Breaking news: The Queen bumps into Alex Salmond

akabula
13 Aug 14 23:04
Joined: 
13 Mar 08 
| Topic/replies: 5,373 | Blogger: akabula's blog
It's been good to see the various people, politicians and others, debate independence. One thing has been evident though from those that would vote yes and it's a distinct lack of factual detail. It's all based on a Braveheart theme.

Maybe you could offer that gem to honest Ally D, it might calm his nerves. Care to expand though akabula? What exactly is a "Braveheart theme"?

Even now Salmond and the rest of his yes team refuse to accept any argument on the use of the pound despite repeated statements that the rest of the UK will refuse to operate a monetary union.
Oh aye, Prime Minister in waiting Miliband says he'll stick it in his manifesto, just to keep Cameron happy. WHEN was the last time ANY party manifesto was adhered to, to the letter? Remember the aftermath of the last general election?

Another aspect of the yes voters is that they insist in attacking and insulting anyone who opposes them. See Alias for proof of that.

Then sayeth akabula: Was a cheap shot from a cheap guy. Oh aye, it's alright for you to say!

My opposition is based purely on the economics of the matter.

Utterly, consummately risible. WTF do you know about economics? Oh aye, "It's all based on a Braveheart theme". IS THAT IT?

I feel that the costs of setting up an independent country has been played down

You FEEL? Is that the economics you speak of?

and that, as in business, bigger is better. Ask yourself why companies merge.

Better tell that to Switzerland then. Oh, and companies merge to create bigger companies, often creating monopolies or cartels, thus ripping us all off.

As regards a republic? Hopefully never. The Queen had been a fantastic Ambassador for us for as long as she has reigned.

Monarchy - an anachronism which has happily been removed in much of the world. Bring on the REPUBLIC.

Complaining of 'lack of factual detail' then claiming 'bigger is better' is not too clever.....


Here is a list of countries ranked by GDP per capita, and their population, according to the IMF-

1) Qatar   2.1m
2)Luxembourg  549,000
3) Singapore  5.4m
4) Norway  5.1m
5) Brunei  415,000
6) USA   318m
- Hong Kong  7.2m
7) Switzerland  8m
8) San Marino  32,000
9) Canada   35m
10) Australia  23.5m
11) Austria   8.5m
12) Netherlands  16.8m
13) Sweden   9.6m
14) Iceland   325,000
15) Germany   80m
16) Taiwan   23m
17) Kuwait   4m
18) Ireland  4.6m
19) Denmark  5.6m
20) Belguim  11.2m
21) UK    64m


The World Bank and CIA (yes, the CIA) also have similar lists. The UK are even lower in those. The differing organisations include regions like Hong Kong, Bermuda, even Jersey as 'nations'. The IMF are most stringent in this regard so I'll stick with them even though I could twist my arguement by using lists which rank the UK lower.

Anyway, on to some observations....

14 of the top 21 (inc. Hong Kong) have populations of less than 10 million.

8 of the top 9 (inc. Hong Kong) have populations of under 8 million.

I think 7 nations (inc. Hong Kong) have gained independence from the UK and now have higher GDP per capita. Qatar and Kuwait were at one time British protectorates so it is really 7 and two halves.

At least 9 countries with a better GDP per capita than the UK could be defined as small European countries.

People fear we will end up like Ireland or Iceland but even with their problems they have better GDP figures than us. Oh and Iceland managed to restructure their banks, put some bankers in jail and let greedy foreign investors take the hit, despite poster boy Darling and his boss threatening them with anti-terrorism legislation and the removal of NATO protection of their airspace.

We boast about how we could save our banks. Darling claims being in the UK minimises risk, but we are now lab rats in a QE project in which our oil wealth is basically collateral while hundreds of billions are printed and handed to the same ****s that caused the mess in order to prop them up.

Only history will tell if being 'bigger' was an advantage in this regard. If printing a few hundred billion has no consequences at all then why doesn't everybody do that all the time?

Norway on the other hand have roughly the same in their oil fund as we are printing and handing to the banks. Better together? Better like people were lied to in the 1970s about oil reserves?

To get back to the point - it is obvious from the list that the following things are important -

1) Being European
2) Having a small population
3) Having a large amount of natural resources.

