Callum Gilhooley Posted March 9, 2014 Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 Are you wanting to go there? Seriously? If it wasn't for Gordon Brown using the vast majority of the UK defence budget on two aircraft carriers to be built at Rosyth you could have added that yard to the list - and while the order has proved to be a woefully inefficient order in terms of defence, we have to remember that an Independent Scotland would decimate defence spending relying on us all running around with spears to handle any threat to our borders. Under Thatcher we may well have seen the closure of Ravenscraig but we also saw US firms heavily investing in Scottish manufacture with plenty of highly skilled technology based jobs in Scotland. Compare that with Salmonds record of encouraging RBS to gamble all to buy ABN Amro, and his proud boasts that he's brought Amazon, one of the worst employers in the UK with wages barely above Minimum Wage, to Scotland with his tax free deals and the Westminster Politicians look far more pro Scottish. Where to start ??? 1 . The bulk of the defence budget blown on Aircraft carriers ? Dont think so. The carriers are currently expected to cost £6 billion.. Total defence budget is somewhere in the region of £40 billion. ( not including development costs of the new Lightning fighter which is funded seperately (paid to the USA !!) 2.Independant Scotland to decimate defence spending ?? Er Naw ! Estimate for the new Scottish DEFENCE FORCE is to be £2.5 - £3 Billion, roughly what our pro rata contribution is at present & significantly MORE when you count the cost of the UKs weapons of mass destruction programme. Also , 3. The new Scottish defence plan would include having TWO Air bases in Scotland. The UK are reducing it to ONE under the strategic defence review. 4. The Nuclear base at Faslane WILL NOT be closed & all the jobs lost , despite what operation fear would have us believe. It will be used as the main base for our Naval Protection fleet & Defence HQ. As for your jibe about low cost amazon type jobs ?? Yes these companies are guilty of shabby re-imbursement of their workforce at times........... But have you met THE TORIES ?? you know , the party who have overseen ( & encouraged in some instances) a massive rise in the amount of ZERO HOUR contracts with Minimum rights for workers ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callum Gilhooley Posted March 9, 2014 Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 Sorry if this has been posted previously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted March 9, 2014 Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 Are you wanting to go there? Seriously? If it wasn't for Gordon Brown using the vast majority of the UK defence budget on two aircraft carriers to be built at Rosyth you could have added that yard to the list - and while the order has proved to be a woefully inefficient order in terms of defence, we have to remember that an Independent Scotland would decimate defence spending relying on us all running around with spears to handle any threat to our borders. Under Thatcher we may well have seen the closure of Ravenscraig but we also saw US firms heavily investing in Scottish manufacture with plenty of highly skilled technology based jobs in Scotland. Compare that with Salmonds record of encouraging RBS to gamble all to buy ABN Amro, and his proud boasts that he's brought Amazon, one of the worst employers in the UK with wages barely above Minimum Wage, to Scotland with his tax free deals and the Westminster Politicians look far more pro Scottish. Once again your contribution to this thread is to make stuff up, post shite and blatantly lie.Great input...NOT! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintnextlifetime Posted March 9, 2014 Report Share Posted March 9, 2014 Where to start ??? 1 . The bulk of the defence budget blown on Aircraft carriers ? Dont think so. The carriers are currently expected to cost £6 billion.. Total defence budget is somewhere in the region of £40 billion. ( not including development costs of the new Lightning fighter which is funded seperately (paid to the USA !!) 2.Independant Scotland to decimate defence spending ?? Er Naw ! Estimate for the new Scottish DEFENCE FORCE is to be £2.5 - £3 Billion, roughly what our pro rata contribution is at present & significantly MORE when you count the cost of the UKs weapons of mass destruction programme. Also , 3. The new Scottish defence plan would include having TWO Air bases in Scotland. The UK are reducing it to ONE under the strategic defence review. 4. The Nuclear base at Faslane WILL NOT be closed & all the jobs lost , despite what operation fear would have us believe. It will be used as the main base for our Naval Protection fleet & Defence HQ. As for your jibe about low cost amazon type jobs ?? Yes these companies are guilty of shabby re-imbursement of their workforce at times........... But have you met THE TORIES ?? you know , the party who have overseen ( & encouraged in some instances) a massive rise in the amount of ZERO HOUR contracts with Minimum rights for workers ! The more likely outcome for Faslane , is that the area will be annexed much like the Sovereign bases in say , Cyprus. This does many things for allowing the Imperialist English elite keep the belief that they are still an imperialist ,super power , able to challenge / take on any other nation they feel like. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Callum Gilhooley Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 The more likely outcome for Faslane , is that the area will be annexed much like the Sovereign bases in say , Cyprus. This does many things for allowing the Imperialist English elite keep the belief that they are still an imperialist ,super power , able to challenge / take on any other nation they feel like. . We could set up a border checkpoint at Dumbarton. Dumbarton rock..... Rock of Gibraltar whats the f**kin difference ?? Now, where did i put those feckin Apes ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuart Dickson Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 You shouldn't walk away from the topic/forum though. Regardless of others opinions, the hardest argument to make is that of the balanced constructive and concerned neutral. I'm not saying that is your position personally, but you say that these are the points you are trying to make. I completely agree with you that one action doesn't come with simply positives and no risk and sadly perhaps this type of argument is tainting the whole debate and not just the one on this forum. As I've said in my opening posts on the topic the following day we all have to get up and go to work with those who voted differently, often for the first time given the variety of opinion within political persuasions. I know in my family there is a difference of opinion both my immediate and less immediate family. I suppose the crux of the argument comes down to your individual perception of the risk taking that step into the unknown. My opinion is that as Scots we for far too long have moaned and groaned about successive Westminster Governments but are simply too scared to rock the boat as the status quo isn't that bad...and rather than take responsibility for ourselves we are happy to remain quietly discontented. I honestly see this as an opportunity to better ourselves, to take control of issues that affect every day life in Scotland and make a change. I see this as far away from an anti-English vote as could possibly be the case and would actively argue that the North of England faces very similar problems, but unlike Scotland didn't want to take that forward with more regionalised Government. More recently I would also argue this as an anti-right wing argument also with UKIP being involved in a Debate about the EU and slowly finding it's way into British politics with the exception of Scotland. With such thinly veiled xenophobia I would prefer no place for them and no influence over a modern Scotland (which a No vote could easily give them with a potential upcoming referendum on EU membership). I accept the potential irony in arguing for what could be seen as parochialism but it is very much in an all inclusive manner with all living here having an equally valid perspective and right to vote. However there is risk. There are multiple questions of what will happen with change...I fear that the referendum comes too soon for a Yes, but it at least has made people start to think about the issues of local problems being sorted out in a different fashion. Hopefully though the No campaign will provide further devolution, but there is no guarantee, and no agreed or specific plan B. I'm not a lawyer or a politician. I haven't a clue about the legalities of each of the arguments. I read your posts with interest. I would argue so do the majority who can be bothered. As is often said to me this forum is no place for reasoned and sensible debate, but it is if you choose so. You just have to develop a thicker skin and choose your moments to make comments relevant to you or to poke fun when the protagonists occasionally slip. It's the ideology debate that you are after Bart. Your view is fair enough. I had much the same viewpoint on Scottish Politics 14 years ago and I took the point of view that if nothing else it would stop so many sad act Scots bleating about how the English kept doing them over. Thing is though the Yes Campaigns vision of an independent Scotland is nothing like the ideological one that I wanted. Instead they still want to use Sterling, governed by the Bank Of England, and they want full European Parliament membership. It's almost like those who want Independence are scared to get it themselves perhaps because it means they've got no-one else to blame when it all goes tits up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintnextlifetime Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 We could set up a border checkpoint at Dumbarton. Dumbarton rock..... Rock of Gibraltar whats the f**kin difference ?? Now, where did i put those feckin Apes ? Exactly . The apes would be held in the special sanctuary , near Govan , as always. . where , they could still wave their pretty flags . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beyond our ken Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 The more likely outcome for Faslane , is that the area will be annexed much like the Sovereign bases in say , Cyprus. This does many things for allowing the Imperialist English elite keep the belief that they are still an imperialist ,super power , able to challenge / take on any other nation they feel like. . Maybe they will trade a currency union or an agreement on cross-border financial transactions for their base then. Maybe both, plus a few others. that would be nice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 Maybe they will trade a currency union or an agreement on cross-border financial transactions for their base then. Maybe both, plus a few others. that would be nice. "They", "their"...? Is that a good way to describe the majority of fellow-Scots who will likely vote NO? Ye can see how Civil Wars start... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickMcD Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 "They", "their"...? Is that a good way to describe the majority of fellow-Scots who will likely vote NO? Ye can see how Civil Wars start... That's a fair point. Any time soon someone will post 'But THEY started it'. An interesting little aside from Peter McKay in the Daily Mail. He mentioned recently that he thought the no vote for exiled Scots could be challenged in court. Seems it will be. The article says there's 'a good prospect' of it being overturned in a judicial revue sought by a London-based Scot, James Wallace. You're bound to know him, living so near London. But whatever you do, don't tell the Yes campaigners. They'll just throw a hissy fit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 . An interesting little aside from Peter McKay in the Daily Mail. He mentioned recently that he thought the no vote for exiled Scots could be challenged in court. Seems it will be. The article says there's 'a good prospect' of it being overturned in a judicial revue sought by a London-based Scot, James Wallace. You're bound to know him, living so near London. But whatever you do, don't tell the Yes campaigners. They'll just throw a hissy fit. Ah yes, the Daily Mail. That bastion of balanced, informed, and measured journalism. Hissy fit? I think not. More likely that we'll simply pish ourselves laughing at someone being taken in by what they read in the Tory Mail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 Fair comment, drew.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 That's a fair point. Any time soon someone will post 'But THEY started it'. An interesting little aside from Peter McKay in the Daily Mail. He mentioned recently that he thought the no vote for exiled Scots could be challenged in court. Seems it will be. The article says there's 'a good prospect' of it being overturned in a judicial revue sought by a London-based Scot, James Wallace. You're bound to know him, living so near London. But whatever you do, don't tell the Yes campaigners. They'll just throw a hissy fit. Ah yes, the Daily Mail. That bastion of balanced, informed, and measured journalism. Hissy fit? I think not. More likely that we'll simply pish ourselves laughing at someone being taken in by what they read in the Tory Mail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 Fair comment, drew.... Only sensible one I've made. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salmonbuddie Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 That's a fair point. Any time soon someone will post 'But THEY started it'. An interesting little aside from Peter McKay in the Daily Mail. He mentioned recently that he thought the no vote for exiled Scots could be challenged in court. Seems it will be. The article says there's 'a good prospect' of it being overturned in a judicial revue sought by a London-based Scot, James Wallace. You're bound to know him, living so near London. But whatever you do, don't tell the Yes campaigners. They'll just throw a hissy fit. The Daily Mail....and you had a go at me for quoting from the Huffington Post! Is this the guy who was on Breakfast a few weeks back? I posted about him at the time, he was actually doing quite well until he revealed he wasn't registered to vote where he lived. In London. Nor could he remember where the last place he was registered to vote was, it was either Dumfries(?) where he came from or Edinburgh where was a student. There's an online petition with his name, too, it's been on the go for about two years now and mentions the legal challenge (without any detail) and it's attracted over 3,000 signatures. Unlikely to change anything with those kind of figures (imo), especially since it's aimed at the Scottish Parliament by people who can't actually vote in elections to that very same Parliament. Here you go, fill your boots: http://www.change.org/petitions/the-scottish-parliament-let-wallace-vote I did check the link to his website but all it says is "Coming soon" - better get a move on, the referendum's only 6 months away, now. Maybe z_a (or another of our legal eagles) could give us an idea of the legal argument he says he has? I can't find it anywhere on-line and can't for the life of me imagine what it could be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickMcD Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 Only sensible one I've made. I wish you had left off posting for an hour or two. You've spoiled my fun by stopping all the righteous indignation that would have followed as sure as night follows day. i suspect you knew that. For what it's worth, I don't think McKay would have printed it if he didn't think the guy is taking it for a judicial review. I don't think it has a snowball's chance in hell of succeeding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickMcD Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 The Daily Mail....and you had a go at me for quoting from the Huffington Post! Is this the guy who was on Breakfast a few weeks back? I posted about him at the time, he