An ex-BBC Scotland journo on the Marr-Salmond interview.
'It won’t be presented by Andrew Marr, a fine journalist like James Naughtie who sought fame in London and found it. The problem here it seems is one of assimilation because after 25 or 30 years absorbing London culture and learning about it, embedding themselves there and bringing up families, they lose some aspect of what makes them Scots.
Is it not the same principe that applies to immigrants to Scotland? They adjust and acclimatise and are no longer the same people who left another country through time. It is a natural process but we make the mistake if assuming London or England is the same country when it is not. But like all diaspora they develop a confused impression of their identity and blame the rest of us for not sharing their view. Presenters are notoriously egotistical and are allowed to puff up their egos until they become bullies and Big shots. They think they are bigger than the people they interview. Marr blew his Barroso interview and he now knows it. The lack if a follow up to find out what legal process would follow a Yes vote was inexcusable and laughable. Yesterday he was trying to cover that failing up but made a worse mess by giving us the Marr Declaration on the EU and was embarrassed by Salmond. It is the triumph of vanity over talent. And it is noticeable that the London Scots treat Salmnod with contempt, with a different tone from the one applied to Cameron.'
Osbone's screw up was 2011 not 2012. If he had tackled reform in 2011 he'd be reaping the benefits by now.
He ducked the issue and so had little left to do as chancellor but shuffle the petty cash, the 2012 budget was the result.
I think you are forgetting how bleak things were in April 2011.
Confidence was in the dumps, the eurozone crisis was in full swing and the economy was teetering on the edge.
While reform may have been a desireable objective, there was huge execution risk and substantial downside should a dramatic package of reforms (eg breaking up the banks) have been announced.
The downside was very very substantial - whereas the reforms will be carried out, but over a longer time period than ideal (assuming the Tories are reelected)
Not at all Charles I remember the PB discussions quite distinctly.
1. QE ( ie inflating away our debts ) was supporting the economy 2. The Euro crisis was in Osborne's own forecasts but he took no substantive counter action 3. we had long debates on whether infrastructure projects should be brought forward ( spade ready ones as the terminilogy was ) 4. Righties didn't want to accept the banks were central to the problem 5. tax, bank reform, reduced legislation and a growth agenda were debated endlessly with supply siders like myself saying get a move on and the Osbornites claiming nothing more could possibly be done until it was. Usually forced, usually too late. usually more than was asked for upfront since that's the price of catchback
Osborne's main failing has been to get the real economy moving again. The treasury\cash management side in reality has been straightforward as the BoE has underwritten HMG and may have to do so again if Balls screws things up. As I have said before Osborne is an ordinary chancellor in extraordinary time. That's the tragedy.
Curious that the shriekers on PB are so reluctant to post on the topic or attribute any blame on the 'blessed' Osborne.
LOL
On this day before Osborne’s 2012 Budget ICM had the Tories 3 points ahead, the last time any poll had a CON lead
And in this March 2012 poll UKIP was on just 1%
If it should be that the Conservatives are not in government after the next general election then a lot of the blame will be attributed to the March 2012 budget and the way the government reacted in the weeks and months that followed.
It's already been pointed out often enough but it's hardly a surprise that it hasn't sunk in for the most amusing usual suspects on here. After all, so many of the PB tories were hilariously wrong about Osbrowne's omnishambles and kept trying to pretend it was just a matter of not spinning it right. Always remember the golden rule on PB.
The PB tories are always wrong. The PB tories never learn.
The fact is it was the incompetence of the omnishambles that really kickstarted the kippers off of what had been fairly unremarkable low polling to where they are now. That was the omnishambles pattern across all the pollsters, not just ICM.
Farage has Osbrowne and Cammie to thank for all those disaffected tories finally deciding enough was enough and starting to jump ship over the the kippers. Farage doesn't even need to keep hold of all of those voters. Just enough to do better than the kipper 3.1% in 2010 and Cammie's own 2015 target of sub 5% for the kipper VI. A task which looks very achievable when you look at where the kippers are now and factor in yet more fop incompetence like Cameron's Cast Iron immigration Pledge blowing up in his face. A Cast Iron Pledge which Farage will happily go huge on in the debate with Calamity Clegg as well as in the EU campaign itself on the ground.
This offends my libertarian principles. *However*, if it means that I can just carry one charger for all my Apple and Android kit, I will be a happy bunny.
Android stuff seems to be standardizing on micro USB anyhow, so there's not that much upside, and there's a huge downside once somebody comes up with a better way to do it and then discovers they're not allowed to sell their phones in the EU.
That does put a spanner in the works for the upcoming revision of microUSB (Type-C) which carries a higher charge and is reversible. Sony are bringing it in for 2015 phones, cameras and tablets. I think Samsung are as well for phones and tablets. Would these devices flout the rules because they wouldn't be compatible with every other charging cable in existence.