Scotland qualifies on all three counts.

If foreign interventions, bullying countries, or a little more reflected glory at the Olympics are your thing then carry on. I'm voting with my heart and my head and for the record Braveheart is a fking awful film.

Light fuse and stand back.



Alias ready to explode

nice post john92, if salmond uses that angle i think he'd have done a better job of persuading the undecideds.

used*

I have been very disappointed by the yes campaign. Surely information like that would persuade people that currently fear they may have to show a passport on train or won't see Homes Under The Hammer anymore.

You won't persuade many with an argument like that.
The problem for the YES campaign has been the lack of detail for the basics.
Pensions is a perfect example with, rightly or wrongly, a lot of old people only concerned with their own position.
Salmond and the rest of the campaigners have failed pathetically in that respect.

I don't suppose many people will be persuaded as most I imagine are like yourself entrenched in your position. In your case, your claim that 'bigger is better' has been shown to be incorrect yet all you can retort with is a laugh.

Bigger is better although there will always be exceptions to the rule.
Salmond should have pitched his campaign at a level that engaged those that are not politically astute.

So bigger is better except in economic terms which just happens to be most important part of this, or any other political debate.

GDP is such a well used term I don't accept that using GDP per head of population would alienate the general public or that only the political astute would understand.

Was at a dinner when the subject of the UKs debt was brought up.
Someone said "You need to put it into perspective and look at it in relation to our GDP"
10 on the table and half didn't know what GDP was.

Use the word 'prosperous' instead if research showed that people didn't understand the term GDP.

The evidence is there. Not even trying to get it across has been a failure.

You seem politically astute, held the belief that bigger was better, but you have shown no indication that clear and undeniable evidence to the contrary is enough for you to consider changing your stance on that point. As I said, people are entrenched.

In this debate the economy has been central. Bigger is clearly not better in that regard.

In what other ways is being part of a bigger nation better and how do they over-ride economic disadvantages?

it tends to be about economies of scale. the larger economies are typically considered more stable and get better interest rates when it comes to government borrowing.

IIRC Germany pays around 2.5%, the UK slightly more, while Italy was paying around 7% when their debt/GDP ratio was high around the time of the financial crisis.

Saying that, apparently Ireland's borrowing costs have fallen below the UK's in the last few months.

that's basically the top of the food chain when it comes to cash and cash flow.

so one argument from the likes of Darling is that the Scottish banks themselves have more debt than the entire GDP of Scotland. In fact, RBS liabilities were comparable to the GDP of the entire UK in 2008/09.

if Scotland had its own currency and central bank at the time, it would have been sh1te and a fan.

the remarkable thing is that Ireland and Iceland have came out the whole crisis pretty well. since the banks were in the "too big to fail" category I imagine we'd have had outside help anyway, but the banks could cease to trade as public companies (much like in Iceland).

question is, would they have got to be so big in an independent Scotland.

akabula 27 Aug 14 17:32 Joined: 13 Mar 08 | Topic/replies: 5,478 | Blogger: akabula's blog
You won't persuade many with an argument like that. Laugh
The problem for the YES campaign has been the lack of detail for the basics.
Pensions is a perfect example with, rightly or wrongly, a lot of old people only concerned with their own position.
Salmond and the rest of the campaigners have failed pathetically in that respect.


You've been shot to pieces akabula. What's YOUR idea of "detail for the basics"?

Pensions? Regarding State Pension, DWP have replied IN WRITING to many enquirers, confirming that the SP will continue to be paid as normal to recipients in Scotland in the event of Scotland becoming independent. This is unarguable, and anyone who claims otherwise is quite simply lying.

Failed pathetically? If by that you mean you haven't been convinced, that's more than likely down to the underlying reason for your stance.

Salmond should have pitched his campaign at a level that engaged those that are not politically astute.

He did. It didn't work on you, thus highlighting your even lower political level.

Was at a dinner when the subject of the UKs debt was brought up.

^Euphemism for "I was at work at McDonald's, when...."

Was at a dinner when the subject of the UKs debt was brought up.

^Euphemism for "I was at work at McDonald's, when...."