was actually doing quite well until he revealed he wasn't registered to vote where he lived. In London. Nor could he remember where the last place he was registered to vote was, it was either Dumfries(?) where he came from or Edinburgh where was a student. There's an online petition with his name, too, it's been on the go for about two years now and mentions the legal challenge (without any detail) and it's attracted over 3,000 signatures. Unlikely to change anything with those kind of figures (imo), especially since it's aimed at the Scottish Parliament by people who can't actually vote in elections to that very same Parliament. Here you go, fill your boots: http://www.change.org/petitions/the-scottish-parliament-let-wallace-vote I did check the link to his website but all it says is "Coming soon" - better get a move on, the referendum's only 6 months away, now. Maybe z_a (or another of our legal eagles) could give us an idea of the legal argument he says he has? I can't find it anywhere on-line and can't for the life of me imagine what it could be. I've got no idea who he is or what argument he thinks he has..He could just be shit-stirring. I hear a lot of folk do that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
salmonbuddie Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 I'm genuinely interested, if it was the same guy he was actually persuading me of the validity of his argument up to the revelation of not being registered to vote. He lost me at that point, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 Here you go, fill your boots: http://www.change.org/petitions/the-scottish-parliament-let-wallace-vote Ta. At least, it'll be more representative than the poll polls on here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickMcD Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 I'm genuinely interested, if it was the same guy he was actually persuading me of the validity of his argument up to the revelation of not being registered to vote. He lost me at that point, though. His name is apparently James Wallace because McKay made a crack about him not being a descendant of Sir William. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bud the Baker Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 (edited) Still going to vote YES! Still think the majority will vote NO! Any businesses that threaten to leave can (in the words of shull ) go fuck themselves! As Doris Day sang Que Sera Sera! Edited March 10, 2014 by Bud the Baker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 Still going to vote YES! Still think the majority will vote NO! Any businesses that threaten to leave can (in the words of shull go fuck themselves! As Doris Day sang Que Sera Sera! This. Businesses would do well not to seek to interfere with the democratic process. In any event, these companies exist to make money, and while there is money to be made in Scotland, they will remain a presence in some capacity or other, and no amount of sabre rattlng will change that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluto Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 Businesses would do well not to seek to interfere with the democratic process. In any event, these companies exist to make money, and while there is money to be made in Scotland, they will remain a presence in some capacity or other, and no amount of sabre rattlng will change that. As Henry Ford said when spoken to about Politicians... "I don't mind their politics, I've got the power." And I hate to keep banging on about that reality - it's economics and Capitalism that currently hold sway in allour lives. Of course, a business will stay if it makes economic sense, "in some capacity or other". It's the ones who think it may not make such sense, that would worry me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 As Henry Ford said when spoken to about Politicians... "I don't mind their politics, I've got the power." And I hate to keep banging on about that reality - it's economics and Capitalism that currently hold sway in allour lives. Of course, a business will stay if it makes economic sense, "in some capacity or other". It's the ones who think it may not make such sense, that would worry me. Sounds like a self-fulfilling prophecy to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TPAFKATS Posted March 10, 2014 Report Share Posted March 10, 2014 (edited) As Henry Ford said when spoken to about Politicians... "I don't mind their politics, I've got the power." And I hate to keep banging on about that reality - it's economics and Capitalism that currently hold sway in allour lives. Of course, a business will stay if it makes economic sense, "in some capacity or other". It's the ones who think it may not make such sense, that would worry me. Indeed. Not sure what businesses have actually said that they would definitely leave? (Genuine question, not at the shit stirring Rick ) re the expat challenge, I'm sure the bbc website had an article in their magazine a few weeks ago about the terms of reference and previous countries votes where the precedent had been set for independence referendum(s). Don't recall it specifically mentioning expats specifically however it gave some background info which would be relevant with regards to why only voters in the country concerned get to vote. Edit due to sausage fingers Edited March 10, 2014 by TPAFKATS 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.