actually turn out and vote, as they have the most to gain.

Plus, I was seeing reports over the weekend that support Salmond's claims about the oil amounts etc. Unfortunately, I has no links to it.

I think it should be a No overall - simply because not having had an opinion on it at all, backing a status quo is the sensible option.

- - - Updated - - -

And I wouldn't put it past Murdoch to interfere to generate an outcome that means he has yet more politicians owing him favours.

Vile, vile little reptile of a man.

[Psychosplodge]

I think it should be a No overall - simply because not having had an opinion on it at all, backing a status quo is the sensible option.



probably the most sensible position.

[Mr Mystery]

Yup. Though seeing as I don't personally have anything riding on this, quite moot :)

[Wolfshade]

The trouble is with any big issue like this that ends up with a near vote you end up with a lot of angry people that lost.

With things like thi I believe the situation should be a presumed status quo unless you have a large majority (2/3rds) for change. (Like they do with the CofE).

That way you ensure that the majority want the change, rather than having near parity wanting no change.

[Mr Mystery]

The trouble is with any big issue like this that ends up with a near vote you end up with a lot of angry people that lost.

With things like thi I believe the situation should be a presumed status quo unless you have a large majority (2/3rds) for change. (Like they do with the CofE).

That way you ensure that the majority want the change, rather than having near parity wanting no change.

Trouble is, that's just not democracy.

Decision like this, first past the post is the only method that really works, as otherwise I'm in favour of Proportional Representation.

Under your one, you could have the future of say, 65% of the population determined by 35%, and that's just not fair.

Take Westminster - 36% of the vote the Tories took. That's all. 36% and now they're in power, and going for it. Sounds undemocratic, but they still have the highest single percentage, so ultimately it is correct that they take power. Though the Libdumbs can suck my clinkers, back stabbing traitors to their own cause that they are! :p

[Wolfshade]

It is democracy, everyone has a vote. It just requires a supermajority for it to change the status quo.

India for instance, requires a 2/3rds majority to pass bills.

The presumption is that you have a status quo unless you have a mjaority of people wanting a change, and a signifcant one at that.

[Mr Mystery]

Nope. Too easy for those wanting the status quo to remain. All they need is their hardcore of nutters. That would lead to lazy politics.

First Past The Post may be far from perfect, but at least it encourages politicians to get out and campaign. And in order to campaign successfully, you need more than just fringe interest policies (unless you're UKIP of course, who can seemingly successfully campaign despite not having any policies whatsoever).

[40kGamer]

Having a supermajority is a fine idea 'if' the status quo is fair and balanced to begin with. As things stand now, those with wealth can manipulate things with very little effort.

I'm actually surprised the vote looks to be so close. I would have thought the majority of independent minded Scots would have migrated elsewhere ages ago.

[Al Shut]

probably the most sensible position.

Wouldn't it be more sensible for people without an opinion to not vote and let the people with an opinion decide?

[Psychosplodge]

No that's how extremists get in. They rely on low turn out. Do yuo think we'd have ever seen BNP councillor if we had 95% turn out?

[Al Shut]

That would would be an for forming an opinion, not for supporting status quo just because it's the status quo

[Mr Mystery]

That would would be an for forming an opinion, not for supporting status quo just because it's the status quo

Oh you should have to actively vote for the status quo. If you look back at what most people went through to gain suffrage, it's an insult not to exercise it (especially you, Russel Brand. Didn't vote, won't vote? Congratulations, you just vetoed your right to a political opinion until you bother to vote).

As my point was - I'm not fussed one way or the other really, so the safe thing is to vote No here (not that I have a vote. Scottish, but live in England) because 'better the devil you know'.

Good example here? I'm pretty leftie, and certainly extremely liberal in my views. I believe in worker's rights taking precedence above the employer's rights etc. But, in 2015? I'm voting Conservative.

No, not sudden change of political allegiance. But, in my constituency, it's the closest I can get to actively voting against UKIP and their lack of policies and closet racism. I see UKIP as a serious political danger - appealing to the lowest common denominator, peddling a campaign of fear and misinformation. Local constituency is otherwise True Blue, very much the 'stick a blue rosette on it and they'll vote for a hatstand'. But, UKIP are making waves.

Now I have no love for either party at all - but at least I know The Tories won't go completely overboard. No point whatsoever in me voting Labour this time, and you'd have to be clinically insance to vote Lib Dem in my opinion - so Tories it is. It's not about supporting them, so much as making sure my vote at least counts against those I definitely do not want running the show!

[Psychosplodge]

O_o

[Denzark]

It's not about supporting them, so much as making sure my vote at least counts against those I definitely do not want running the show!

It is a sad fact of British politics that so much of it is 'The politics of the alternative'. ie 'I'm not voting Labour in, I'm voting tories out.'

[Mr Mystery]

Sadly I'm yet to find a political party that gives a Monkey's about me.

Being single, with no dependants and in full time employment, I'm a cash cow to be milked without getting much out.

NHS and Education I don't mind - it's clear from my continued existence, and relative success I owe both those institutions a great deal.

But stuff like Child Tax Credits etc? No slice of that pie!

[Wolfshade]

In which case you should vote tory since they will keep most of your wealth in your pockets without spending it on programs that you don't need.

[Mr Mystery]

Whilst I happily admit to being a bit better off under the Tories, I currently exist in an odd economic place.

For me on my own, I earn a decent amount, and I have a comfortable lifestyle. However, I don't yet earn enough (emphasis on yet. I has plans!) to dabble in the stock market or other meaningful savings where Government policy might make a difference.

Which grants me the luxury of being able to vote for policies I feel will benefit my country the most.

