Guest TPAFKATS Posted February 21, 2014 Report Share Posted February 21, 2014 The statement from Lloyds said that they would be registering the TSB in England rather than Scotland before selling the bank later this year. You might be right Tony they may well be hedging their bets as a consequence of the referendum, but why would they do that if they didn't fear the consequences of Independence? I think anyone could understand their position. It's not necessarily the case that Lloyds have no confidence in an Independent Scotland, but they must realise that the uncertainty could put off potential buyers therefore affecting the selling price. Ultimately those kind of business decisions could well be harming the Scottish economy right now and if the uncertainty continues past September - if Scotland votes Yes and two years of negotiations start - it really could harm Scotland quite badly. Is there any facts you'd like to add, or is it all conjecture? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted February 21, 2014 Report Share Posted February 21, 2014 Oh absolutely. I thought I'd made that clear in the past. I'm sure most people would have got the message that I think that all of us get really poor value for money on services offered by governments and we could all make private arrangements that would be much more cost effective and much more efficient. So how much bargaining power do you think you personally would have when the M8 needs resurfacing and how would you organise and pay for it? What about food? How do you ensure there is a coherent food strategy? Are you planning to grow and/or breed your own? How would you prevent the entire countryside being covered in those windmills you hate if you remove all taxes and therefore all government? What about disease? How would you handle an outbreak of bird flu? Who will pay to decide how the next rail franchise would be decided? What if Russia decided to invade? Would you raid your piggy bank for a Trident missile? I could literally go on all night with examples but you are trolling again aren't you? You must be because nobody can be as hilariously unhinged as you on almost any subject you care to mention. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted February 21, 2014 Report Share Posted February 21, 2014 Is there any facts you'd like to add, or is it all conjecture? Who can add facts? Not me, not you, not StuDick, not Oaksoft... not Salmond, not Cameron, not Osbourne, not Barosso, not anyone. It's all conjecture, what ifs and maybes. As Drew put it - he's willing to take a leap of faith. I feel many 'yes' voters will feel the same way. Deep breath, say a prayer to your God of choice, close your eyes, say three Hail Marys and two Hello Dollys..... then with a trembling hand plunge that 'X' into the 'yes' box. Facts? In this debate? I'd love some! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted February 21, 2014 Report Share Posted February 21, 2014 The thing about it is that it's NOT news. Of course it's news. For months you and others have slavishly repeated Barosso's comments as though they came from Jesus himself. Now the man is getting his arse kicked THIS VERY DAY for his nonsense including the unfettered twittery which saw him comparing Scotland to Kosovo. He's even apologised for that one himself in fairness. This is the first time he's been royally slapped down for this crap by some very important people. If something which is happening for the first time today isn't news then frankly we're all eagerly anticipating your definition of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted February 21, 2014 Report Share Posted February 21, 2014 Who can add facts? Not me, not you, not StuDick, not Oaksoft... not Salmond, not Cameron, not Osbourne, not Barosso, not anyone. It's all conjecture, what ifs and maybes. As Drew put it - he's willing to take a leap of faith. I feel many 'yes' voters will feel the same way. Deep breath, say a prayer to your God of choice, close your eyes, say three Hail Marys and two Hello Dollys..... then with a trembling hand plunge that 'X' into the 'yes' box. Facts? In this debate? I'd love some! Well done. You've actually said something intelligent. I'm away for a lie down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smcc Posted February 21, 2014 Report Share Posted February 21, 2014 "For those of us climbing to the top of the food chain, there can be no mercy. There is but one rule: Hunt or be hunted." However, as oaksoft did omit the comma, I was right. If your auntie was a man she'd be your uncle, but that is also not the case. What is your point, caller? I do hate being a pedant. Anyone with a knowledge of English would have realised that a comma had been omitted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted February 21, 2014 Report Share Posted February 21, 2014 Well done. You've actually said something intelligent. I'm away for a lie down. Why thank you kind Sir. I feel a warm glow inside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted February 21, 2014 Report Share Posted February 21, 2014 Now, before anyone with an agenda tries to second guess my emotions, I'm neither happy nor unhappy about this article. I'm merely pointing out that Mr.Barroso's views on the EU are not actually what will definitely happen and that alternative views from other individuals in similar positions of authority, who don't have a sizeable part of their country wanting to secede from their governance, do exist. So while it appears that an entry to the EU could be difficult and involve negotiations, it is certainly not "impossible". In the section you've quoted he states that "It is