The Referendum Thread

[Drew]

And it appears it's BOTH sides of the debate business is complaining about:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28194431

Aye, and that is exactly how Ch4 are trailing the Dispatches programme.

[zurich_allan]

Well that kills the "we won't get into the EU" nonsense:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28197298

And it appears it's BOTH sides of the debate business is complaining about:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28194431

It doesn't kill the EU debate. It's not even anything new on what I already posted many moons ago on this thread. Again to repeat - in theory if all of the existing 28 Member States are happy for Scotland to be brought in, it would / could be as simple and straightforward as noted in the article above. If even one of the 28 doesn't agree (I personally don't see why they would object, but I'm not going to second guess the international political agenda of other European countries), then it is impossible / illegal for Scotland to be brought in any other way than via the full application process, as the main treaties of the EU cannot legally be amended to increase membership without unanimous agreement.

Again, to repeat, I don't see why another country would object, but in theory they could, and there is literally nothing we could do about it - it's completely out of our hands.

Edited to add - don't shoot the messenger BTW - I'm not posting anything political or opinion based, this is purely factual information.

Edited July 7, 2014 by zurich_allan

[Stuart Dickson]

Any muppet can set up a Facebook account - even YOU have probably done it!

True, but Newsnet is one of the websites often quoted by Natsi's on here.

[oaksoft]

It doesn't kill the EU debate. It's not even anything new on what I already posted many moons ago on this thread. Again to repeat - in theory if all of the existing 28 Member States are happy for Scotland to be brought in, it would / could be as simple and straightforward as noted in the article above. If even one of the 28 doesn't agree (I personally don't see why they would object, but I'm not going to second guess the international political agenda of other European countries), then it is impossible / illegal for Scotland to be brought in any other way than via the full application process, as the main treaties of the EU cannot legally be amended to increase membership without unanimous agreement.

Again, to repeat, I don't see why another country would object, but in theory they could, and there is literally nothing we could do about it - it's completely out of our hands.

Edited to add - don't shoot the messenger BTW - I'm not posting anything political or opinion based, this is purely factual information.

I agree with you that in theory it could be as BT are describing in the same way it's theoretically possible for Scotland to win a World Cup one day.

Reality and practicality makes it a different matter.

What I'm annoyed about is the No campaign picking an option which has a low chance of happening and assigning a FAR larger probability to it than it needs without any qualifying statement. This is then routinely parroted by every No supporter as either highly likely to happen or that it's fact when it's nothing of the sort.

I've repeatedly said there will be a political solution to this because there is no legal precedent for it and common sense dictates it.

I am not disputing any aspect of law with you because I don't have the background to do so but it's not relevant anyway.

We really do appear to be saying almost the same thing.

Yes there's a chance of us getting booted out (or however you want to phrase this) and nobody is denying there's a risk. We're all disagreeing over how big that risk is I think.

Edited July 7, 2014 by oaksoft

[salmonbuddie]

Interesting

http://news.stv.tv/scotland-decides/news/281832-deloitte-referendum-less-of-a-business-risk-than-uk-election/

[salmonbuddie]

Another perspective on StuD's "pressure" on businesses by the Scottish Government.

http://wingsoverscotland.com/when-day-doesnt-follow-night/

[oaksoft]

Aye, and that is exactly how Ch4 are trailing the Dispatches programme.

In which case they are being more even handed than the BBC which is a good thing.

The tone of the debate on every forum, in every newspaper and in every sphere is absolutely f**king dreadful from both sides.

There's absolutely nowhere to go to discuss this stuff in a reasonable manner without one side lying through their teeth.

It's the persistent deliberate lying and misleading from both sides which is switching me off the entire thing.

BT are by far the worst offenders - lying, exaggerating, bullying, threatening and misleading on every single issue; turning every single minor risk into a major f**king catastrophe. There's no need for it. If they have a case they should make it and then leave folk alone to make up their own minds without needlessly threading their jobs and their livelihoods.

IMO this is why people are switching off.

The sad thing is that whilst this strategy of negativity and bullshitting may well be enough to win the vote for No, it's a long term disaster for democracy with potentially hundreds of thousands switching off from politics permanently. That's the surest way to allow the lunatic fringe into power. That worries me far more than a No vote.