Now. My plans? That outlook could change dramatically in the next three years. If my career plan pans out, I'll have considerable surplus income. At that point, I may well find my vote being cast more selfishly :)

[40kGamer]

Finally seeing coverage of the Scottish Independence vote popping up on the US news. I bet everyone will be glad to get past the vote in two days so that the emotional tension from this can ease off.

[The_Gonk]

Finally seeing coverage of the Scottish Independence vote popping up on the US news. I bet everyone will be glad to get past the vote in two days so that the emotional tension from this can ease off.

I saw some CNN coverage last night. It was interesting to see that perspective. I think the UK might be better as a Federal system but that isn't on the table.

[40kGamer]

I saw some CNN coverage last night. It was interesting to see that perspective. I think the UK might be better as a Federal system but that isn't on the table.

I'm not sure how taxation and governance works in the UK but I would not wish the US multi-tiered system as it currently exists on our worst enemy. Federal > State > County > City > School District... and on and on. It gets stupidly complex, creates ridiculous tax situations and allows elected officials to pass blame around like a hot potato. In that way I can actually understand the Scots desire to govern and tax themselves.

[Wildeybeast]

Local councils have control over local issues (bin collections, schools, roads etc) and we pay council tax for it. But most of their funding come direct form central government which still regulates and controls the majority of things. There is occasionall talk about giving more power to counties/cities in Engalnd, but most people don't seem especially bothered by it. Rather than just having one authority stuffing it up for everyone, you would have lots of local ones messing things up AND failing to work with the others.

[Wolfshade]

It is universal.

Whatever the tax it is the same in all parts of the UK, but then you get weird things like the Isle of Mann

[40kGamer]

Local councils have control over local issues (bin collections, schools, roads etc) and we pay council tax for it. But most of their funding come direct form central government which still regulates and controls the majority of things. There is occasionall talk about giving more power to counties/cities in Engalnd, but most people don't seem especially bothered by it. Rather than just having one authority stuffing it up for everyone, you would have lots of local ones messing things up AND failing to work with the others.


It is universal.

Whatever the tax it is the same in all parts of the UK, but then you get weird things like the Isle of Mann

Centralized revenue collection allocated to local governing bodies sounds simpler and more efficient. I guess the downside is when the local people/governing bodies feel like they have been short changed in the deal.

The system in the US can get ridiculously complicated and not surprisingly, greatly favors the wealthy. In the state I currently live in you have to pay Federal, state and city income taxes. Then depending upon exactly where you live you may have to pay a second city and a school district income tax as well. This is in addition to state and county sales taxes and local property taxes. It's horribly frustrating.

[Wolfshade]

Well that is part of the issue. Owing to the North Sea Oil fields being off the coast of Scotland, they feel that they contribute more per head because of the tax raised from the Oil firms operating from Scotland and that the population is low 5.3 million.
On the flip side, they also recieve a higher funding per capita also.

That tax system sounds strange, though I suppose it is what you grow up with. We have a standard "sales" tax of 20% on non-essential items, then certain things have additional "duties" levied on them, beer, cider, tobacco, spirits, petrol etc.

The only place where there is a degree of localism is "council tax", which is akin to the property tax. So depending which county/city/borough you live in (it can be confusing where the county isn't the unitary authority, and then places like Feckenham) anyway, you then pay a tax based on what you house was (or would have been worth) in 1991 because reasons and to make it easier to administer these are grouped into pricing bands from the lowest A to the highest H. So for instance I moved from a band A in one county to a band C in another city and the amount dropped, so yeah.

[Psychosplodge]

yeah but you aren't still paying for the construction a stadium they've since demolished now.

[Mr Mystery]

Well that is part of the issue. Owing to the North Sea Oil fields being off the coast of Scotland, they feel that they contribute more per head because of the tax raised from the Oil firms operating from Scotland and that the population is low 5.3 million.
On the flip side, they also recieve a higher funding per capita also.

That tax system sounds strange, though I suppose it is what you grow up with. We have a standard "sales" tax of 20% on non-essential items, then certain things have additional "duties" levied on them, beer, cider, tobacco, spirits, petrol etc.

The only place where there is a degree of localism is "council tax", which is akin to the property tax. So depending which county/city/borough you live in (it can be confusing where the county isn't the unitary authority, and then places like Feckenham) anyway, you then pay a tax based on what you house was (or would have been worth) in 1991 because reasons and to make it easier to administer these are grouped into pricing bands from the lowest A to the highest H. So for instance I moved from a band A in one county to a band C in another city and the amount dropped, so yeah.

And if you live in that house on your own, you get a piffling 20% discount, likewise for reasons.

Council Tax really needs a rejig. Distribute it more evenly. Perhaps just a set amount per eligible head.

[Psychosplodge]

No I'm not paying poll tax. It doesn't cost them anymore to police or empty the bin because there's more occupants. that's just bull****.

[Mr Mystery]

So why must I pay more, despite generating less rubbish for recycling, and being a less likely target for burglary (one person won't have as much ming as say a family home).

It's a fundamentally unjust tax.

[Wolfshade]

Yeah but don't forget you can get a house of 30 full time students who are tax free because reasons.

Or you can have someone living with you who is unemployed and have to pay full rate, but if that person recieves benefits then again it is reduced to single occupancy, because reasons.

It is empty homes that get burglarised the most, I bet your house is unoccupied for much longer periods than mine for instance.

[Mr Mystery]

Out the house for about 11 hoursish a day?

But, part of a communal block of flats, 2nd floor from the rear so well above ground level. Plus I live in a very low crime area (despite the resident junkies).

Couple next door both work - they each pay less council tax from me. That's inherently unfair.

[Wolfshade]

Why?