very difficult to see how Scotland would not be a member, eventually, if it so desires to be." I don't think that viewpoint is something that anyone could disagree with. If Scotland wants to be in the EU it could proceed - like other applicants - to meet the criteria for admission. That's fact. Where he's less clear is that he doesn't say that Scotland would automatically retain the terms that we currently enjoy as part of the UK, nor does he say that membership would be continuous in the event of Independence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted February 21, 2014 Report Share Posted February 21, 2014 Is there any facts you'd like to add, or is it all conjecture? The fact is that they are moving their HQ to England ahead of the referendum. It's quite clear that the instability in Scotland has forced this move and it's evidence that the uncertainty is damaging Scotlands economy. That's inevitable up till September - however a Yes vote will mean that instability and uncertainty will continue for at least a further two years while Alex Salmond trying to negotiate his Nirvana on his and only his terms. Can Scotland really afford that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted February 21, 2014 Report Share Posted February 21, 2014 (edited) Of course it's news. For months you and others have slavishly repeated Barosso's comments as though they came from Jesus himself. 1. Untrue. Quote me where I have slavishly repeated Barosso. I didn't even endorse his point of view, though I certainly used his comments as demonstrating that ubiquitous smooth Tarmac does not lie ahead. 2. I am very unlikely to ever use Jesus as my point of reference regarding the truth. Now the man is getting his arse kicked THIS VERY DAY for his nonsense including the unfettered twittery which saw him comparing Scotland to Kosovo. No, he isn't. It's some other nonentities offering opinion. He's even apologised for that one himself in fairness. This is the first time he's been royally slapped down for this crap by some very important people. Very important people? You need to get out more and meet humans. If something which is happening for the first time today isn't news then frankly we're all eagerly anticipating your definition of it. A tosser giving his opinion is not news - as you ably demonstrate every day. Edited February 21, 2014 by bluto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted February 21, 2014 Report Share Posted February 21, 2014 Why thank you kind Sir. I feel a warm glow inside. Check to make sure oaksoft is not standing awfy close behind you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted February 21, 2014 Report Share Posted February 21, 2014 So how much bargaining power do you think you personally would have when the M8 needs resurfacing and how would you organise and pay for it? What about food? How do you ensure there is a coherent food strategy? Are you planning to grow and/or breed your own? How would you prevent the entire countryside being covered in those windmills you hate if you remove all taxes and therefore all government? What about disease? How would you handle an outbreak of bird flu? Who will pay to decide how the next rail franchise would be decided? What if Russia decided to invade? Would you raid your piggy bank for a Trident missile? I could literally go on all night with examples but you are trolling again aren't you? You must be because nobody can be as hilariously unhinged as you on almost any subject you care to mention. I wonder how the rest of the world copes? Road - oh yeah, cheap fuel and a road network owned by private companies who operate tolls. The US network isn't perfect but big wide open toll roads, well maintained, traffic jam free, and nowhere near as riddled with holes as the M8 are a pleasure to drive even in the challenging environment of Florida. Rail - why pay for someone to decide who wins a franchise when you can simply let operators run their trains on the tracks, paying Network Rail for the privilege. With more than one operator running routes perhaps we'd see proper consumer choice and competition with regard to pricing. I could go on all night batting away your idiocy but I've got better things to do, however you can rest assured that for every point you've made there is a simply privatised solution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted February 21, 2014 Report Share Posted February 21, 2014 Ah but Bluto you have to admire Oaksofts idea of class structure. The current President is not as important in an organisation structure as an ex employee who ran a department handling environmental affairs who resigned from his post to take up a paid position with nuclear fuels 12 years ago and the President is not as important as a man who is head of another department at the European Policy Centre. Oaksoft also has a strange idea of what constitutes and arse kicking. Apparently saying that the Presidents opinion is not 100% as you see it, but it's vaguely similar is tantamount to being given your final disciplinary warning and your jacket hanging on a shoogly peg. Every time Oaksoft posts I find myself wondering if he isn't just another Supras alias. Remember when he claimed he was a world renowned lecturer at the LSE. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted February 21, 2014 Report Share Posted February 21, 2014 The fact is that they are moving their HQ to England ahead of the referendum. It's quite clear that the instability in Scotland has forced this move and it's evidence that the uncertainty is damaging Scotlands economy. That's inevitable up till September - however a Yes vote will mean that instability and uncertainty will continue for at least a further two years while Alex Salmond trying to negotiate his Nirvana on his and only his terms. Can Scotland really afford that? No facts then, not sure there's even conjecture after the first sentence... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thepaisleypanda Posted February 22, 2014 Report Share Posted February 22, 2014 (edited) Who can add facts? Not me, not you, not StuDick, not Oaksoft... not Salmond, not Cameron, not Osbourne, not Barosso, not anyone. It's all conjecture, what ifs and maybes. As Drew put it - he's willing to take a leap of faith. I feel many 'NO' voters will feel the same way. Deep breath, say a prayer to your God of choice, close your eyes, say three Hail Marys and two Hello Dollys..... then with a trembling hand plunge that 'X' into the 'yes' box. Facts? In this debate? I'd love some! Okay, I've REVERSED the scenario - discuss!! ??? Edited February 22, 2014 by thepaisleypanda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud Bundy Posted February 23, 2014 Report Share Posted February 23, 2014 Check to make sure oaksoft is not standing awfy close behind you. London Boy - ménage does trios on the Go with Prick and Lex ? Bend over London Boy's - You will take it in the ass big style like the W@nkers from Eton ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted February 23, 2014 Report Share Posted February 23, 2014 Okay, I've REVERSED the scenario - discuss!! ??? I don't understand the question? Are you saying he's now not willing to take a leap of faith, but will vote Yes? That doesn't make any sense at all. At the end of the day it's a choice between reality and a discredited fanticsts dream Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintnextlifetime Posted February 23, 2014 Report Share Posted February 23, 2014 I hate msn but I thought this might be relevant . . http://money.uk.msn.com/features/how-households-would-be-affected-by-scottish-independence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud Bundy Posted February 23, 2014 Report Share Posted February 23, 2014 I don't understand the question? Are you saying he's now not willing to take a leap of faith, but will vote Yes? That doesn't make any sense at all. At the end of the day it's a choice between reality and a discredited fanticsts dream Stuart, I again salute your immoral Ignorance to the Cause ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted February 23, 2014 Report Share Posted February 23, 2014 Okay, I've REVERSED the scenario - discuss!! ??? I don't understand the question either. People voting for the status quo and retaining the union doing so with a sharp intake of breath, hoping things work out, and taking a leap into the unknown? Sorry, I need that explained to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted February 23, 2014 Report Share Posted February 23, 2014 I don't understand the question? Are you saying he's now not willing to take a leap of faith, but will vote Yes? That doesn't make any sense at all. At the end of the day it's a choice between reality and a discredited fanticsts dream I don't understand the question either. People voting for the status quo and retaining the union doing so with a sharp intake of breath, hoping things work out, and taking a leap into the unknown? Sorry, I need that explained to me. FFS guys it's down to me YET AGAIN to explain the simple basics. What he was TRYING to say .......obviously.......was.......errrr.......ehm........damn....nope I've got nothing! Anyone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smcc Posted February 23, 2014 Report Share Posted February 23, 2014 Seems obvious to me. The Panda is suggesting that potential "No" voters will have to take a leap of faith, as the Unionist camp is unwilling to specify its plans for Scotland in a continuing UK. The SNP is continually being castigated for not giving details of their plans. It needs pointing out to the No camp that Yes Scotland represents not only the SNP, but many others who think that Scotland would be better on its own. Their is absolutely no guarantee that the SNP will form a government in an independent Scotland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted February 23, 2014 Report Share Posted February 23, 2014 Seems obvious to me. The Panda is suggesting that potential "No" voters will have to take a leap of faith, as the Unionist camp is unwilling to specify its plans for Scotland in a continuing UK. The SNP is continually being castigated for not giving details of their plans. It needs pointing out to the No camp that Yes Scotland represents not only the SNP, but many others who think that Scotland would be better on its own. Their is absolutely no guarantee that the SNP will form a government in an independent Scotland. Indeed, that was my reading of the post. Was the panda being too smart, or too obtuse for some on here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted February 23, 2014 Report Share Posted February 23, 2014 Good article in todays herald from Ian Bell http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/columnists/you-dont-need-to-be-a-yes-voter-to-secure-social-justice-but-it-helps.23493868 Iain McWhirter's isnt bad either http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/columnists/after-bullying-and-bowie-there-will-be-nothing-united-about-this-kingdom-followin.23509172 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oaksoft Posted February 23, 2014 Report Share Posted February 23, 2014 2. There is no 'u' in negotiations. Maybe not but there IS a "u" in c**t. 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.