An ex-BBC Scotland journo on the Marr-Salmond interview.
'It won’t be presented by Andrew Marr, a fine journalist like James Naughtie who sought fame in London and found it. The problem here it seems is one of assimilation because after 25 or 30 years absorbing London culture and learning about it, embedding themselves there and bringing up families, they lose some aspect of what makes them Scots.
Is it not the same principe that applies to immigrants to Scotland? They adjust and acclimatise and are no longer the same people who left another country through time. It is a natural process but we make the mistake if assuming London or England is the same country when it is not. But like all diaspora they develop a confused impression of their identity and blame the rest of us for not sharing their view. Presenters are notoriously egotistical and are allowed to puff up their egos until they become bullies and Big shots. They think they are bigger than the people they interview. Marr blew his Barroso interview and he now knows it. The lack if a follow up to find out what legal process would follow a Yes vote was inexcusable and laughable. Yesterday he was trying to cover that failing up but made a worse mess by giving us the Marr Declaration on the EU and was embarrassed by Salmond. It is the triumph of vanity over talent. And it is noticeable that the London Scots treat Salmnod with contempt, with a different tone from the one applied to Cameron.'
He seems to "know" that if Scottish journalists living in London ask Salmond a series of questions that Salmond finds uncomfortable it means they have lost "some aspect of what makes them Scots". Some might find that a pretty sinister attitude, others obviously don't.
The attempts by the SNP to pretend that there is no controversy about Scotland remaining an EU member state is laughable. Time and again senior Commission officials, as well as various EU member states, have stated that should part of an EU member state decide to leave that member state, it would automatically place itself outside the EU. This has been a consistent position for a number of years.
Marr blew his Barroso interview and he now knows it. The lack if a follow up to find out what legal process would follow a Yes vote was inexcusable and laughable.
It's a view.......
Scotland is not a member of the EU - the UK is.
If Scotland votes to leave the UK, it votes to leave the EU......
Somehow pointing this out upsets St Eck and his believers......
Even as a unionist, I can see that this is a dumb line. The idea that the EU wouldn't embrace what would be the ~17th richest nation on Earth and a £1bn pa net contributor is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
This offends my libertarian principles. *However*, if it means that I can just carry one charger for all my Apple and Android kit, I will be a happy bunny.
Android stuff seems to be standardizing on micro USB anyhow, so there's not that much upside, and there's a huge downside once somebody comes up with a better way to do it and then discovers they're not allowed to sell their phones in the EU.
Surely Apple would make that exact argument now? While rippng off their customers...
If you buy Apple products, then you are by definition being ripped off. You are wasting money just because you want to be one of the in-crowd.
This offends my libertarian principles. *However*, if it means that I can just carry one charger for all my Apple and Android kit, I will be a happy bunny.
Android stuff seems to be standardizing on micro USB anyhow, so there's not that much upside, and there's a huge downside once somebody comes up with a better way to do it and then discovers they're not allowed to sell their phones in the EU.
Surely Apple would make that exact argument now? While rippng off their customers...
Sure they would. And they'd be right. If you don't like being ripped off, don't buy their stuff.
I take it you are one of those anti-Apple types
Why not just make everyone use the same charger? It's for convenience more than anything - so you don't get stranded when away from home.
Why not just let manufacturers do their own thing, and let the consumer decide what they want to spend their cash on? I'd like to think the EU has more pressing matters to legislate on.
This offends my libertarian principles. *However*, if it means that I can just carry one charger for all my Apple and Android kit, I will be a happy bunny.
Android stuff seems to be standardizing on micro USB anyhow, so there's not that much upside, and there's a huge downside once somebody comes up with a better way to do it and then discovers they're not allowed to sell their phones in the EU.
Surely Apple would make that exact argument now? While rippng off their customers...
Sure they would. And they'd be right. If you don't like being ripped off, don't buy their stuff.
I take it you are one of those anti-Apple types
You're the one saying they rip off their customers, I'm agreeing with you. I wouldn't buy one myself for just that reason, but I'm pro-choice...
Why not just make everyone use the same charger? It's for convenience more than anything - so you don't get stranded when away from home.
Because some chargers are better for some purposes than other chargers, and if you make everyone use the same kind you prevent people from improving them. It's a judgement call when the benefit of a particular non-standard thing is worth the cost of having to buy more chargers, but the people in the best place to make that call are the manufacturers and their customers.
This offends my libertarian principles. *However*, if it means that I can just carry one charger for all my Apple and Android kit, I will be a happy bunny.
Android stuff seems to be standardizing on micro USB anyhow, so there's not that much upside, and there's a huge downside once somebody comes up with a better way to do it and then discovers they're not allowed to sell their phones in the EU.