As a household they have the same services provided by the council, same fire protection, it is not light they will need twice the number of police to investigate a crime or twice the number of firemen, or two collections of rubbish/recycling.

[Psychosplodge]

You probably actually pay less anyway due to geography.
Because it takes the same amount of time to collect no matter how man people live there.

- - - Updated - - -

Also ours is literally only empty for probably less than 48 hours a year. Literally when my brother goes to the shops while the rents are on holiday. That's it.

[Mr Mystery]

If only it was just the pick up.

I produce less rubbish than pretty much anyone else in my building, because I try to buy low packaging, and where unavoidable, I ensure the packaging is recyclable, and put it in the correct bin. So my refuse is easier and less expensive to deal with.

Family of four in a two bedroom house pays the same as two people sharing a two bedroom house - why.

If it costs the same for a crime to be investigated, why I am asked to contribute more personally than the folk next door? How is that just?

[Wolfshade]

Because you still occupy one house, not half a house.

And it is worked out per property, it is a property tax.

It does not matter if you produce a fraction, or even more, it still requires a resource to empty the bins. If everyone halved their rubbish it wouldn't be a case that we would then need half the people to collect it and process it.

Think of it this way, that family of 4 each pay a fraction of the internet/phone/tv than you do, that is because they share it, you share it between one. Is that fair or should each person have to have their own package?

But if it makes you feel any better I make full payments without getting a 20% reduction so I would pay more than you if we were in similiar bands in a similiar council.

[sebi81]

Wthout knowing anything about your tax-system I guess a familiy of four pays not more than two people because on a long run it is necessary for a functional political system to have enough children.

[Mr Mystery]

Interesting article about the reliability of the opinion polls (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29223389).

Worth a read if you ask me.

[eldargal]

Actually on the reliability of polls thing, one of my Australian friends pointed out a precedent, their republic referendum ten years ago or so. They had polls with a Yes vote up until the day anywhere from 55-60% apparently but the actual result was almost opposite with a very high No vote because people either weren't willing to admit they were going to vote No or got cold feet on the day.

I expect that will happen with Scotland too, I mean you have a situation where you don't know what currency you are going to have, you have no idea how industries and the economies will be disentangles and how much pain that will course, Scotland will have no trade partners because they were all signed with GB/UK, no EU membership, no clue how disentangling the armed forces will work, Deutsche Bank saying there will be a Scottish depression if the Yes vote wins and all manner of very genuine concerns about what it will actually mean which are just being dismissed by the Yes crowd as scaremongering.

[Mr Mystery]

Large part of the unknowns have been caused by Westminster's refusal to discuss the matter - which has got a lot of backs up in Scotland, especially as they're trying to use that as a stick to beat off the SNP (fnarr!)

I still reckon it'll be a no, but I wouldn't put money on it overall. As the article says - the Yes campaign have sought to engage those who have never voted before etc, and it would appear that 'missing million' aren't taken into account on the opinion polls.

What I am tempted to put money on though is The Sun and Murdoch's other rags suddenly piping up in favour of Independence tomorrow. He's pretty toxic in Westminster at the moment given recent trials etc, so could see Scotland as a new start, a fresh pie to get his vile, slimey little fingers into.

[Psychosplodge]

Have they refused to engage though?
They've given an answer just not the one salmon wants....

[eldargal]

I don't agree, some are, but I doubt Westminster has all the answers. So many little things like people on one side of the border and working on the other, will they need Visas, how soon will they need them, how will the yget them etc. There is no provision for part of an EU country splitting off to become a new country so no one knows how that will go. Apparently Spain is dead opposed to giving Scotland a break in reneterting the EU quickly because they don't want to encourage Catalan independence. They have been quite clear that Scotland won't get the pound but the SNP seem keen to ignore that bit. So much stuff is completely unprecedented and could result in economic disaster for Scotland and I don't think the warm glow of nationalism will see them through.


Have they refused to engage though?
They've given an answer just not the one salmon wants....

Some they have ignored, but that is because I don't think they even know themselves. Others the SNP have ignored as you say because it doesn't fit their narrative...

[Mr Mystery]

Apparently, every time Salmond has said 'so, what's is and isn't going to be on the negotiating table then?', Westminster have said 'nothing until a Yes vote' - which I can kind of understand, but I think is very poor, particularly as I said when they try to use those unknowns, which they themselves have created, as a beating stick.

Part of me is hoping for a Yes vote - even though I don't think it's necessarily best for Scotland (least not in the short term), simply because it might just provide the bloody nose UK politics has long deserved, and get a shift under way.

[Wolfshade]

It makes a stronger point to have no fall back plan, it is saying we are not contemplating losing this election.

As soon as people get wind of a back up plan or contingency planning the call goes up from the opposition that they are already planning on losing. Unfortunately we live in a world of spin.

There was a great thing that I was reminded of while watching brassed off, when people were asked if they were going to vote for a redundancy or to keep the jobs and fight on, most when asked said that they would keep on, when the anonmyous vote came it was a landslide to take the money and run.

A radio programme Monday night suggested that those who vote against independence are somehow unpatriotic and were not "proper" scotts. Indeed, in some areas there was claims of intimidation.

But who knows.

[Mr Mystery]

Claims on both sides.

That there is media bias is abundantly clear - one paper is for Independence.

BBC are also looking a wee bit guilty. Concert in aid of the Yes campaign held the other day. Trouble ensued outside, when two youths, estimated to be around 18, set about a concert goer, said to be around 48, whilst shouting No campaign slogans. BBC simply reported trouble at the Yes Gig. Sloppy reporting or bias? I dunno.

Front pages are getting more and more hostile to the Yes campaign, and some opinion pieces are downright disgusting, not to mention factually wildly inaccurate.

