saintnextlifetime Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 The Yes people are desperately grasping at straws. Another clanger? Doubt it. They have said time and again no pound sharing for perfectly valid reasons. Sorry , Rick , I don't get the grasping at straws , jibe. Cameron coming up here to talk on the pound can only be a good thing for Yes Scotland. . As has been said by Ian , the reasons we WILL get the pound have been done to death on here. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vambo57 Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 Brave man indeed. Are all you 'No' men still supporting this corrupt goverment? Shame on you if you are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strummer Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 I was wondering what to vote but the front page of todays daily record really made me realise what way to vote..archie mcpherson says no..wtf is this bias rag all about.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddiecat Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 coming from a uk ambassador who was driven about in a limo,then he discovers corruption,was he very naive or just ignoring it when he had his nose in the trough,i would say that most sensible people know that any politician is out to see what he can get,whether he does good things along the way or not,does this guy really think we are stupid enough to believe that he didnt know about corruption, he himself knew he was involved in it due to taking part in the meetings he speaks of,why did he not "tell all" when it was actually happening ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil McCracken Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 Brave man indeed. Are all you 'No' men still supporting this corrupt goverment? Shame on you if you are. 'this corrupt government' is as much scotland's as it is England, wales, etc its amazing the bits of the uk that the yes lot want to keep and the bits they want to disassociate themselves with Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil McCracken Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 24 hours since i asked the question, can anyone yet explain how Scotland will deal with the collapse of the financial services in Scotland in the event of a yes vote? independence will mean seperate regulatory and tax regimes and hence higher costs and risk to customers in the uk major advisers such as Hargreaves lansdown have already indicated that no more business would go to Scotland and existing business would be pulled out financial services is 8% of the Scottish economy independence would wreck our economy overnight Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 (edited) 24 hours since i asked the question, can anyone yet explain how Scotland will deal with the collapse of the financial services in Scotland in the event of a yes vote? independence will mean seperate regulatory and tax regimes and hence higher costs and risk to customers in the uk major advisers such as Hargreaves lansdown have already indicated that no more business would go to Scotland and existing business would be pulled out financial services is 8% of the Scottish economy independence would wreck our economy overnight Nobody has responded because nobody believes there will be a collapse of our financial industry. You are falling foul of BT's hysterical doom mongering. Edited August 28, 2014 by oaksoft Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
groucho Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 coming from a uk ambassador who was driven about in a limo,then he discovers corruption,was he very naive or just ignoring it when he had his nose in the trough,i would say that most sensible people know that any politician is out to see what he can get,whether he does good things along the way or not,does this guy really think we are stupid enough to believe that he didnt know about corruption, he himself knew he was involved in it due to taking part in the meetings he speaks of,why did he not "tell all" when it was actually happening ? I think you will find he did speak out about this in 2003 and was sacked in 2004 this is taken from wiki..... In 2002 Murray was appointed British ambassador to Uzbekistan at the age of 43 but dismissed in October 2004.[1] In July 2004 he told The Guardian that "there is no point in having cocktail-party relationships with a fascist regime", and that "you don't have to be a pompous old fart to be an ambassador".[10] In October 2002 Murray made a speech at a human rights conference hosted by Freedom House in Tashkent in which he asserted that "Uzbekistan is not a functioning democracy" and that the boiling to death of two members of Hizb ut-Tahrir "is not an isolated incident".[15] Later, Secretary-General of the United Nations Kofi Annan confronted Uzbek President Islam Karimov with Murray's claims.[10] Murray was summoned to the FCO in London and on 8 March 2003 was reprimanded for writing to his employers, in response to a speech by President of the United States George W. Bush, "when it comes to the Karimov regime, systematic torture and rape appear to be treated as peccadilloes, not to affect the relationship and to be downplayed in the international fora... I hope that once the present crisis is over we will make plain to the US at senior level our serious concern over their policy in Uzbekistan." [16] Disciplinary charges[edit] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denbud Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 24 hours since i asked the question, can anyone yet explain how Scotland will deal with the collapse of the financial services in Scotland in the event of a yes vote? independence will mean seperate regulatory and tax regimes and hence higher costs and risk to customers in the uk major advisers such as Hargreaves lansdown have already indicated that no more business would go to Scotland and existing business would be pulled out financial services is 8% of the Scottish economy independence would wreck our economy overnight Why would there be a collapse of financial services in scotland, do you honestly beleive that every bank and financial institution would leave scotland? Has it occurred to you that thwe company you quote maybe scaremongering to tout for more business Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 The UK state has already tried to play the man buddiecat. Your about 10 years and a couple of books too late... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isle Of Bute Saint Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 24 hours since i asked the question, can anyone yet explain how Scotland will deal with the collapse of the financial services in Scotland in the event of a yes vote? independence will mean seperate regulatory and tax regimes and hence higher costs and risk to customers in the uk major advisers such as Hargreaves lansdown have already indicated that no more business would go to Scotland and existing business would be pulled out financial services is 8% of the Scottish economy independence would wreck our economy overnight I see in todays Herald The Royal Bank Of Scotland signed the letter 'FOR' independence. Get rid of your pampers your a big boy now Andy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faraway saint Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 Not going into why we will get the pound as it's be discussed to death but its great to see the YES vote climbing at a great rate which is only going to be helped by Cameron and Brown. Any chance you can back this up? Remember, the voices in your head don't count. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddiecat Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