There already is a better way in development and due later this year. USB 3.1 (10 Gb/s) with Power Delivery (up to 100W, so you could even charge laptops) on the new Type-C connector, which is reversible like Apple's Lightning, and it will have some spare pins for future growth. On paper at least it sounds great, and should be widely supported.
I bloody well hope that the EU hasn't inadvertently blocked that being adopted.
Osbone's screw up was 2011 not 2012. If he had tackled reform in 2011 he'd be reaping the benefits by now.
He ducked the issue and so had little left to do as chancellor but shuffle the petty cash, the 2012 budget was the result.
I think you are forgetting how bleak things were in April 2011.
Confidence was in the dumps, the eurozone crisis was in full swing and the economy was teetering on the edge.
While reform may have been a desireable objective, there was huge execution risk and substantial downside should a dramatic package of reforms (eg breaking up the banks) have been announced.
The downside was very very substantial - whereas the reforms will be carried out, but over a longer time period than ideal (assuming the Tories are reelected)
Not at all Charles I remember the PB discussions quite distinctly.
1. QE ( ie inflating away our debts ) was supporting the economy 2. The Euro crisis was in Osborne's own forecasts but he took no substantive counter action 3. we had long debates on whether infrastructure projects should be brought forward ( spade ready ones as the terminilogy was ) 4. Righties didn't want to accept the banks were central to the problem 5. tax, bank reform, reduced legislation and a growth agenda were debated endlessly with supply siders like myself saying get a move on and the Osbornites claiming nothing more could possibly be done until it was. Usually forced, usually too late. usually more than was asked for upfront since that's the price of catchback
Osborne's main failing has been to get the real economy moving again. The treasury\cash management side in reality has been straightforward as the BoE has underwritten HMG and may have to do so again if Balls screws things up. As I have said before Osborne is an ordinary chancellor in extraordinary time. That's the tragedy.
I don't think we should rehearse the same discussions here in 2014 but suffice to say, even with 20:20 hindsight spooking the markets was and remains a real problem in determining an extraordinarily perfect line of action.
No one (ie the capital markets) was in the mood for anything other than austerity talk (of course he didn't act austerely, as you often point out).
But to say that he should have would have could have done this that or the other is to misunderestimate the precarious nature of our position at that time.
Marr blew his Barroso interview and he now knows it. The lack if a follow up to find out what legal process would follow a Yes vote was inexcusable and laughable.
It's a view.......
Scotland is not a member of the EU - the UK is.
If Scotland votes to leave the UK, it votes to leave the EU......
Somehow pointing this out upsets St Eck and his believers......
Even as a unionist, I can see that this is a dumb line. The idea that the EU wouldn't embrace what would be the ~17th richest nation on Earth and a £1bn pa net contributor is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
It's like the most amusing PB Romneys who simply could not grasp just how unelectable and out of touch Romney was despite reams of evidence proving them wrong. Don't expect the shriekers to understand or listen now. Leave them to their ignorance.
Marr blew his Barroso interview and he now knows it. The lack if a follow up to find out what legal process would follow a Yes vote was inexcusable and laughable.
It's a view.......
Scotland is not a member of the EU - the UK is.
If Scotland votes to leave the UK, it votes to leave the EU......
Somehow pointing this out upsets St Eck and his believers......
Even as a unionist, I can see that this is a dumb line. The idea that the EU wouldn't embrace what would be the ~17th richest nation on Earth and a £1bn pa net contributor is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
The EU may well embrace Scotland. But it would need an application process first. No-one is saying that Scotland will be permanently excluded from the EU. But to pretend that everything will just carry on as it has done is profoundly dishonest. It won't.
The entire SNP campaign is based on saying what it takes to get 50% plus one in September. Whether what is said is true or not is entirely immaterial to them - once they get a Yes, there is no going back and to a nationalist Scotland being independent is all that matters. The Unionist side have every right to point that out. If the Scottish people do not believe it, then so be it. At least they will have been given the opportunity to make a judgement call. Should the Unionists turn out to be correct those who voted Yes will not be able to say they have not been warned. That, surely, is a good thing.
This offends my libertarian principles. *However*, if it means that I can just carry one charger for all my Apple and Android kit, I will be a happy bunny.
Android stuff seems to be standardizing on micro USB anyhow, so there's not that much upside, and there's a huge downside once somebody comes up with a better way to do it and then discovers they're not allowed to sell their phones in the EU.
Surely Apple would make that exact argument now? While rippng off their customers...
Sure they would. And they'd be right. If you don't like being ripped off, don't buy their stuff.
I take it you are one of those anti-Apple types
Why not just make everyone use the same charger? It's for convenience more than anything - so you don't get stranded when away from home.