[Psychosplodge]

I genuinely don't understand the point if they still want to be in the EU they're just putting themselves at a larger disadvantage. Or do they just want their laws direct from brussels instead?

[40kGamer]

That tax system sounds strange, though I suppose it is what you grow up with. We have a standard "sales" tax of 20% on non-essential items, then certain things have additional "duties" levied on them, beer, cider, tobacco, spirits, petrol etc.

The only place where there is a degree of localism is "council tax", which is akin to the property tax.

Well even as a tax professional our system goes beyond strange into the realm of batcrap crazy! Our federal income tax code has over 75,000 pages of rules and regulations and that is before you get down to the state, county, city and school district levels. All taxes below the federal level vary wildly at these levels. (From 0 to lots) The end result of special interest groups and paid for politicians dabbling away with no concern for the common good.

It has been enlightening to see that a lot of the same political shenanigans and tensions exist on your side of the pond. I expect to see a No vote at the end of the day but I wouldn't be willing to bet the farm on it.

[Mr Mystery]

You know, there's another thing niggling away at me, and it's something being pinned on the Scottish Parliament and Nationalist movement, even though it's nowt to do with them....

And it's the lack of a devolved English Parliament.

Seriously - you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who doesn't support such a thing in Scotland. The fact there isn't one despite Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland having one is all down to Westminster not providing.

It's a completely understandable demand, but why the lack thereof is used to bash scottish nationalism is quite beyond me!

[Al Shut]

A radio programme Monday night suggested that those who vote against independence are somehow unpatriotic and were not "proper" scotts.


Makes sense to me, against independence people are proper brits instead.

[Faultie]

Well, in Scotland it is tomorrow already, and tomorrow is when the vote is. Not sure what the right choice is, but I hope you lot that can vote make it. Good luck to Scotland and UK and Isle of Man and all the rest of the various sorts of things.

[Wildeybeast]

Wales and Northern Island were the ones you missed. :) I wouldn't bother including the Isle of Man as it a is Crown Dependency rather than a direct part UK and if you go down that route you have to include the Channel Islands as well.

[Faultie]

Wales and Northern Island were the ones you missed. :) I wouldn't bother including the Isle of Man as it a is Crown Dependency rather than a direct part UK and if you go down that route you have to include the Channel Islands as well.
That is exactly (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNu8XDBSn10) why I only listed a few of the various sorts of this's and thats's, and left out Gibraltar and Falklands and Canada. :P

[daboarder]

falkland islands already choose to stay with the UK, there was a bit of a war about it

[Mr Mystery]

So this is it. Today's the day. Do or do not, sink or swim, win or lose

97% voter registration confirmed by BBC Breakfast. That's just over 4 million people. Of that number, around 1 million are said to be first time voters. Predicted turnout of 85%+.

Whatever the result, no matter which camp lose - Democracy is the clear, outright winner.

And it's on that count I find myself wanting a Yes vote. If it's a No vote, the promises of additional autonomy and powers will either be discreetly forgotten, or Westminster will simply vote against it.

So sadly, it's going to take a Yes vote to give UK politics the kick up the arse it so badly needs. Yes it's uncharted territory. Yes it's going to be tough going. But it's a break that must happen to my mind.

[Houghten]

BBC simply reported trouble at the Yes Gig.

And everybody thought they were talking about the actual band called Yes.

[Wolfshade]

falkland islands already choose to stay with the UK, there was a bit of a war about it

Unless you talk to the Argentine government, but I hear that they have their own problems....

[Al Shut]

I know it doesn't make much difference with 97% registered, but in countries with voting registration is turnout calculated from registered or eligible voters?

[Mr Mystery]

Registered I believe - so even 85% of 97% is something of a record.

[Psychosplodge]

Whatever the result I expect trouble. Salmon and his ilk have whipped up so much hate that there's no other outcome. In the event of a No we may see salmon has unleashed a new Northern Ireland.

[Mr Mystery]

Salmond has done nothing of the sort. The media might like to lay the blame at his door, but a leader cannot be held responsible for a lunatic fringe of supporters - otherwise UKIP would have to disband.

There won't be trouble.

[Al Shut]

Clearly, this has to be an omen

http://www.scotlandnow.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/referendum-man-shocked-finds-piece-4275714

[Psychosplodge]

Salmond has done nothing of the sort. The media might like to lay the blame at his door, but a leader cannot be held responsible for a lunatic fringe of supporters - otherwise UKIP would have to disband.

There won't be trouble.

Really? you must have watched a different man than I did during the campaign.

[Mr Mystery]

Evidentally.

[Psychosplodge]

I hope you're right though.

[Mr Mystery]

There'll be the odd punch up for sure - but I don't expect anything more.

Remember, the media focusses upon the most negative aspects of which ever side they are against. Lopsided reporting of the minority acting like goons, rather than the vast swathes of perfectly reasonable voters.

However, if Westminster get their No, and then turn their back on the promised additonal powers? That's a very, very different kettle of fish.

I doubt there'd be bombings still - the tension just isn't that great. But we might see a push for a second referendum within 20 years. It's all down to how Westminster handle a No vote really.

[Wolfshade]

The lectionary reading for today was a bit prescient.

"Why then did you despise us? Were we not the first to speak of bringing back our King? But the words of the people of Judah were fiercer than the words of the people of Israel"

[Mr Mystery]

Whereas after my first post this morning, Twisted Sister's 'We're Not Gonna Take It' came on my iPhone.

And please - stop making a vote for independence a vote for Salmond. It's not. He himself has said as much. After the referendum, if it's a Yes (and it could well be, missing million and all that) he has said he doesn't give a monkey's whether the SNP form the first Scottish Government. Yet the No campaign keep on picking apart SNP policies

Why? That's a different campaign for a later date.