By the way I'm not having a go at you - just generally letting off steam :-)

Edited July 7, 2014 by oaksoft

[salmonbuddie]

And a piece from the Sunday Times on probable oil revenue from someone in the know:

http://wingsoverscotland.com/danny-alexanders-broken-calculator/

Will Beaker admit he got it wrong?

[buddiecat]

Answer the simple question that I posed BC,You deal with Poverty, Day in and Day out, Yet you cant answer the question with regards to Poverty in this small country ? You are one of the fortunate few that have continuity of employment due to poverty, Yet you cant or wont state an opinion cause your a Bitter Together fearty, scared of losing his call centre position of dealing with Poverty first hand ?

i did answer the question if you want to look back - i said i dont think anyone deserves to be in poverty,and yes of course i'm concerned about losing my job, i help people in poverty every day,i'm actually quite good at it and proud of the help i give people,do you think me and other civil servants should vote yes and give up their jobs, which would put more people in poverty.

feck it lets just all give up our jobs and all be in poverty,

[groucho]

http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/scotland/article1431143.ece

Beat me to it Salmonbuddie

Edited July 7, 2014 by groucho

[Stuart Dickson]

Another perspective on StuD's "pressure" on businesses by the Scottish Government.

http://wingsoverscotland.com/when-day-doesnt-follow-night/

Der Sturmer trying to dismiss Natsi pressure on business leaders from the First Ministers office and the SNP - no great surprise there. I don't know why they couldn't find any coverage of the oil revenue report though. It was on National Radio and on the BBC website amongst other places - not that it was all that exciting. Just one persons opinion that increased investment in the North Sea should see oil production increase which may dent the size of the deficit in the predictions for north sea oil revenues that occurred this year because Alex Salmond and John Swinney refused to listen to everyone else.

My opinion is that he's wrong and the over optimistic revenue predictions being followed by the SNP will never be realised leaving the country £Bns in deficit if we were ever to go it alone. I don't really expect to see that make the news either - or your Der Sturmer website for that matter.

Edited July 7, 2014 by Stuart Dickson

[Stuart Dickson]

In which case they are being more even handed than the BBC which is a good thing.

The tone of the debate on every forum, in every newspaper and in every sphere is absolutely f**king dreadful from both sides.

There's absolutely nowhere to go to discuss this stuff in a reasonable manner without one side lying through their teeth.

It's the persistent deliberate lying and misleading from both sides which is switching me off the entire thing.

BT are by far the worst offenders - lying, exaggerating, bullying, threatening and misleading on every single issue; turning every single minor risk into a major f**king catastrophe. There's no need for it. If they have a case they should make it and then leave folk alone to make up their own minds without needlessly threading their jobs and their livelihoods.

IMO this is why people are switching off.

The sad thing is that whilst this strategy of negativity and bullshitting may well be enough to win the vote for No, it's a long term disaster for democracy with potentially hundreds of thousands switching off from politics permanently. That's the surest way to allow the lunatic fringe into power. That worries me far more than a No vote.

By the way I'm not having a go at you - just generally letting off steam :-)

Ach yer arse on so many different counts.

Whatever we think of the debate I have never seen Scotland so politically charged in my lifetime. To claim people are switching off and being lost to politics forever is utter nonsense!

[oaksoft]

do you think me and other civil servants should vote yes and give up their jobs.

This is a prime example of the sort of scaremongering shit that is being casually peddled on a daily basis.

People being threatened with their jobs unless they vote No and then not only swallowing that mound of obvious crap but peddling it as fact so that others can be scared into voting No too.

[oaksoft]

Ach yer arse on so many different counts.

Whatever we think of the debate I have never seen Scotland so politically charged in my lifetime. To claim people are switching off and being lost to politics forever is utter nonsense!

The "debate", if that's what you can even call it, is being dominated by a handful of internet wannabes who believe that their voice has importance.

Look at your posts. What do you genuinely feel you have added to the debate on here with the exception of windups?

Do you seriously believe it's reasonable to use phrases linking the Yes campaign to Nazis?

On what planet is that a reasonable debating position?