Why not just let manufacturers do their own thing, and let the consumer decide what they want to spend their cash on? I'd like to think the EU has more pressing matters to legislate on.
Why not just let every manufacturer use different plug sockets too? A: because the benefits of standardisation are massive. I have lost count of the amount of times I have been stranded without a charger because Apple insists on using its proprietary cable.
Marr blew his Barroso interview and he now knows it. The lack if a follow up to find out what legal process would follow a Yes vote was inexcusable and laughable.
It's a view.......
Scotland is not a member of the EU - the UK is.
If Scotland votes to leave the UK, it votes to leave the EU......
Somehow pointing this out upsets St Eck and his believers......
Even as a unionist, I can see that this is a dumb line. The idea that the EU wouldn't embrace what would be the ~17th richest nation on Earth and a £1bn pa net contributor is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
I'm reflecting what the EU Commission President said - that's only embarrassing to Salmond..........
Marr blew his Barroso interview and he now knows it. The lack if a follow up to find out what legal process would follow a Yes vote was inexcusable and laughable.
It's a view.......
Scotland is not a member of the EU - the UK is.
If Scotland votes to leave the UK, it votes to leave the EU......
Somehow pointing this out upsets St Eck and his believers......
Even as a unionist, I can see that this is a dumb line. The idea that the EU wouldn't embrace what would be the ~17th richest nation on Earth and a £1bn pa net contributor is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
I'm reflecting what the EU Commission President said - that's only embarrassing to Salmond..........
Try having an opinion of your own then. Do you seriously believe Scotland would be frozen out of Europe?
Still can't get my head round the fact a 777 just vanished. Totally bonkers.
What about the admittedly, fantastic possibility, that a time warp opened up mid flight, and swallowed the plane and contents. Could it be the burning chariot that Elijah saw?
Osbone's screw up was 2011 not 2012. If he had tackled reform in 2011 he'd be reaping the benefits by now.
He ducked the issue and so had little left to do as chancellor but shuffle the petty cash, the 2012 budget was the result.
I think you are forgetting how bleak things were in April 2011.
Confidence was in the dumps, the eurozone crisis was in full swing and the economy was teetering on the edge.
While reform may have been a desireable objective, there was huge execution risk and substantial downside should a dramatic package of reforms (eg breaking up the banks) have been announced.
The downside was very very substantial - whereas the reforms will be carried out, but over a longer time period than ideal (assuming the Tories are reelected)
Not at all Charles I remember the PB discussions quite distinctly.
1. QE ( ie inflating away our debts ) was supporting the economy 2. The Euro crisis was in Osborne's own forecasts but he took no substantive counter action
Osborne's main failing has been to get the real economy moving again. The treasury\cash management side in reality has been straightforward as the BoE has underwritten HMG and may have to do so again if Balls screws things up. As I have said before Osborne is an ordinary chancellor in extraordinary time. That's the tragedy.
I don't think we should rehearse the same discussions here in 2014 but suffice to say, even with 20:20 hindsight spooking the markets was and remains a real problem in determining an extraordinarily perfect line of action.
No one (ie the capital markets) was in the mood for anything other than austerity talk (of course he didn't act austerely, as you often point out).
But to say that he should have would have could have done this that or the other is to misunderestimate the precarious nature of our position at that time.
Which markets ? The BoE was the main purchaser of the debt. At the time quite a lot of agencies were also saying HMG should boost demand and would get away with it if spent on infrastructure. In the middle of the Euro crisis the UK was also benefitting from having its own currency as a "safe haven" while issuing piles of new debt. Osborne just didn't have the courage to address supply side ( too busy dabbling elsewhere ). That's now 17 years the UK has had political chancellors rather than reforming ones.
An ex-BBC Scotland journo on the Marr-Salmond interview.
'It won’t be presented by Andrew Marr, a fine journalist like James Naughtie who sought fame in London and found it. The problem here it seems is one of assimilation because after 25 or 30 years absorbing London culture and learning about it, embedding themselves there and bringing up families, they lose some aspect of what makes them Scots.
Is it not the same principe that applies to immigrants to Scotland? They adjust and acclimatise and are no longer the same people who left another country through time. It is a natural process but we make the mistake if assuming London or England is the same country when it is not. But like all diaspora they develop a confused impression of their identity and blame the rest of us for not sharing their view. Presenters are notoriously egotistical and are allowed to puff up their egos until they become bullies and Big shots. They think they are bigger than the people they interview. Marr blew his Barroso interview and he now knows it. The lack if a follow up to find out what legal process would follow a Yes vote was inexcusable and laughable. Yesterday he was trying to cover that failing up but made a worse mess by giving us the Marr Declaration on the EU and was embarrassed by Salmond. It is the triumph of vanity over talent. And it is noticeable that the London Scots treat Salmnod with contempt, with a different tone from the one applied to Cameron.'