[Psychosplodge]

But it is though. That's like saying you can be an anti eu libdem voter the two just aren't compatible.

[eldargal]

Have to agree with 'splodge, voting for independence is both giving the SNP what they want, giving them more power and legitimising their political ideology.

[Mr Mystery]

Nope. Not in the least.

Once the referendum is done, SNP are fundamentally done as a party. They've achieved their goal, and for the most part become a bit redundant.

This is not a referendum to elect Salmond as Dear Leader For Life. It's about whether or not Scotland goes it alone. Labour, Lib Dems, Tories - all still present, all still valid parties.

[Wolfshade]

But then in order of balance and fairness then we should also make sure that the yes campaign isn't an anti Cameron thingy, so why on earth did salmond keep wanting a debate with him?

[Mr Mystery]

Leader of one Parliament discussing with a Leader of another Parliament. Can't imagine why.:rolleyes:

See, this is what has swung me from not caring, to wanting a Yes. Hollow promises.

Cameron (for understandable reasons) has largely distanced himself from this campaign. Rock and Hard Place politically speaking, but hey, nobody said being PM would be easy.

And now all these promises are being made, seemingly under duress given they were off the table entirely when the date was set. But there's nothing there to back them up, just a sort of ropey pledge to give more. Except it has to pass in Parliament (and you know, rightly so) and it's incredibly unlikely to do so.

Cameron right now is the figurehead of Westminster, and has acted distant and aloof, and in some cases has displayed astounding arrogance in his approach, so sure of a No result. He represents all that many Scots want to see put to an end in politics. It's not so much the man himself, or even the party he belongs to, but the institution he represents.

Westminster is the veritable Nine Bob Note. It's corrupt, inefficient and entirely self serving. It plays very dirty politics, and is seemingly filled with overgrown children.

[Wolfshade]

A debate between the head of the Yes campaign vs not the head of the no campagin, makes perfect sense.

- - - Updated - - -

Next we will have a debate with the SoS for Health vs the Shadow Cabient minsiter for education on the Ebola crisis...

[Mr Mystery]

Which just asks the question - why did the incumbent party not head up the No campaign? They agreed to the referendum.

Dirty, finger pointing politics is the answer to that one.

Yes Salmond has a perfect storm going on. Not only a Tory party in power, but one in by the skin of it's teeth, and pretty far from popular anywhere. But it's about more than just the Tory party. It's about a distant seeming Westminster overall.

[Denzark]

However, if Westminster get their No, and then turn their back on the promised additonal powers? That's a very, very different kettle of fish.


Don't forget that 'Westminster' has not promised additional powers - the 3 party leaders have. No matter how much anyone tries to Those weren't manifesto promises, they were not even raised at last party conference and they have not been subjected to informed debate in parliament. You cannot call them with any degree of certainty, 'Westminster promises'.

Admittedly, whether or not the party leaders think they can use this as an escape clause is a different matter - actually I think it more likely that they are arrogant enugh tothik they can bully it through by use of whips, than they can go back after a no and say 'sorry about the 'Vow' Jockanese chaps, but the English/N Irish/Welsh MPS voted against it.'








Westminster is the veritable Nine Bob Note. It's corrupt, inefficient and entirely self serving. It plays very dirty politics, and is seemingly filled with overgrown children.

No more than Holyrood - dirty politics, self serving, overgrown children.

Also, how self serving is it when it maintains the NHS when all good business sense is to privatise? The NH is unsustainable as a business model. Also how self serving is it to agree to have 1.2% of GDP as international aid?

[Mr Mystery]

Snouts in troughs dude. Special interests. Scotland has at least a chance here to rejig that.

As I mentioned on Facebook earlier - best reason to vote Yes today? Rupert Murdoch's Evil Empire aren't backing it. CLOBBER HIM WITH VOTES!

[eldargal]

SNP will morph into Scotlands Tories, if independence happens they will have too much political presence and legitimacy to just dissapear. They will be on top and want to keep themselves their as well as feather their own nests.

[Mr Mystery]

I honestly don't know.

But if Independence is delivered, then many peeps would switch back to the more traditional parties.

[Psychosplodge]

I honestly don't know.

But if Independence is delivered, then many peeps would switch back to the more traditional parties.

I sincerely doubt that. There's no way they'll just walk away and give up power.
Some of the stated aims of independence are the SNP manifesto, trident removal for example.

[Mr Mystery]

And if they're voted in following a Yes vote? YAY DEMOCRACY, and everyone else can shush.

Really not getting the whole 'Independence = SNP for evars, yo' claim. Scotland will elect whomever it wants, and that done, who really cares?

[Morgrim]

I think they're more worried about the very long, troublesome time period between when Scotland splits and when the newly independent Scotlands gets their first democratic election of a brand new government.

Historically it's been a transition prone to exploitation; the only advance Scotland has over most nations is the lack of a large standing army that can sweep in and establish a period of martial law.

[40kGamer]

Westminster is the veritable Nine Bob Note. It's corrupt, inefficient and entirely self serving. It plays very dirty politics, and is seemingly filled with overgrown children.

You just summed up every political seat of power in the known world.

Definitely a lot of eyes on today's vote. I have a nationalistic spark that makes me want to see my families original homeland take control of it's own destiny but I still expect the no vote to carry the day. People as a whole fear change, which along with indifference, allows politicians to abuse their powers with near impunity.

[Mr Mystery]

I reckon 60% yes.

The Yes Campaign have engaged the Missing Million - That's 25% of the registered voters who are just that because the Yes campaign came to them.

Now only an idiot would claim they're all therefore Yes voters. But the Polls have apparently not taken them into account...