groucho Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 Think it was a former chairman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrong Planet Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 I see in todays Herald The Royal Bank Of Scotland signed the letter 'FOR' independence. Get rid of your pampers your a big boy now Andy Point of order IOBS, that is entirely wrong, we all make mistakes. As Groucho has points out it was former RBS chairman Sir George Mathewson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrong Planet Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 There's an old saying, you've probably heard it, "Better late than never". If there is a Yes vote, the financial institutes will not just walk away. They will wait for the negotiations and they will talk to the politicians, then each one will decide what is best for it. I could have made that more succinct by saying "Stop talking shite" but I couldn't be arsed. Thing is, they might be forced to walk away if they don't actually have any money in them. The potential for money to leave Scottish financial institutions via customers and business transferring to alternative institutions outside of Scotland is huge. There is one thing that it seems both sides agree on, if there was to be a Yes vote the uncertainty from a currency and financial perspective post 18th September could be crippling. For an inde Scotland's sake, it would need solved, one way or another, very quickly. How likely that is under highly charged circumstances is anyone's guess. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 The sky will fall down... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted August 28, 2014 Report Share Posted August 28, 2014 Something a bit more lighthearted - seems Cameron took a wrong turn and ended up in Scotland earlier http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/analysis/289974-indyref-daily-stephen-daisley-on-independence-referendum-campaign/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted August 29, 2014 Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 Both sides don't agree with that at all. What the f**k are you talking about? As Tony insinuated, you're being a bit Chicken Licken here. I've been trying to decide whether or not you are just an alias trolling. I've decided that you are. And here we go again. You've no defence so you smear. Why must he be a trolling alias? Is it cause he makes you look like a fanny? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted August 29, 2014 Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 ...guess who's back; back again; shady's back... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted August 29, 2014 Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 So Cameron won't debate with Salmond as it's a decision for Scotland. Once again though Cameron arranges to come to Scotland for a speech and arranged questions - this time telling us basically that bigger is better. Unfortunately for him the speech by head of CBI was off script, talking of all the uncertainty around the in/out Eu Referendum that Cameron has committed too. Cameron will also be campaigning for a no vote in Scotland this morning...remember though it's a decision for Scotland and he's no getting involved! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted August 29, 2014 Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 We are not allowed a participatory vote, but we do have opinions. People ask David for his, so he generously frees up time to proffer it. As I do, on occasion, in here.... Safe in the knowledge that my opinion is valued by all you lovely Buddies. NO supporters on here get slagged for confusing Salmond as the leader of the Indy side, cos he is NOT what the vote is all about. I fear the Yes men are just as baffled when they suggest Cameron is some sort of titular God of No. And nor is Mr Darling, they are merely occasional mouthpieces for the folk who believe that this half-hearted blind shuffle towards a non-participatory dependency state is a good idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted August 29, 2014 Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 (edited) Tony is just desperate, as is the yes campaign. Salmonds interview on Sky News the other day showed him up - yet again - to be light on facts. His cover was to offer sky the chance to televise a debate between him and Cameron. It's poor, poor stuff and the public are seeing through it Edited August 29, 2014 by Stuart Dickson Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrong Planet Posted August 29, 2014 Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 Both sides don't agree with that at all. What the f**k are you talking about? As Tony insinuated, you're being a bit Chicken Licken here. I've been trying to decide whether or not you are just an alias trolling. I've decided that you are. Unfailingly disappointed in your responses Slarti, you do your Yes colleagues, many of whom have something constructive to say and do so eloquently, no good at all. It's all the more disappointing as I had heard from impeccable sources that you are a master debater. Course, I might have misheard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintnextlifetime Posted August 29, 2014 Report Share Posted August 29, 2014 We are not allowed a participatory vote, but we do have opinions. People ask David for his, so he generously frees up time to proffer it. So , are you now a Tory , bluto. . As I do, on occasion, in here.... Safe in the knowledge that my opinion is valued by all you lovely Buddies. NO supporters on here get slagged for confusing Salmond as the leader of the Indy side, cos he is NOT what the vote is all about. I fear the Yes men are just as baffled when they suggest Cameron is some sort of titular God of No. And nor is Mr Darling, they are merely occasional mouthpieces for the folk who believe that this half-hearted blind shuffle towards a non-participatory dependency state is a good idea. 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.