The attempts by the SNP to pretend that there is no controversy about Scotland remaining an EU member state is laughable. Time and again senior Commission officials, as well as various EU member states, have stated that should part of an EU member state decide to leave that member state, it would automatically place itself outside the EU. This has been a consistent position for a number of years.
Its like the 'currency union' - the other party to the union has said "no" is an irrelevance to be swatted aside as an inconsequential detail......
Marr blew his Barroso interview and he now knows it. The lack if a follow up to find out what legal process would follow a Yes vote was inexcusable and laughable.
It's a view.......
Scotland is not a member of the EU - the UK is.
If Scotland votes to leave the UK, it votes to leave the EU......
Somehow pointing this out upsets St Eck and his believers......
Even as a unionist, I can see that this is a dumb line. The idea that the EU wouldn't embrace what would be the ~17th richest nation on Earth and a £1bn pa net contributor is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
The EU may well embrace Scotland. But it would need an application process first. No-one is saying that Scotland will be permanently excluded from the EU. But to pretend that everything will just carry on as it has done is profoundly dishonest. It won't.
The entire SNP campaign is based on saying what it takes to get 50% plus one in September. Whether what is said is true or not is entirely immaterial to them - once they get a Yes, there is no going back and to a nationalist Scotland being independent is all that matters. The Unionist side have every right to point that out. If the Scottish people do not believe it, then so be it. At least they will have been given the opportunity to make a judgement call. Should the Unionists turn out to be correct those who voted Yes will not be able to say they have not been warned. That, surely, is a good thing.
You've stated at great length that if there's a Yes vote, there will be a currency union, albeit on the rUK's terms. I must have missed your numerous posts criticising Osborne, Balls and Alexander for dishonestly ruling out a c.u. just to get the result they want.
Still can't get my head round the fact a 777 just vanished. Totally bonkers.
What about the admittedly, fantastic possibility, that a time warp opened up mid flight, and swallowed the plane and contents. Could it be the burning chariot that Elijah saw?
I don't think we should exclude the possibility that the government does indeed know where this plane is, but is not releasing that information because they're negotiating (etc.).
Even as a unionist, I can see that this is a dumb line. The idea that the EU wouldn't embrace what would be the ~17th richest nation on Earth and a £1bn pa net contributor is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
The idea that Spain would rubber stamp the automatic continuous membership of a secessionist state is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
Marr blew his Barroso interview and he now knows it. The lack if a follow up to find out what legal process would follow a Yes vote was inexcusable and laughable.
It's a view.......
Scotland is not a member of the EU - the UK is.
If Scotland votes to leave the UK, it votes to leave the EU......
Somehow pointing this out upsets St Eck and his believers......
Even as a unionist, I can see that this is a dumb line. The idea that the EU wouldn't embrace what would be the ~17th richest nation on Earth and a £1bn pa net contributor is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
The EU may well embrace Scotland. But it would need an application process first. No-one is saying that Scotland will be permanently excluded from the EU. But to pretend that everything will just carry on as it has done is profoundly dishonest. It won't.
The entire SNP campaign is based on saying what it takes to get 50% plus one in September. Whether what is said is true or not is entirely immaterial to them - once they get a Yes, there is no going back and to a nationalist Scotland being independent is all that matters. The Unionist side have every right to point that out. If the Scottish people do not believe it, then so be it. At least they will have been given the opportunity to make a judgement call. Should the Unionists turn out to be correct those who voted Yes will not be able to say they have not been warned. That, surely, is a good thing.
The key point is that Scotland is a certainty to be accepted into the EU. All the rest is froth.
This offends my libertarian principles. *However*, if it means that I can just carry one charger for all my Apple and Android kit, I will be a happy bunny.
Android stuff seems to be standardizing on micro USB anyhow, so there's not that much upside, and there's a huge downside once somebody comes up with a better way to do it and then discovers they're not allowed to sell their phones in the EU.
Surely Apple would make that exact argument now? While rippng off their customers...
Sure they would. And they'd be right. If you don't like being ripped off, don't buy their stuff.
I take it you are one of those anti-Apple types
Why not just make everyone use the same charger? It's for convenience more than anything - so you don't get stranded when away from home.
Why not just let manufacturers do their own thing, and let the consumer decide what they want to spend their cash on? I'd like to think the EU has more pressing matters to legislate on.
Why not just let every manufacturer use different plug sockets too? A: because the benefits of standardisation are massive. I have lost count of the amount of times I have been stranded without a charger because Apple insists on using its proprietary cable.
You want the EU to nanny you because you're too forgetful to remember your charger, and too tight to buy another one?