[Wolfshade]

historically it's been a transition prone to exploitation; the only advance scotland has over most nations is the lack of a standing army that can sweep in and establish a period of martial law.

ftfy.

[Psychosplodge]

I'm predicting the reverse on the basis of Wolfie's brassed off statement from yesterday.

[Mr Mystery]

I really don't know dude. Working Class engaged and apparently out to vote - when was the last time we saw that in the UK?

[Psychosplodge]

dunno. But the point was the public face isn't necessarily what happens in the booth.

[Wolfshade]

I don't really think anyone can predict what is going to happen.

Certainly it is a good day for democracy, but other than that, I have no clue.

[Mr Mystery]

All linking to my recent experiences north of the border.

There was a real buzz in the air about the referendum.

But I agree with Wolfie - Democracy wins regardless.

[Psychosplodge]

I thought we'd already decided democracy doesn't work?

[Mr Mystery]

Works better than the alternatives.

[Psychosplodge]

There was that too...

[AirHorse]

I sincerely doubt that. There's no way they'll just walk away and give up power.
Some of the stated aims of independence are the SNP manifesto, trident removal for example.

Indeed. People keep saying its not about the SNP, but it most definitely is.

Im sure a lot of people voting Yes are doing so because they want to self determinate. But I think equally as many, if not more, are voting Yes because of promises being made by the SNP on what will happen in an independent Scotland.

[Mr Mystery]

If there's an SNP Government after a Scottish General Election.

If you can't twig on that, then you don't really deserve the vote :p

[Psychosplodge]

But when is the election?

[Psychosplodge]

lols just seen this elsewhere



a quick and bias TL:DR

- alex salmond (head of the Scottish National Party) wants a bigger wage.

- launches a campagin for independence.

- has weird ****ing rules; 16 year olds can vote (you need to be 18 to vote in the uk) and even if 50001 people vote yes, and 49999 people vote now itll be a independent country for life. oh and the current cabinet cant step in apparently

- Salmond BS's throughly the entire campaign (hides NHS cuts, says we can keep the pound (we cant), ect, ect)

- tons of advertising and blatent lies. no one steps in

- no one takes him sersiouly.

- goes round yelling that only scottish people vote for independance, and if you dont you not scottish

- now there is a risk of a yes vote happening tomorrow as all the junkies, racists and people who dont know much all think independence will be like braveheart.

- HALP PLS.

[Mr Mystery]

So in order to want to distance yourself from Westminster you must be a Junkie, Racist or thick?

Right......

[AirHorse]

Oh dear...

There was a depressing amount of people saying things on facebook last night like "I'm just watching braveheart to test my resolve before the big day" :/

[eldargal]

So in order to want to distance yourself from Westminster you must be a Junkie, Racist or thick?

Right......

No, but the Yes campaign is highly nationalistic and Salmond has basically swept a huge number of issues aside and basically yelled 'Vote yes if you are really Scottish'. In the same way there are lots of morons that would vote for UKIP in England there are lots of morons in Scotland whose dislike of the English outweighs their common sense and ability to comprehend the true and full consequences.

[Mr Mystery]

Oh indeed. But there is understandably mud slinging on both sides.

Just a shame the media chooses to show off the worst of the Yes campaign.

[40kGamer]

Oh indeed. But there is understandably mud slinging on both sides.

Just a shame the media chooses to show off the worst of the Yes campaign.

If it's like the US media, they have their own agenda. Our news is so far from neutral it's a joke.

[Mr Mystery]

Indeed.

In the UK we really need to crack down on the media somewhat. Too many papers tell outright lies and stir up mistrust.

[40kGamer]

I still don't understand how politicians and the media get away with feeding the public obvious blatant lies. When both sides are telling mutually exclusive stories, someone IS lying!

[Psychosplodge]

yes but people are lazy and assume the truth is a grey area in the middle somewhere

[YorkNecromancer]

When both sides are telling mutually exclusive stories, someone IS lying!

Not always true when it comes to politics. Data is data, but it's the interpretation of that data which matters. Both the Yes and No sides believe the data is on their sides; whether that is the case is usually a matter of opinion.

For example, it is a proven fact that higher levels of inequality increase levels of unhappiness in all people, poor and rich. (source:http://www.dannydorling.org/books/injustice/)
But yet there are many who believe that wealth inequality is a desirable thing, and for a variety of reasons. The facts are undeniable, but the interpretation is all that matters. For example:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfgSEwjAeno

So, just because two sides are arguing mutually exclusive points, it doesn't mean someone has to be wrong. Sometimes, absolutely it does. Other times, it's just a case of conflicting opinion. Especially with something like this, where no-one really knows what will happen after independance with any real certainty. Anyone who says they does is a snake-oil salesman. They can suspect, and they can suggest possibilities, or maybe even probabilities, but they don't know.

[40kGamer]

John Oliver always makes me smile... even though he covers some of the most depressing things. Wealth Inequality is a passionate issue for me so I'll duck it.

The problem is that those with, or seeking power, color the world in shades of grey to the point that reality becomes meaningless and perception is everything. This allows both sides to argue mutually exclusive points and the freedom to manipulate things to their benefit. In fact the best thing that can happen for the wealthy and the political leaders is for the populace to be distracted, ignorant and/or apathetic.

In that way, the simple fact that over 90% of the people may vote on the Independence issue is a tremendous accomplishment in and of itself.

[Wildeybeast]

I showed my year 7 form an interview some kids did with Salmond and Darling and one of them said 'the Yes man was more happy and positive and made better arguments as the other one was a bit boring and negative, but I still don't think they should become independent as they will be better off with us'. Out of the mouth of babes....