I've highlighted the word euphemism within the above which I've obviously copied and pasted from your last post.
Now I'm assuming that you know the meaning of the word in the context that you have used it and would ask you why you look down on people who work at McDonald's.
I'm retired now and, as I had a good well paying job, was able to go early but in this day and age I would never belittle anyone who had what might be described as low paying employment. Why do you feel the need?

I'm retired too. Why did you mention pensions when you KNOW there is nothing to be concerned about?

I don't belittle just anyone either, but then I don't reply to serious questions with a long row of laughing faces. Isn't that belittling?

Bigger is better?

Economy? Clearly not. Some potential disadvantages as described above but they can't be so bad when so many small countries are more prosperous than us.

Defence? (Surely should be renamed attack) Iceland and Costa Rica have no standing military. Neither have been invaded lately. Less money on nukes and invasions for geo-political reasons means more money to treat the sick and educate the young. Maybe there is some rogue North Korean general just waiting on a yes vote so he can unleash hell, but I wouldn't bet on it.
Less war, less foreign influence(hypocricies) mean less reason for people to hate and bomb us. If these people hated freedom and democracy they wouldn't attack a country with an unelected head of state and unelected second chamber and that is not in the top 10 of the global democratic index (below).

Democracy? Not according to democracy rankings of 2011-12 which list the following - Norway, Sweden, Finland, Swizterland, Denmark, Netherlands, Germany, Austria then Belgium. 8 of these 10 are European countires with populations of 11 million or less.

Influence/World Stage? I'm willing to be enlightened on that one though I have my doubts. I'd rather we got our own house in order first though and to me this area is inextricably linked to war and hypocricy anyway.

Sport? Yes, more reflected glory from the achievements of others in sports that you don't give a fk about except during the Olympics.

I'm struggling now. Do bigger countries have better weather?

I mentioned them Alias because most pensioners currently in Scotland rely solely on their government pension and it's a major concern for them and with 20% of the Scottish population at retirement age I would have thought this would have been an obvious target for the YES campaigners.
as regards your laughing at people in poorly paid jobs is that what we can expect in an independent Scotland?

@John
I could list at least as many countries of a similar size that have a GDP smaller than the UK but, like your list, it would prove nothing.
As regards your list, and to follow on from erse's comments, we have a similar credit rating to some and a better one than others.
GDP in itself is only part of the picture and if, as Salmond is suggesting, that we walk away from our share of the National Debt if we don't get a monetary union then Scotland would go bust as it would affect our credit rating and no one would lend us cash.If we accept our share then our economy would struggle to support it.

It is not my list. If I type out The Count Of Monte Cristo it won't make it my book.

I think the facts clearly prove that using the statement 'bigger is better' in this context is wrong and that was my intention.

Beyond that the conclusions are mine and they lead me to believe that there is every chance a small, developed European country, with substantial oil reserves which gains independence will thrive. There is certainly nothing to fear. I think that much at least is obvious.

This is a gambling site. If somebody posted stats which challenged preconcieved opinions on promoted teams staying up then it would be madness not to at least consider them properly.

There is an author called Daniel Yergin. Read his books and if you are still worried about a country with signficant oil reserves getting cash then fair enough. I came to the conclusion that the opposite was true.... the problem comes when they get too much credit. Given we would have the vast majority of oil reserves I have no worries about our debt to gdp ratio.

Argentina get money and they default all the time. If you mean we will have to pay it back at higher rates then of course that would happen but would have to be weighed up against no interest on current debt for balance.

Another point on debt which is missed is that alot of the UK debt is basically owed to itself because of QE. This would in effect bring Scotland's share of the debt down by over £30bn when both sides of the ledger cancel each other out. A yes vote would therefore insulate us from at least some of the negative impacts of QE when it finally hits the fan.

I see the YES campaigners were out in force today pelting Jim Murphy with eggs and scolding hot tea. Nice people.

as regards your laughing at people in poorly paid jobs is that what we can expect in an independent Scotland

As you no doubt know akabula, I was poking fun at you. In fact, one of the reasons I am voting YES is to hopefully rid Scotland of subsistence wages, zero hours contracts (a Tory's dream) and other inequalities.

akabula
akabula 28 Aug 14 19:48 Joined: 13 Mar 08 | Topic/replies: 5,503 | Blogger: akabula's blog
I see the YES campaigners were out in force today pelting Jim Murphy with eggs and scolding hot tea. Nice people


ONE man hit Murphy with an egg. Has this ever happened before at a political meeting? Anyway, see link below for some nice NO voters. maybe you'll even spot yourself.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmGjiokfQ2A

I notice the betting on here has changed slightly with a no vote at 1.21. This could go down to the wire imo and just a few thousand votes either way deciding the outcome.