It's a trolling windup Stuart plain and simple. The internet is chock full of people like you doing exactly the same thing.

To believe you are fully and constructively engaging in this historic political moment is delusional in the extreme.

If you're not making "jokes" about the second world war you are posting nothing but lies, smears and exaggeration.

You are peddling meaningless shite for reasons only you can possibly know.

Make no mistake - your contributions are meaningless in the context of the debate.

Edited July 7, 2014 by oaksoft

[Stuart Dickson]

The "debate", if that's what you can even call it, is being dominated by a handful of internet wannabes who believe that their voice has importance.

Look at your posts. What do you genuinely feel you have added to the debate on here with the exception of windups?

Do you seriously believe it's reasonable to use phrases linking the Yes campaign to Nazis?

On what planet is that a reasonable debating position?

It's a trolling windup Stuart plain and simple. The internet is chock full of people like you doing exactly the same thing.

To believe you are fully and constructively engaging in this historic political moment is delusional in the extreme.

If you're not making "jokes" about the second world war you are posting nothing but lies, smears and exaggeration.

You are peddling meaningless shite for reasons only you can possibly know.

Make no mistake - your contributions are meaningless in the context of the debate.

I know my contributions are pretty meaningless. I don't imagine that St Mirren supporters will hold sway in the referendum. But my posts are no worse than those of Stewart Campbell who's website is again being quoted over and over on this forum. Lets not forget this is the man who lives in Bath, who's going to be "done" with Scotland if it doesn't vote Yes, and a man who laughed all through the Hillsborough disaster. His website is listed on official Yes Campaign propaganda as one of the places to go for information - seriously. The No campaign haven't listed Stuart Dickson's rants on B&W Army amongst the list of recommended reading for the No Campaign

[Bud Bundy]

Oh FFS, he answered your question. He believes that Independence will lead to more job losses, higher rates of unemployment and more poverty.

Maybe you should counter his argument and explain why you think an independent country would prosper and the rest of us can decide who's logic we'll believe

I posed the question to BC, dont need you to wipe his arse ? Now away and lye in your pish ya bawbag !

[buddiecat]

This is a prime example of the sort of scaremongering shit that is being casually peddled on a daily basis.

People being threatened with their jobs unless they vote No and then not only swallowing that mound of obvious crap but peddling it as fact so that others can be scared into voting No too.

i'm not scaremongering i'm giving my opinion on what could happen,nobody has told me i will lose my job,but i can use my head and work out that it is a distinct possibility given that DWP offices in scotland would lose 88% of their customers, you might not care and thats up to you,but i care about my job

[oaksoft]

I know my contributions are pretty meaningless.

It's not just that your contributions are meaningless.

They are grossly offensive.

You seem unable to understand that.

To you it's a big joke to play on the Nazi pun but it's not funny or clever.

The only person in the room who doesn't seem to get that is you.

I can understand a teenager continuing to behave like a twat for the hell of it but surely a fully grown man with children is capable of a modicum of self awareness?

We've had 250 pages of this relentless Nazi shit.

Can you drop it now?

Am I asking too much?

[oaksoft]

i'm not scaremongering i'm giving my opinion on what could happen,nobody has told me i will lose my job,but i can use my head and work out that it is a distinct possibility given that DWP offices in scotland would lose 88% of their customers, you might not care and thats up to you,but i care about my job

Where did I ever say I didn't care about job losses?

Show me a single post where I've even hinted at that?

Of course you care about your job. I'm not suggesting you shouldn't but when you say "do you think me and other civil servants should vote yes and give up their jobs." you are not stating an opinion. You are stating a fact that a Yes vote will cost you your job.

I actually agree with you that there is a risk of jobs losses but your job isn't safe under EITHER government.

You are confusing risk with likelihood and then presenting your opinion as fact.

The only people talking about job losses is BT and their supporters.

It's bullshit - total bullshit to suggest that there is any realistic threat to your job through independence over and above that posed by remaining part of the UK.

The fact that BT and their supporters peddle this IS a classic example of how the debate is becoming bogged down in threats and nonsense.

It's stifling the debate, deflecting people from the real issues and is needlessly fuelling resentment.

This is an important principle.