[YorkNecromancer]

In that way, the simple fact that over 90% of the people may vote on the Independence issue is a tremendous accomplishment in and of itself.

Most people aren't politically apathetic; the problem is that the vast majority of politicians are so obviously horrible, awful human beings, and that the choice is usually "vote for us, we're incompetent at best" or "vote for us, we're actively malicious". Then most third parties tend to base their election strategy around the concept of "vote for me, I'm neither of those two guys."

Not to mention the aforementioned arguments over the implications of data.

*sigh*

None of it'll matter when Global Warming eventually drowns the world, I suppose. :(

[Mr Mystery]

Well, with less than three polling hours to go, and around 12 until I find out if I'm a dirty foreigner or not, seems what's done is done!

[Houghten]

the public face isn't necessarily what happens in the booth.

Can't read my, can't read my, no you can't read a-my voting face...

[40kGamer]

Well, with less than three polling hours to go, and around 12 until I find out if I'm a dirty foreigner or not, seems what's done is done!

You could always move to the US where most all of us are dirty foreigners.

[Mr Mystery]

Nah

I'll stay in South East England, mostly to annoy the piss out of UKIP :p

[40kGamer]

So long as you have fun doing it! :D

[Mr Mystery]

Immigrant? Earning more than national average? Not a Christian?

You better believe I'm going to enjoy it :p

[Eldar_Atog]

Speaking as a US citizen, I have a question:

I've seen several references over the last few days to Cameron stating that people shouldn't vote Yes because of him. That he would be gone sooner or later. What has been the usual trend for PMs in regards to Scottish issues? Has Cameron's behavior been par for the course?

[Mr Mystery]

Well, as mentioned earlier, Cameron and his cronies are something of a perfect storm for Scottish Nationalists.

They're Conservatives, who are far from popular in Scotland (just a single MP in Scotland....) They've also got through various deeply unpopular acts of Parliament, despite the majority of MP's in Scotland (which are different to Scottish Members of Parliament) voting against them.

Add in that the Conservatives are 'in on a technicality', having formed a ropey coalition with the Liberal Democrats.

If that wasn't bad enough for the Nationalists view, the Liberal Democrats (usually shortened to Lib Dems, or Lib Dumbs) backstabbed their voters, backing down on a number of key issues. They ran on opposing a rise in student fees, and then promptly grabbed their ankles and thought of power, and voted for a rise in student fees.

So overall there's a feeling, or at least an impression in Scotland that Westminster really don't care about anyone except the home counties (London and surrounding area).

Yes we are back in growth as a nation, and I personally have done pretty well out of things, benefitting from various and sundry tax cuts (though majority of those are courtesy of the Lib Dems) and not being affected by cuts (I claim no benefits, and essentially exist separate from public funds). But I'm arguably in a minority here.

Jobs are coming through, but many are on Zero Hour contracts, which as the name suggests means you have no guaranteed income.

Then there's incredibly dodgy policies, like Workfare.

Workfare (sp?) is intended to get people off of benefits by giving them work experience. So far so commendable. BUT.....it involves working for free, with the threat of having all benefits cut off if you refuse to do it. This has included people working for charities (including one notable case of a University graduate forced to give up working at a Museum to go stack shelves in a Pound Shop, who successfully challenged the Government in the courts over it).

So more or less UK wide unpopular Government, who act like they won the election outright, cowardly coalition partners, and lots of dodgy stuff going on.

[Eldar_Atog]

Thanks for the nice summary :)

[Bitrider]

I am soooo excited. Watching council coverage on BBC One Scotland!

[Denzark]

Thanks for the nice summary :)

It is definitely a nice summary. Nice and biased are not mutually exclusive though...

[Mr Mystery]

Never said it wasn't biased. Opinions tend to carry bias.

[Bitrider]

Never said it wasn't biased. Opinions tend to carry bias.

Speaking of bias...switching between watching BBC One and BBC Scotland I am amazed by the stark contrast in coverage 'attitude'. BBC One is always harsh with anyone from the 'Yes' campaign, Yes campaign in-studio guests, etc. Whereas on BBC Scotland they give everyone an even shake, no attitude, just discussion and evaluation. (except for the UKIP MEP David Coburn which is really funny - All the BBC-Scotland guests either from Yes or No ignore the UKIP guy or outright slight the guy. Even the host rides him a bit.)

[Wildeybeast]

Well, that's that done then. It's a no, thank god. Scotland will doubtless get more powers whilst Sctotish MPs can still vote on matters that only affect England, thanks to inept bungling and cowardice of the Westminster parties. Hopefully the issue will be left well alone and we can about healing some of the divisions this debate has caused.

[Mr Mystery]

There's a call in Scotland for England to get a devolved Parliament.

As you said, the fact there isn't one right now isn't Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland's doing :)

I'm interested to see if any Political Parties will campaign as hard next year for the General Election. Think what you may of the SNP and Salmond, but you can't knock their successful campaign to just get people out and voting.

[Wildeybeast]

Oh yeah, not blaming Scotland. Salmond has basically got what he wanted all along - devo max. All the benefits with none of the burdens. He has played a canny hand.

The problem with an English devolved Parliament is that Westminster IS our Parliament. The other nations were merged into it, then given their own when devolution happened. The only way to give England a devolved government is boot the MPs from other nations out of Westminster.

[Psychosplodge]

All we need is a ban on MPs voting on issues that don't affect their constituency.

[Wolfshade]

No, all we need is the restoration of the kingdom of mercia, re-establishing the Archdiocease of Lichfield, and return of the kings of the line of Æthelflæd.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ae/Saint_Alban%27s_cross.svg

[Mr Mystery]

Oh yeah, not blaming Scotland. Salmond has basically got what he wanted all along - devo max. All the benefits with none of the burdens. He has played a canny hand.