Meanwhile, it looks like we could have our first ever UKIP MP...

Murphy quits his tour.

Man guilty of joking he might kill Salmond.

There are utter cretins on both sides as there are a few cretins in society. What happened to Murphy was unacceptable though I don't know why some would eggsagerate the incident by claiming scalding hot tea was thrown. Source?

There is still room to make a few quid sb. That's all I'm telling you. I have an absolutely lovely position, and no, I won't post my bets.

Alias, on voting day do they do regional announcements of the results or are all the results collected and announced in one place?

I believe Salmond to be an odious individual and no friend to Scotland.  Whatever the result, all this stupid referendum will achieve is to divide the country for decades and cause much bad feeling.  For what it's worth, I hope the No vote is successful as there's no way Scotland will be better off out of the union.

'no way Scotland will be better off out of the union'

well done. huge statement without a single argument to qualify it.

It's Chat Chat not a friggin' courtroom ffs.  And who are you to judge anyway?  All you ever seem to post about are farts.  I don't see you qualifying those posts much.

so are you trying to make a point or are you saying your post is as worthless as a fart comment. I'm confused.

I'm not surprised.

the irony.

And who are you to judge anyway?

You just did. Can we assume you've met Salmond and engaged him in deep conversation, or have you formed your opinion from the telly? In any case IT'S NOT ABOUT SALMOND.

Pensions? Regarding State Pension, DWP have replied IN WRITING to many enquirers, confirming that the SP will continue to be paid as normal to recipients in Scotland in the event of Scotland becoming independent. This is unarguable, and anyone who claims otherwise is quite simply lying.


I'll take your word for that Alias. Did the DWP also give the same guarantee  in writing re: benefits? Will they remain the same, especially for the disabled?

Don't take my word for anything, please. Look it up yourself. The truth is out there!

NHS expert: only a Yes will save the health service in Scotland from Westminster cuts

Allyson Pollock, professor of public health research and policy at Queen Mary University of London, warned reforms in the NHS south of the Border could result in "serious" consequences for Scotland by translating into reduced funding through the Barnett formula.

Her warning seriously undermines claims by Better Together spokesmen, including its leader Alistair Darling at last week's final TV debate with First Minister Alex Salmond, that devolution protects the Scottish NHS from the creeping privatisation south of the Border.

She said a Yes vote would free Scotland from the "stranglehold" of the Westminster Treasury by allowing politicians to control public finances and NHS policy.

Her comments support Salmond's assertion that any cutbacks in England could hurt the health service in Scotland. In last week's debate he warned that, while the Scottish Government has operational control of the health service, it was a "serious problem" to be without financial control of it. Darling accused the First Minister of "scaremongering".

Pollock, who is a leading authority on the implications of privatisation for public services, said: "In the absence of any reversal of neoliberal policies in England, the clearest way to defend and promote the principle of a public NHS is to vote for Scotland to have full powers and responsibilities of an independent country."

Government critics have raised concerns the NHS in England is on a path towards an American-style healthcare system. Central to this has been the Health and Social Care Act of 2012, dubbed one of the most radical plans in the history of the health service, which included encouraging greater involvement by the private sector.

Pollock told the Sunday Herald: "Although people find this extraordinary and can't believe it, the Health and Social Care Act of 2012 has abolished the NHS in England as a universal service. The NHS is reduced to a funding stream and a logo; increasingly all the services are going to be contracted in the marketplace.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/nhs-expert-only-a-yes-will-save-the-health-service-in-scotland-from-westminster-cuts.25192360

Erm, excuse me Alias, but that doesn't answer my question. I never askes about the NHS.


I'll try again....





Did the DWP also give the same guarantee  in writing re: benefits? Will they remain the same, especially for the disabled?

Look it up yourself. The truth is out there!


Meanwhile.....