On 19th Sept we're going to wake potentially to a No vote whch won by making half of us fearful enough and miserable enough to avoid taking a chance and the other half rightly very angry that our chance at a fresh start was stolen from us by lying cheating bastards on the other side.

That's an entire population of angry and frustrated people. How on earth is that a good thing?

It is CRUCIAL that if BT wins this vote that they've been seen to win it in the correct manner or we're going to have a total nightmare on our hands afterwards.

Edited July 7, 2014 by oaksoft

[Bud Bundy]

i did answer the question if you want to look back - i said i dont think anyone deserves to be in poverty,and yes of course i'm concerned about losing my job, i help people in poverty every day,i'm actually quite good at it and proud of the help i give people,do you think me and other civil servants should vote yes and give up their jobs, which would put more people in poverty.

feck it lets just all give up our jobs and all be in poverty,

Mon BC ! 1.4 Trillion of debt, That these corrupt Unionist politicians have ladled the UK with, because of their friend's the Bankers. ? You are indeed A Big fearty, Who cuddles up on the belief that You are doing a job that help's the poorest members of our society ? I, remember Supplementary Benefit, Income support, and the changes to the Benefit's System made by the various corrupt London. Based politicians. !

Now answer the question with regards to the welfare state that existed in this corrupt union ?

You BC, have more than most of the 820,000 people who are living in Poverty, In this small country called Scotland ! Benefit sanctions, And foodbanks are the norm in this day and age,Yet you could not give a f**k as long as You have your Job,and various property's owned and rented by You ? Do you Let any of these Property's to benefit claimants, And doe's Pishy fae Wishay, Wipe your arse ?

[salmonbuddie]

Der Sturmer trying to dismiss Natsi pressure on business leaders from the First Ministers office and the SNP - no great surprise there. I don't know why they couldn't find any coverage of the oil revenue report though. It was on National Radio and on the BBC website amongst other places - not that it was all that exciting. Just one persons opinion that increased investment in the North Sea should see oil production increase which may dent the size of the deficit in the predictions for north sea oil revenues that occurred this year because Alex Salmond and John Swinney refused to listen to everyone else.

My opinion is that he's wrong and the over optimistic revenue predictions being followed by the SNP will never be realised leaving the country £Bns in deficit if we were ever to go it alone. I don't really expect to see that make the news either - or your Der Sturmer website for that matter.

The important part is the Sunday Times part, not the WOS part. Check out the guy's cv, it's one guy, yes, as are you, but I think I'll trust his opinion before yours, given his background. Or Beaker's, for that matter.

[Bud Bundy]

i'm not scaremongering i'm giving my opinion on what could happen,nobody has told me i will lose my job,but i can use my head and work out that it is a distinct possibility given that DWP offices in scotland would lose 88% of their customers, you might not care and thats up to you,but i care about my job

You should not Exist in this day and age BC,As HMRC should have had the capability to Implement the outdated systems that are used for Benefit Delivery ?

[salmonbuddie]

i'm not scaremongering i'm giving my opinion on what could happen,nobody has told me i will lose my job,but i can use my head and work out that it is a distinct possibility given that DWP offices in scotland would lose 88% of their customers, you might not care and thats up to you,but i care about my job

I may be picking you up wrongly, bc, but wouldn't DWP offices in Scotland pick up the Scottish "clients" which the EWNI offices currently handle?

[salmonbuddie]

No comment on the STV story, then?

[Stuart Dickson]

The important part is the Sunday Times part, not the WOS part. Check out the guy's cv, it's one guy, yes, as are you, but I think I'll trust his opinion before yours, given his background. Or Beaker's, for that matter.

Yep I know who he is. A FORMER oil boss as well as a former banker, former whisky boss and a former boss of fisheries. A bit of a jack of all trades. However far be it for me to rubbish his credentials, or his motives for taking a different line to current bosses in ALL of these industries.

However since you are giving him so much credence how about current oil bosses? Will you listen to them with their impressive CV's? Bob Dudley at BP and Ben van Beurden of Shell have both spoken out against Independence. Two guys who know their business inside out. Two real experts in their field. Or do you only choose the opinion of experts who's views seem to back up your prejudices.