Isle Of Bute Saint Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 Many of those countries have become so inconsequential in the world that whether they do or don't regret it will never be reported. However if you want to look at the list you can see a hell of a lot of countries that became more instable, more war torn and evidently much more corrupt as a result of independence. Countries like Rwanda, Burundi, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Bangladesh, Burkino Faso, Cambodia, Chad - and I'm not even past the C's yet all back that up. Many of those countries have become so inconsequential in the world that whether they do or don't regret it will never be reported. However if you want to look at the list you can see a hell of a lot of countries that became more instable, more war torn and evidently much more corrupt as a result of independence. Countries like Rwanda, Burundi, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Bangladesh, Burkino Faso, Cambodia, Chad - and I'm not even past the C's yet all back that up.Stuart these countries were corrupt even before independence. Moving around a lot of countries and dealing with customs and immigration I have to deal with customs and immigration , bonded goods , meat products and crew. Only in northern Europe is things straight most other places including countries that would surprise you are corrupt If you want to look a bit closer to home see how the concretive party take money from the extremely rich and company's for wink , wink tax concessions and other goodies wrapped up in Christmas paper such as government hand outs to countries in return for arms and so on. So get off your white horse Stuart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickMcD Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 Stuart and any NO voters could you answer me one question of all the countries in the past 50 years who got independence of which there is many can you show me just one country that regrets its independence and proof that it regrets it. Don't normally bother but would throw in Uganda. Amin got deposed in 1979 to be replaced by Obote. He in turn was deposed in 1985 and it was reckoned the Ugandan people would gladly have taken Big Daddy back again despite the fact that he had been one of the most despotic dictators in history. Countries aren't normally offered two bites at the cherry. There is no going back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isle Of Bute Saint Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 Uganda , Scotland like for like don't think so Rick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickMcD Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 Uganda , Scotland like for like don't think so Rick There's no like for like. Most countries effect the change because of ethnic or cultural differences and at times only politics. Hatred too as we can see in the present debate. Cue rebuttal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salmonbuddie Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 Canada, don't forget Canada.....oh, wait. Drew is spot on, I've said it before, I'll say it again, I fully expect independence to cost me directly from my salary at the end of each month. I'm happy to pay that , though, because I'm taking the leap of faith in the belief that my son and grandson will benefit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 Stuart these countries were corrupt even before independence. Moving around a lot of countries and dealing with customs and immigration I have to deal with customs and immigration , bonded goods , meat products and crew. Only in northern Europe is things straight most other places including countries that would surprise you are corrupt If you want to look a bit closer to home see how the concretive party take money from the extremely rich and company's for wink , wink tax concessions and other goodies wrapped up in Christmas paper such as government hand outs to countries in return for arms and so on. So get off your white horse Stuart You asked me a question and I answered it FFS. I've no idea if any of those nations are regretting their independence but they sure aren't better off for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 (edited) Canada, don't forget Canada.....oh, wait. Drew is spot on, I've said it before, I'll say it again, I fully expect independence to cost me directly from my salary at the end of each month. I'm happy to pay that , though, because I'm taking the leap of faith in the belief that my son and grandson will benefit. Canada didn't get independence in the last 50 years and it still has it's divisions. Like Scotland Quebec has it's malcontent's who are demanding independence however they found that having just under a third of the votes is a doing in the Canadian elections, whereas in Scotland with our ridiculous voting system the SNP can get into power with similar figures. Like the UK, Canada has a successful economy, falling unemployment and it's people have a good standard of living. Scots will follow and they'll tell the Nationalists to get to f**k Oh and you might be willing to write a blank cheque to the Nationalist politicians to pay for your idealism, and that's fair enough. I suspect the rest of us aren't quite so stupid though. . Edited May 30, 2014 by Stuart Dickson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WirralSaint Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 Why did Swinney inform his cabinet colleagues that revenue Scotland would cost between 500-650mn to set up? How did Salmond arrive at his 200mn figure for the entire Scottish state to be set up? I believe he was going on the estimate from Professor Patrick Dunleavy of London School of Economics whose name the Treasury tried to attribute their original figures to before he announced he was furious how they'd exagerated them by around x10 ..they then backtracked to say they'd used a Canadian Professor Young's estimate for Quebec from 18 years ago. 18 year old data whose use in Scotland's context Professor Young then quickly dissasociated himself was presented as "the most comprehensive analysis of the fiscal position of Scotland yet produced" Honestly I'm not making that up ! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-27611563 You won't see it under BBC Scotland news they sneaked it out late Wednesday night backdated the byeline and don't provide any link to it under latest news or from related stories. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 There's no like for like. Most countries effect the change because of ethnic or cultural differences and at times only politics. Hatred too as we can see in the present debate. Cue rebuttal. Maybe, just maybe most countries want self determination? Genuinely meant as a question, in case you think I was rebutting you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoWSaint Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 Well how about simply producing their working and their assumptions so we can all make up our minds how realistic or credible it all is Drew. Taking a leap of faith into the hands of people you trust is one thing, but a leap of faith into career politicians.....really? And particularly a career politician who has made so many huge errors of judgement when it comes to the economy over the last 20 years? Not me, absolutely not me. Oh and this compromise option from the No campaign - has that not already been done? From what I can see all three major parties are committed to giving the Scottish Parliament more powers, a major move towards the Devo Max option that Alex Salmond seemed to want as a consolation prize. Name one of these powers. You cry from your soapbox that we need details from the YES campaign but the entire NO campaign seems to rest on these "extra powers" but none have actually committed to specifying any of these supposed powers. It's completely meaningless as it stands. The same as "the best of both worlds". What the f**k does that mean? Seriously. Are people voting NO based on these 2 statements? Who would be so naive? Drew , You wrote I have simply tried to highlight the fact that it will be all but impossible to get any reliable information So Stuart is not a reliable source just that he counters every post made to anyone who says they might even vote yes. The lies that come out of Westminster no matter the government over years and years along with fighting needlessly in countries that have nothing to do with the UK sickens me. Look at the state Libya is in , Iraq , Afghanistan is the next one to fall into a mess while we back the rebels in Syria. We might not have liked these countries leaders but if you ask the normal working person in these countries if they could turn back the clock to stability they would jump at the chance. There is so many reasons why I will be voting yes. He's dodged tons of my posts. He only replies to the ones he wants which he is entirely entitled to do but there are many YES issues for which he has no rebuttal. Many of those countries have become so inconsequential in the world that whether they do or don't regret it will never be reported. However if you want to look at the list you can see a hell of a lot of countries that became more instable, more war torn and evidently much more corrupt as a result of independence. Countries like Rwanda, Burundi, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Bangladesh, Burkino Faso, Cambodia, Chad - and I'm not even past the C's yet all back that up. Rwanda is after the C's. I'm going to use your rolly eye smiley now. Here it comes.................................. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 Canada didn't get independence in the last 50 years and it still has it's divisions. Like Scotland Quebec has it's malcontent's who are demanding independence however they found that having just under a third of the votes is a doing in the Canadian elections, whereas in Scotland with our ridiculous voting system the SNP can get into power with similar figures. Like the UK, Canada has a successful economy, falling unemployment and it's people have a good standard of living. Scots will follow and they'll tell the Nationalists to get to f**k Oh and you might be willing to write a blank cheque to the Nationalist politicians to pay for your idealism, and that's fair enough. I suspect the rest of us aren't quite so stupid though. . Dearie me. Well folks, that pretty much sums it up. Stu doesn't give a flying fuck about anyone but himself, so we are on barren ground here, and I don't think I'll be wasting a further ounce of my energy in a futile discussion with him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 I believe he was going on the estimate from Professor Patrick Dunleavy of London School of Economics whose name the Treasury tried to attribute their original figures to before he announced he was furious how they'd exagerated them by around x10 ..they then backtracked to say they'd used a Canadian Professor Young's estimate for Quebec from 18 years ago. 18 year old data whose use in Scotland's context Professor Young then quickly dissasociated himself was presented as "the most comprehensive analysis of the fiscal position of Scotland yet produced" Honestly I'm not making that up ! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-27611563 You won't see it under BBC Scotland news they sneaked it out late Wednesday night backdated the byeline and don't provide any link to it under latest news or from related stories. Uk treasury and Gov release a paper (funded by us obviously) that is discredited and shown up be to lies by the 2 experts quoted in it. You kinda expect that the newspapers will hide facts as they have an agenda, however it took the bbc over a day to run it and then we have the farce of them trying to cross examine and discredit the academics. Now the story is being twisted and the scots Gov publishing no figures is worse! The uk government has been caught lying to the people and our mainstream media are complicit. There is no attempt from bbc or other media to question, lies are simply run as fact with no need to correct after the event. Open your eyes as the british state and uk establishment stop at nothing to ensure Scotland stays part of uk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuddieinEK Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 Simple question... why was Alex Salmond so obviously avoiding answering a very simple and easily answered question? I know politicians do that... but this was an important question asked in different ways by different opposition members... but not even subtly patched... it was ignored with a "get it up ye" attitude! I'd actually like an answer. Most folks do. Does he not know or is he not prepared to say? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 Simple question... why was Alex Salmond so obviously avoiding answering a very simple and easily answered question? I know politicians do that... but this was an important question asked in different ways by different opposition members... but not even subtly patched... it was ignored with a "get it up ye" attitude! I'd actually like an answer. Most folks do. Does he not know or is he not prepared to say? What was the question? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 Simple question... why was Alex Salmond so obviously avoiding answering a very simple and easily answered question? I know politicians do that... but this was an important question asked in different ways by different opposition members... but not even subtly patched... it was ignored with a "get it up ye" attitude! I'd actually like an answer. Most folks do. Does he not know or is he not prepared to say? Easy answer is I dont know Buddie. I suspect from quotes given by others who are prominent in Yes campaign that there are too many variables, due to the lack of negotiation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuddieinEK Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 What was the question? It was to do with the start up c osts of an Independent Scotland. Salmond was challenged several times but just attacked each questioner in an attempt to avoid answering that was so obvious, it made Kevin Thomsons missed tackle by Goodwin look not only genuine but worthy of a lifetime ban from the human race! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 (edited) DIdn't see the footage. Doesn't sound as though he covered himself in glory based on your description. I saying that, I suspect the reason he didn't anser the question is because he doesn't have an answer. How could he, to be fair? I've posted on this a page or so back. There can't be an adequate answer as there is much ground to be covered, work to be undertaken, variables to be considered, and negotiation to be embarked upon. As the Westminster Govt is, not surprisingly, declining to enter into any discussion as to how a transfer of administrative and economic power would take place, I can't imagine that Salmond can be expected to come up with any definitive response. Quite simply - there isn't an answer to offer. All there can be is conjecture, speculation, spin, and assumptions (mixed in amongst the political posturing and point scoring). ETA: apologies TS, didn't see your earlier response. Edited May 30, 2014 by Drew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 Name one of these powers. You cry from your soapbox that we need details from the YES campaign but the entire NO campaign seems to rest on these "extra powers" but none have actually committed to specifying any of these supposed powers. It's completely meaningless as it stands. The same as "the best of both worlds". What the f**k does that mean? Seriously. Are people voting NO based on these 2 statements? Who would be so naive? I would hope that those who voted for "jam tomorrow" back in 1979 wouldn't be so naive... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuddieinEK Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 DIdn't see the footage. Doesn't sound as though he covered himself in glory based on your description. I saying that, I suspect the reason he didn't anser the question is because he doesn't have an answer. How could he, to be fair? I've posted on this a page or so back. There can't be an adequate answer as there is much ground to be covered, work to be undertaken, variables to be considered, and negotiation to be embarked upon. As the Westminster Govt is, not surprisingly, declining to enter into any discussion as to how a transfer of administrative and economic power would take place, I can't imagine that Salmond can be expected to come up with any definitive response. Quite simply - there isn't an answer to offer. All there can be is conjecture, speculation, spin, and assumptions (mixed in amongst the political posturing and point scoring). The questioners asked him to share figures from a study he had received less than two years ago... it was as if they had asked Obama for a guided tour of Roswell and a shot of steering the craft! I'd have respected him had he simply said those figures have been revised and are being recalculated. Instead he came across as an arrogant bully caught masturbating! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 The questioners asked him to share figures from a study he had received less than two years ago... it was as if they had asked Obama for a guided tour of Roswell and a shot of steering the craft! I'd have respected him had he simply said those figures have been revised and are being recalculated. Instead he came across as an arrogant bully caught masturbating! Dont know if anyone has established that Salmond received the figures 2 years ago? Thought he could've answered it more positively though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
groucho Posted May 31, 2014 Report Share Posted May 31, 2014 It was to do with the start up c osts of an Independent Scotland. Salmond was challenged several times but just attacked each questioner in an attempt to avoid answering that was so obvious, it made Kevin Thomsons missed tackle by Goodwin look not only genuine but worthy of a lifetime ban from the human race! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xh14_O2GWE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thepaisleypanda Posted May 31, 2014 Report Share Posted May 31, 2014 Just putting things in perstpective!!! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19386492 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted May 31, 2014 Report Share Posted May 31, 2014 Just putting things in perstpective!!! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-19386492 £3bn to refurbish Westminster - must be a figure that uk treasury have come.up with. Perspective right enough, you could start up a new country for less(a lot less) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted June 1, 2014 Report Share Posted June 1, 2014 I would hope that those who voted for "jam tomorrow" back in 1979 wouldn't be so naive... Yeah too bloody right. After all who would want a discount of up to 60% on the purchase of their council home. It would have been far better for Scotland's councils to have continued as slum landlords. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted June 1, 2014 Report Share Posted June 1, 2014 https://twitter.com/NoIn2014/status/472652228449550336 That's me convinced on the merits of the union... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.