Model in Better Together leaflet: 'I'm voting Yes'

http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/model-in-better-together-leaflet-im-voting-yes.25192401

In other words, like Salmond you cannot answer my question.

Hopefully the bad publicity that has followed the YES campaigners violent attacks on anyone who dares oppose them will force them to now play fair.
@stewart A straight answer? No chance of that. Plenty of insults but no answers.

The Scots, the Irish, the  Welsh and the English ......................... BETTER TOGETHER.

People have never had so much information at their fingertips. I worked out that if an independent Scotland spent as much money on defence as Germany we would save around £1.5 billion a year.

   http://www.yesscotland.net/answers/what-will-happen-benefits-and-social-secu...

Thanks for that link john. As it happens I've never received one leaflet on the subject. As for.....


After that, details of what improvements would be implemented in Scotland will depend on who is elected to form the government in May 2016.  We know that Scottish MPs and the Scottish Parliament are opposed to many of the Westminster government’s welfare cuts – [i]and it is very likely that some of these measures would be among the first to be reversed on independence.[/i]



I don't receive benefits, but the words 'very likely' seems to me that nothing is set in stone.

From what I read about pensions any guarantee is that people ALREADY retired will have their pensions covered, but this is not a blank cheque, this guarantee does not cover those yet to retire, and apparently will cause havoc with private pensions due to current EU rules about cross border pensions.

^^

As it says, long term spending will be determined by elected governments. An SNP led yes campaign can't put other political parties manifestos into stone.

The reason I threw in the military spending is to show that virtually everything in this regard would be up for grabs. Germany, the Swiss, Scandanavians all spend much less than us on defence (by a % of gdp and per head) as an example. A country of 5 million can't be a world policeman. I like that. Some don't. The point is that (whatever shape the political landscape takes by 2016) parties will put forward their proposals how an independent Scotland should be run. Comaparable defence spending to virtually all similar nations would allow parties to pledge higher benefits spending, a lowering of a certain tax, or whatever their ideologies and vision dictates that £1.5bn should be spent on.

The result will be that if people democratically elect a government which pledges benefits in line with or above what the rUK spends then that is what the people of Scotland will get..... if politicians fulfil their manifesto pledges of course!

Pensions? Regarding State Pension, DWP have replied IN WRITING to many enquirers, confirming that the SP will continue to be paid as normal to recipients in Scotland in the event of Scotland becoming independent. This is unarguable, and anyone who claims otherwise is quite simply lying.



Just like Salmond, Alias's nose just gets bigger and bigger.

It's actually worse that that stewart, the demographics are such that Scotland will more age "top heavy" than the rest of the UK which is why, given state pension is not from a fund but funded by current tax payers, they are looking at doubling immigration to Scotland to 24,000 a year to get the working age people to cover the shortfall.

Not sure if this is in any "yes" adverts, leaflets or friendly doorstop chats though...

stewarty b 31 Aug 14 14:58 Joined: 02 Aug 02 | Topic/replies: 7,522 | Blogger: stewarty b's blog
In other words, like Salmond you cannot answer my question.

CORRECT sb. I'm flattered that you see me as the font of all knowledge, but I must disappoint you. Still, I'll trust ANY independent Scottish govt before ANY Tories in Westminster. How about you?

Just Checking
Just Checking 31 Aug 14 15:40 Joined: 25 Jun 06 | Topic/replies: 14,933 | Blogger: Just Checking's blog
From what I read about pensions any guarantee is that people ALREADY retired will have their pensions covered, but this is not a blank cheque



tewarty b 31 Aug 14 15:50 Joined: 02 Aug 02 | Topic/replies: 7,522 | Blogger: stewarty b's blog
Pensions? Regarding State Pension, DWP have replied IN WRITING to many enquirers, confirming that the SP will continue to be paid as normal to recipients in Scotland in the event of Scotland becoming independent. This is unarguable, and anyone who claims otherwise is quite simply lying.

stewarty, JC and I appear to be in agreement here. What don't you understand?

The Scots, the Irish, the  Welsh and the English ......................... BETTER TOGETHER.

Get yourself over to Dublin and try shouting that in O'Connell St on a Saturday afternoon.

Alias, how independent would Scotland REALLY be if we vote yes?

Would you prefer Brussels to rule us?