The problem with an English devolved Parliament is that Westminster IS our Parliament. The other nations were merged into it, then given their own when devolution happened. The only way to give England a devolved government is boot the MPs from other nations out of Westminster.

I don't think you'd find anyone objecting to that!

[eldargal]

Relieved.

[Mr Mystery]

Ball is now in Westminster's park.

Honestly? I think they panicked hard and promised too much too vaguely, and they're more or less stuck with it. It's going to ruffle some feathers and no mistake, but I don't see them welching on the offer.

And Westminster have a lot to gain from this. Matter of Scottish Independence could, once and for all, be put to bed, roped in, nailed down, bunged in a lead lined casket, and shot into the sun forever more if they play this right.

If they start getting politicky about it? We could be seeing another referendum due to broken promises etc.

Salmond came. Salmond saw. And let's face it - Salmond conquered. The option he knew Scotland really wanted (Devo Max) is now what's about to happen. Who knows, he might now retire from politics. He has achieved his raison d'etre. All that can happen now is a decline unto retirement. Best to head off into legend as the man that can.

[Psychosplodge]

http://i59.tinypic.com/282nnle.png

[Psychosplodge]

Already seen people on facebook claiming its a fix and demanding a recount. (don't understand their logic if its a fix a recount would still produce the same result)

[40kGamer]

Already seen people on facebook claiming its a fix and demanding a recount. (don't understand their logic if its a fix a recount would still produce the same result)

It should be "demanding an inquiry." Of course the people that control the inquiry are the same ones who are capable of fixing it so it is still another waste of time. At least with this wrapped up for the moment things should settle down and move forward.

[Mr Mystery]

Brother has thrown teddy from the pram.

But then childhood did show he's not a gracious loser!

[Psychosplodge]

http://i60.tinypic.com/2v7tf2e.jpg

[Mr Mystery]

And now it's England's turn.

Scotland has more or less just proven that ask, and you might just get :)

- - - Updated - - -

Alex Salmond, man of integrity (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29277527)

[Kirsten]

not a fan of Alex Salmond, but today I take my hat off to him. he has been gracious in defeat.

[Wildeybeast]

Not sure integrity had anything to do with it, he had no other option really. His whole platform has always been independence, he finally got his vote on it and Scotland said it didn't agree with him. He had no where to go from there other than to stand down and let someone else take the SNP in a new direction on a new platform.

[Denzark]

Alex Salmond, man of integrity (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29277527)

The keys O-B-E-S-I-T-Y are nowhere near I-N-T-E-G-R-I-T-Y no idea how you managed to mistype that.

http://i797.photobucket.com/albums/yy257/denzark/10710745_860322943985495_3114356918558685616_n_zps 0be0dfdf.jpg (http://s797.photobucket.com/user/denzark/media/10710745_860322943985495_3114356918558685616_n_zps 0be0dfdf.jpg.html)

[Mr Mystery]

So he should do what instead?

The dude took a fringe party into power, and delivered all he ever promised - a referendum.

[Wildeybeast]

Yeah, in that regard he is a success. He has also inadvertently secured devo max. However, he is still a loser and it is an immutable law in human society that people won't follow losers. Sooner or later (most likely sooner) someon in his party would have started to ask why they were still following a proven loser and the knives would have been sharpened. Then the SNP would have got embroiled in a leadership crisis, which would have detracted from their success, take the focus off the gains made in the independence movement and quite possibly given Westminster a chance to slow down the transfer of power a wee bit. He could have stayed, but for the sake of his party and their goals, he had to stand down.

[Denzark]

I'm pretty sure the Referendum was not his desired aim. At least I hope the millions of pounds in wasted time, effort, money of the stock market etc was not just to have a referendum for the sake of it.

He wanted independence. He couldn't promise that because it relied on a few other people as well.

As to integrity, he luckily was not exposed as a deluxe fibber - because his erroneous assertions on the Pound, NATO and EU membership and all sorts of other gash, can't be proven wrong because he didn't get his independence.

But I'll give you that he was a man of great principle, for sure and even a great politician.

But for me integrity means your pants would have to be less on fire.

[Wildeybeast]

Seconded. The worrying thing is 45% of the populace believed his guff.

[Kirsten]

no vote narrowly avoids lengthy custody battle over Sir Ian Mckellan

http://www.theonion.com/articles/ugly-custody-battle-over-ian-mckellen-narrowly-avo,36968/

[Mr Mystery]

I'm pretty sure the Referendum was not his desired aim. At least I hope the millions of pounds in wasted time, effort, money of the stock market etc was not just to have a referendum for the sake of it.

He wanted independence. He couldn't promise that because it relied on a few other people as well.

As to integrity, he luckily was not exposed as a deluxe fibber - because his erroneous assertions on the Pound, NATO and EU membership and all sorts of other gash, can't be proven wrong because he didn't get his independence.

But I'll give you that he was a man of great principle, for sure and even a great politician.

But for me integrity means your pants would have to be less on fire.

He wanted Independence, but only promised the referendum.

Successful Politician is ultimately successful.

[Denzark]

Very political of you!

- - - Updated - - -

What's all this aboot then?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11110051/Telegraph-reporters-barred-from-Alex-Salmonds-resignation-press-conference.html

[lobster-overlord]

What's all this aboot then?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11110051/Telegraph-reporters-barred-from-Alex-Salmonds-resignation-press-conference.html

they wern't banned... they wern't invited. to say they were banned is like saying the this vote meant scotland was just re-annexed, rather than voting down independance

[Mr Mystery]

And of the papers invited, just one supported the Yes vote.

Tort graph, daily fascist A and daily fascist B?

No, can't imagine why they weren't invited...