Even as a unionist, I can see that this is a dumb line. The idea that the EU wouldn't embrace what would be the ~17th richest nation on Earth and a £1bn pa net contributor is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
The idea that Spain would rubber stamp the automatic continuous membership of a secessionist state is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
Do you think that the EU would refuse Scotland's application?
Marr blew his Barroso interview and he now knows it. The lack if a follow up to find out what legal process would follow a Yes vote was inexcusable and laughable.
It's a view.......
Scotland is not a member of the EU - the UK is.
If Scotland votes to leave the UK, it votes to leave the EU......
Somehow pointing this out upsets St Eck and his believers......
Even as a unionist, I can see that this is a dumb line. The idea that the EU wouldn't embrace what would be the ~17th richest nation on Earth and a £1bn pa net contributor is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
The EU may well embrace Scotland. But it would need an application process first. No-one is saying that Scotland will be permanently excluded from the EU. But to pretend that everything will just carry on as it has done is profoundly dishonest. It won't.
The entire SNP campaign is based on saying what it takes to get 50% plus one in September. Whether what is said is true or not is entirely immaterial to them - once they get a Yes, there is no going back and to a nationalist Scotland being independent is all that matters. The Unionist side have every right to point that out. If the Scottish people do not believe it, then so be it. At least they will have been given the opportunity to make a judgement call. Should the Unionists turn out to be correct those who voted Yes will not be able to say they have not been warned. That, surely, is a good thing.
The key point is that Scotland is a certainty to be accepted into the EU. All the rest is froth.
I agree, but the uncertain bit is at what price ? It won't be on the current conditions.
Marr blew his Barroso interview and he now knows it. The lack if a follow up to find out what legal process would follow a Yes vote was inexcusable and laughable.
It's a view.......
Scotland is not a member of the EU - the UK is.
If Scotland votes to leave the UK, it votes to leave the EU......
Somehow pointing this out upsets St Eck and his believers......
Even as a unionist, I can see that this is a dumb line. The idea that the EU wouldn't embrace what would be the ~17th richest nation on Earth and a £1bn pa net contributor is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
I'm reflecting what the EU Commission President said - that's only embarrassing to Salmond..........
Try having an opinion of your own then. Do you seriously believe Scotland would be frozen out of Europe?
Scotland cannot begin the process of joining the EU until it is an independent country. That does not mean it will be frozen out of Europe, but it does mean it will have to go through an application negotiation to determine under what terms it becomes a member. Assuming a change of government in Spain next year, I'd expect Scotland to become a full member some time in 2018 were there a Yes vote in September.
Marr blew his Barroso interview and he now knows it. The lack if a follow up to find out what legal process would follow a Yes vote was inexcusable and laughable.
It's a view.......
Scotland is not a member of the EU - the UK is.
If Scotland votes to leave the UK, it votes to leave the EU......
Somehow pointing this out upsets St Eck and his believers......
Even as a unionist, I can see that this is a dumb line. The idea that the EU wouldn't embrace what would be the ~17th richest nation on Earth and a £1bn pa net contributor is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
I'm reflecting what the EU Commission President said - that's only embarrassing to Salmond..........
Try having an opinion of your own then. Do you seriously believe Scotland would be frozen out of Europe?
I do have opinions of my own, but what part of 'if Scots vote to leave the EU, they leave the EU' is unclear?
Scotland is NOT a member of the EU - the UK is - so if Scots vote to leave the UK, they vote to leave the EU.
Would they get back in? Almost certainly. But on what terms (Euro/Schengen/no rebate)? And to pretend it could be done in 18 months is 'optimistic' at best.
The key point is that Scotland is a certainty to be accepted into the EU.
No, it isn't.
And of course Eck's assertion is that Scotland would not need to be 'accepted'. His claim is that Scotland is already a member (wrong) and will continue to be a member (wrong) with all of the UK opt-outs intact (wrong)
Marr blew his Barroso interview and he now knows it. The lack if a follow up to find out what legal process would follow a Yes vote was inexcusable and laughable.
It's a view.......
Scotland is not a member of the EU - the UK is.
If Scotland votes to leave the UK, it votes to leave the EU......
Somehow pointing this out upsets St Eck and his believers......
Even as a unionist, I can see that this is a dumb line. The idea that the EU wouldn't embrace what would be the ~17th richest nation on Earth and a £1bn pa net contributor is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
The EU may well embrace Scotland. But it would need an application process first. No-one is saying that Scotland will be permanently excluded from the EU. But to pretend that everything will just carry on as it has done is profoundly dishonest. It won't.
The entire SNP campaign is based on saying what it takes to get 50% plus one in September. Whether what is said is true or not is entirely immaterial to them - once they get a Yes, there is no going back and to a nationalist Scotland being independent is all that matters. The Unionist side have every right to point that out. If the Scottish people do not believe it, then so be it. At least they will have been given the opportunity to make a judgement call. Should the Unionists turn out to be correct those who voted Yes will not be able to say they have not been warned. That, surely, is a good thing.