They'd be a damn sight worse than Westminster, I can assure you!

Any of you No fellas planning to attend these events?

Farage plans indyref visit before Orange march
Paul Hutcheon
Investigations Editor
Sunday 31 August 2014

UKIP leader Nigel Farage is to visit Scotland 24 hours before a massive Orange Order march "to save the Union", sparking fears of further public disorder.


An Orange march in support of No and an opportunity to pay homage to Nigel Farage. (Or should that be Falange?)

They'd be a damn sight worse than Westminster, I can assure you!

According to your BT campaign, we won't be in the EU anyway! What's your problem?

@ Alias Why bring a foreign country into the debate?
@ Trilby Alias wants an independent Scotland but by Europe and dependant on the BoE for fiscal policies. You couldn't make it up.

*ruled by Europe

You couldn't make it up.

You just did.


Going to the Orange parade lads?

I'll give it a miss Alias but you enjoy yourself at it.

Revised betfair odds on Alias imploding

2/1 up to and including the 5th of Sept.
1/3 between the 6th and 11th
8/1 thereafter

I'll be nowhere near it. In fact I'll be surprised if the polis don't get it stopped.

Meanwhile, you being such a fair minded person, when are you going to condemn the threats to Alex Salmond, akabula? A bit worse than a single egg being thrown methinks.

SNP leader Alex Salmond has urged people to steer clear of unionist rallies after Better Together accused the Yes campaign of turning "sinister".


Labour MP Jim Murphy was pelted with eggs and said he has been threatened with violence during his 100 Towns in 100 Days tour.

Today, Mr Murphy accepted that Mr Salmond has not personally orchestrated the attacks, but the SNP leader has spoken out to urge Yes supporters to ignore the unionists in future.

"I condemn any egg throwing or any intimidation from any side," Mr Salmond told Sky News' Murnaghan show.

"Somebody was convicted, of course, of online threats against me. Somebody thought his car should be a political weapon. There was a woman, a Yes campaigner, assaulted on the streets of Glasgow.

"I don't hold press conferences accusing Mr Murphy of orchestrating these events, because I know that would be ridiculous to do so.

"So let me be absolutely clear to people watching, if Mr Murphy comes balling and shouting in a street corner near you any time soon keep doing your shopping, keep doing what you were doing.

Tell me this Alias. How is it that us Scots get free eye tests, free prescriptions, and free university education, yet the English don't?

stewarty, are you deliberately trying to change the subject after discovering that you falsely accused me of lying yesterday over pensions? Here's ANOTHER two links for you, and there are plenty of others to back them up. Maybe you think DWP are liars too of course.

http://newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-economy/8083-whitehall-department-confirms-state-pension-safe-after-independence

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/uk-mp-state-pensions-would-be-paid-after-yes-vote-1-3400799


Incidentally, in wrongly accusing me of lying, by inference you also accuse Just Checking. I'll accept your apology if and when it is provided.

Still no comment on the NHS story in the Sunday Herald from you or any other Nopes btw.

I thought your answer would have been it's because we have our own parliament. But, like Salmond, you can't give a straight answer.

As for Just Checking, he pointed out the real truth....


From what I read about pensions any guarantee is that people ALREADY retired will have their pensions covered, but this is not a blank cheque, this guarantee does not cover those yet to retire, and apparently will cause havoc with private pensions due to current EU rules about cross border pensions.

As for apologies, it's YOU who owes me one. I asked a simple question yesterday about benefits. What was your reply? A ramble about how the NHS would be better off. You couldn't make it up.

I told the truth about pensions (the initial subject), as did JC, but you in your warped thought process have decided to maintain that I'm a liar, in spite of copious evidence to the contrary. Then you expect me to engage with you in different subjects, without the decency of apology from you. I'm beginning to think you might be the egg throwing agent provocateur, such is your duplicity.

It's got nothing to do with being a liar. It's all about asking a simple question and you give an answer which is completely off subject.

I told the truth about pensions (the initial subject), as did JC


That's poppyc0ck. Read my 13:20 post again.

I'm beginning to think you might be the egg throwing agent provocateur, such is your duplicity.



Once again the yes nutters cannot reply without some sort of sarcasm.

I didn't ever claim anything different. It's exactly the same thing as JC posted.


By the way, you haven't apologised for this either:

You have a hatred of England imo Remember that offering?

A pathetic, worthless jibe from someone who has no real argument or strategy except to obfuscate and blankly accuse others of lying, when anyone who reads this thread can patently see that your accusation is consummate rubbish. For JC to be in agreement with me is remarkable in itself, but I'll give him credit for at least being truthful. You stewarty, have left yourself with nowhere to go, except of course your Orange parade on 17th. Say Hello to Mr Falange won't you?

Sarcasm

SEE ABOVE.

Sarcasm.



There will be no more smiley faces from you come the 18th. (NAP) (FIVE STARS)

Are you really that daft? Even if it's a No, do you really think we're going away? It's a MOVEMENT, a continuation of the devolution issue, remember? Tricked out of it in '79, but what happened in '97? I guarantee you that if it's NO, within five years 50% of no voters will regret their choice and the clamour for another referendum will be unstoppable.

A ramble about how the NHS would be better off. You couldn't make it up.

A ramble? Did you actually take the time to read it, or don't you care about the NHS?

Enjoy your Orange parade sb, if it goes ahead, and remember to promise Mr Falange your vote, unless you've already kissed Cameron's arse of course.

Tattie bogle.

Oh, we'd be skint!


http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/independent-scotland-could-be-aaa-rated-standard-poors/

You don't care one way or the other don't you Alias. Remember, you are well greened up. (apparently) As for....


unless you've already kissed Cameron's arse of course.


If your tongue was as long as your nose you would be able to get it right up Salmond's rectum and reach his tonsils.

It's a MOVEMENT


I'm sure you've visited a few dance halls in your time Alias. Remember the 'twist?'


That was also a movement. Sadly not available anymore.

Hello hello, Nope lads. Why did you turn up so early for the Orange parade? Kind of puts Murphy's egging in the shade, naw?

http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/yes-campaigners-attacked-by-mob-outside-tynecastle-1-3527125

In the long term, issues such as pension levels will be determined by a democratically elected government.

The questions are -

whether or not you would prefer these decisions to be taken in Scotland or at Westminster with Scotland remaining in the UK;

and

could an independent Scotland afford to pay the same or (even higher) pension as rUK?

I am aware of the issues about demographics but all things considered I see no reason why we couldn't afford it and I'd rather the power was here to take the decisions.

A written in stone guarantee on pension levels is impossible. What you are asking for is the yes campaign to write manifestos for all current and potential political parties into the next 50 years and then make them stick to it. Voting no because you don't have some sort of guarantee on pensions makes no sense, as nobody could say what British pensions will look like in 20 or 40 years either.

I mentioned defence spending the other day and it is reported today that proposed spending in an independent Scotland would be £2.5bn which per head and as a % of GDP is higher than most European countries including Germany.

A former NATO commander and Ruth Davidson have blasted the proposals in the White Paper; both clearly unaware that elections will take place with defence plans put forward by each party being one of the things for people to consider when casting their vote.... exactly the same as happens now within the UK.

Come 2016 Davidson can explain why she feels we need to spend UK levels of 2.3%, 2.4% of GDP on defence aka attack, rather than an amount comparable to other European nations that have a) not been invaded lately, and co-incidentally b) don't feel the need to get as involved in wars. She can explain what will be sacrificed to pay for it, or what taxes will rise. People will then vote accordingly.

Independence is a movement Stewart. A movement that devolution was to kill stone dead and we can see how that turned out. A no vote will not kill it either.

Alias why do you continue to bring up the orange order parade?
You're obsessed with it ffs"
50k members which is less than 1% of the population of Scotland.

It's a movement? You already in with your nonsense for when the NO vote prevails.

BETTER TOGETHER

@John we are being asked to believe that everything will be better in an independent Scotland with no real figures to back it up.
Every single question that has been asked on here or directly to Salmond either on tv or in the press is met with the same answer.
Taxes lower, spending on the nhs higher and etc etc. No matter what some things must suffer, it can't all be good news.
My thoughts are that in reality nobody knows for sure what will happen and we are being asked to take a massive gamble.
A massive gamble on not just our own futures but that of subsequent generations. Too big a risk for me.