The key point is that Scotland is a certainty to be accepted into the EU. All the rest is froth.
It would be if the SNP wasn't pretending otherwise. They made uninterrupted EU membership an issue and so the No side have every right to call them out in this. And, of course, Scotland will only become an EU member state if it accepts the terms under which membership is offered.
An ex-BBC Scotland journo on the Marr-Salmond interview.
'It won’t be presented by Andrew Marr, a fine journalist like James Naughtie who sought fame in London and found it. The problem here it seems is one of assimilation because after 25 or 30 years absorbing London culture and learning about it, embedding themselves there and bringing up families, they lose some aspect of what makes them Scots.
Is it not the same principe that applies to immigrants to Scotland? They adjust and acclimatise and are no longer the same people who left another country through time. It is a natural process but we make the mistake if assuming London or England is the same country when it is not. But like all diaspora they develop a confused impression of their identity and blame the rest of us for not sharing their view. Presenters are notoriously egotistical and are allowed to puff up their egos until they become bullies and Big shots. They think they are bigger than the people they interview. Marr blew his Barroso interview and he now knows it. The lack if a follow up to find out what legal process would follow a Yes vote was inexcusable and laughable. Yesterday he was trying to cover that failing up but made a worse mess by giving us the Marr Declaration on the EU and was embarrassed by Salmond. It is the triumph of vanity over talent. And it is noticeable that the London Scots treat Salmnod with contempt, with a different tone from the one applied to Cameron.'
He seems to "know" that if Scottish journalists living in London ask Salmond a series of questions that Salmond finds uncomfortable it means they have lost "some aspect of what makes them Scots". Some might find that a pretty sinister attitude, others obviously don't.
Its part of the SNP's 'no true Scot' meme - which we see demonstrated here daily by the Nats - any Scot who does not support the SNP and Scottish independence 'hates Scotland'........
Marr blew his Barroso interview and he now knows it. The lack if a follow up to find out what legal process would follow a Yes vote was inexcusable and laughable.
It's a view.......
Scotland is not a member of the EU - the UK is.
If Scotland votes to leave the UK, it votes to leave the EU......
Somehow pointing this out upsets St Eck and his believers......
Even as a unionist, I can see that this is a dumb line. The idea that the EU wouldn't embrace what would be the ~17th richest nation on Earth and a £1bn pa net contributor is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
I'm reflecting what the EU Commission President said - that's only embarrassing to Salmond..........
Try having an opinion of your own then. Do you seriously believe Scotland would be frozen out of Europe?
I expect Scotland would get into the EU. The timescale and the terms, however, are more opaque, substantially for the reasons that Jose Manuel Barroso gave. For example, I doubt it would get a slice of the British rebate and I expect it would have to commit to join the Euro.
It’s time the BBC stood up to Alex Salmond The row over Andrew Marr's comments to the First Minister over Scottish independence highlights the danger of kowtowing to the SNP.
Having just read the above document it is typical of an academic who tries to be neutral, but in reality is not and hasn't a clue about what matters to real people.
He says, "telling the viewer that the debate over living standards, employment and taxation was the only debate anyone cared about. No evidence for this view was given."
This is showing extreme naivety in that, are not living standards, employment and taxation the primary and most important interests to the electorate. Nowadays in a global economy most people want those facts and long term trends spelt out in detail. Surely this academic must be living in such a closeted society which is so well protected from the normal economic winds of change that he is unqualified to do such a study. Let him walk out into the street to find the evidence he needs for this view - or would that be a too foreign experience for him.
Actually, to be fair, the main thrust of his research was into biased presentation by the BBC and STV - not on that. Or am I missing something?
Carnyx, No it is just Financier is so used to spouting bollox , he did not even read what the point was but chose to give you the benefit of his multi-billion experience. Probably washing the dishes at the time and got confused.
This offends my libertarian principles. *However*, if it means that I can just carry one charger for all my Apple and Android kit, I will be a happy bunny.
Android stuff seems to be standardizing on micro USB anyhow, so there's not that much upside, and there's a huge downside once somebody comes up with a better way to do it and then discovers they're not allowed to sell their phones in the EU.
Surely Apple would make that exact argument now? While rippng off their customers...
Sure they would. And they'd be right. If you don't like being ripped off, don't buy their stuff.
I take it you are one of those anti-Apple types
Why not just make everyone use the same charger? It's for convenience more than anything - so you don't get stranded when away from home.
Why not just let manufacturers do their own thing, and let the consumer decide what they want to spend their cash on? I'd like to think the EU has more pressing matters to legislate on.