BETTER TOGETHER

akabula, you made so much of the incident with Jim Murphy, but you've completely ignored the link I posted at 17:16 You professed disgust at the egg job, now you're hiding from the harsher truth when it comes from the other direction.

https://twitter.com/WingsScotland/status/506461249400766464
http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/yes-campaigners-attacked-by-mob-outside-tynecastle-1-3527125

Hearts fans for Yes attacked by a mob singing Rule Britannia, Salmond's car tailgaited by a nutter, a woman Yes supporter, possibly pregnant, kicked in the street in Glasgow. A chair thrown from a window at a Yes supporter. Tell me, is ignorance truly bliss?

There has been violence on both sides, all of which must be condemned, however the attacks on Jim Murphy were orchestrated via tweeter, facebook and etc by the YES campaigners. That's the difference.

BETTER TOGETHER

however the attacks on Jim Murphy were orchestrated via tweeter, facebook and etc by the YES campaigners. That's the difference.

I see, and do you have proof of that, and that the same doesn't apply elsewhere? Does throwing an egg constitute violence? Is it of the same level as kicking a woman? Of course there IS proof that Murphy was egged, I mean the culprit was caught on video. Odd, don't you think, that no arrest has been made? Curiouser and curiouser.

Oh, still no comment on the NHS? Maybe you don't care, maybe you've got BUPA, maybe not.

BITTER TORYGETHER.

Direct me to the NHS link again please.
You ramble that much that I must have missed it or fallen asleep before I got to that bit.
Does it include anything on the humour bypass operation that you went through?
BETTER TOGETHER

Funnily enough I was in BUPA but changed to Remedi. What's wrong withy that.

Hearts  have said they are not happy with the club crest being used

SNP have used football fans disgracefully throughout their shameless campaign

Alais the Hearts man

A Hearts man who has no interest in the league Hearts play in. You couldn't make it up.

I didn't say I had no interest sb. I don't study it for betting purposes. At least give me credit for steering you towards a trade on the referendum market. Gets better and better for me.

breadnbutter 01 Sep 14 19:49 Joined: 29 Aug 06 | Topic/replies: 4,482 | Blogger: breadnbutter's blog
Hearts  have said they are not happy with the club crest being used

You've got something right at least. Hearts, in common with other clubs, do not wish to be politicised. Understandable. Still, which other club incorporates the Saltire in its normal crest?

Here you are akabula. Try to READ it this time, sticking your head in the sand won't enlighten.

NHS expert: only a Yes will save the health service in Scotland from Westminster cuts

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/nhs-expert-only-a-yes-will-save-the-health-service-in-scotland-from-westminster-cuts.25192360
......................................................................................

You might also want to feast your eyes on this. Some of your fellow "loyalists" from across the water. You know akabula, that wee bit of Ireland at the top. "Alex Salmond still living in the 17th century" - this from a knucklehead who sings about a battle which took place in 1690! IRONY doesn't come close.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4gjeMU93J0

Funnily enough I was in Tory party but changed to UKIP. What's wrong withy that.

Now I believe you.

Alias has flipped.
Shouting for independence but wants to share the pound with the remaining UK countries, have the BoE dictate fiscal policy and retain the Monarchy.
You couldn't make that up.

Your NHS expert works for the Sun.
Oh dear.

You obviously can't read properly akabula, or at the very best, do so very selectively. Only days ago I said I'd prefer to dump the monarchy, and not for the first time.

Allyson Pollock, professor of public health research and policy at Queen Mary University of London

The Sun? Maybe cut doon oan the Buckie sunshine.

Alias
Alias 13 Aug 14 15:08 Joined: 28 Jul 02 | Topic/replies: 4,831 | Blogger: Alias's blog
Well she'll be the c*nt, since he's already said she'll still be intended HoS.


Another referendum within 10 years max though. "Should Scotland be a Republic?" Massive YES.
.............................................................................................................

That's when he treated the voters with contempt. Was a cheap shot from a cheap guy.

Says akabula, prince of the cheap shot.
........................................................................................................

It's all based on a Braveheart theme.

akabula's total argument for the status quo. I'm amazed you haven't sold that to Alistair Darling. Wow, what a vote winner.

Light blue touch paper and stand well back.
Alias ready to implode at any minute.