Why not just let every manufacturer use different plug sockets too? A: because the benefits of standardisation are massive. I have lost count of the amount of times I have been stranded without a charger because Apple insists on using its proprietary cable.
You want the EU to nanny you because you're too forgetful to remember your charger, and too tight to buy another one?
I have bought two spares. The whole thing is mad though - not to mention the waste it creates it's inconvenient. That's why we have standard plug sockets.
Marr blew his Barroso interview and he now knows it. The lack if a follow up to find out what legal process would follow a Yes vote was inexcusable and laughable.
It's a view.......
Scotland is not a member of the EU - the UK is.
If Scotland votes to leave the UK, it votes to leave the EU......
Somehow pointing this out upsets St Eck and his believers......
Even as a unionist, I can see that this is a dumb line. The idea that the EU wouldn't embrace what would be the ~17th richest nation on Earth and a £1bn pa net contributor is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
The EU may well embrace Scotland. But it would need an application process first. No-one is saying that Scotland will be permanently excluded from the EU. But to pretend that everything will just carry on as it has done is profoundly dishonest. It won't.
The entire SNP campaign is based on saying what it takes to get 50% plus one in September. Whether what is said is true or not is entirely immaterial to them - once they get a Yes, there is no going back and to a nationalist Scotland being independent is all that matters. The Unionist side have every right to point that out. If the Scottish people do not believe it, then so be it. At least they will have been given the opportunity to make a judgement call. Should the Unionists turn out to be correct those who voted Yes will not be able to say they have not been warned. That, surely, is a good thing.
You've stated at great length that if there's a Yes vote, there will be a currency union, albeit on the rUK's terms. I must have missed your numerous posts criticising Osborne, Balls and Alexander for dishonestly ruling out a c.u. just to get the result they want.
I think that you must indeed have missed the posts in which I have stated that they are being as dishonest as the SNP on this. All sides know that there will be a currency union and that it will be on terms dictated by the rUK. The Unionists will not admit this because it will make it easier for Devomaxers to vote Yes; the SNP will not admit it because it means that Scotland will not be anything other than symbolically independent of Westminster.
This offends my libertarian principles. *However*, if it means that I can just carry one charger for all my Apple and Android kit, I will be a happy bunny.
Android stuff seems to be standardizing on micro USB anyhow, so there's not that much upside, and there's a huge downside once somebody comes up with a better way to do it and then discovers they're not allowed to sell their phones in the EU.
Surely Apple would make that exact argument now? While rippng off their customers...
Sure they would. And they'd be right. If you don't like being ripped off, don't buy their stuff.
I take it you are one of those anti-Apple types
Why not just make everyone use the same charger? It's for convenience more than anything - so you don't get stranded when away from home.
Why not just let manufacturers do their own thing, and let the consumer decide what they want to spend their cash on? I'd like to think the EU has more pressing matters to legislate on.
Why not just let every manufacturer use different plug sockets too? A: because the benefits of standardisation are massive. I have lost count of the amount of times I have been stranded without a charger because Apple insists on using its proprietary cable.
You want the EU to nanny you because you're too forgetful to remember your charger, and too tight to buy another one?
I have bought two spares. The whole thing is mad though - not to mention the waste it creates it's inconvenient. That's why we have standard plug sockets.
We're not talking about plug sockets though, are we? It's your decision to buy Apple products. Why aren't you bitching about the fact that BMW components won't fit on a Dacia Duster? Should the EU standardise all car parts as well? My coffee machine takes different filters to other types, should I go crying to Brussels?
Even as a unionist, I can see that this is a dumb line. The idea that the EU wouldn't embrace what would be the ~17th richest nation on Earth and a £1bn pa net contributor is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
The idea that Spain would rubber stamp the automatic continuous membership of a secessionist state is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
Do you think that the EU would refuse Scotland's application?
A simple yes or no to that question will suffice.
LOL
Watch the shriekers squirm. The most amusing part is we've had all this tosh long ago. Even Iain Gray tried some of that same scaremongering around 2011. We've heard all the 'too poor, too wee and too stupid' idiocy from SLAB long before now. It certainly didn't help them in 2011. When the matter gets debated (and it has been despite the ignorance on show here from the usual PB suspects) that question inevitably comes up and the unionists are forced to start mumbling and look at their feet when the ludicrous scaremongering is clearly exposed.
Let's not forget calamity Clegg is basing his entire May EU elections strategy on being the party of IN. This while the incompetent fop Cameron tries to persuade gullible tory kipper waverers that he really, really, really, really does mean it about having his Cast Iron IN/OUT referendum on Europe.
There really are people on PB who are self evidently just far too stupid to realise that posturing on the ability to stay in the EU might not be the brightest of ideas with that backdrop playing out loud and clear for the scottish public to see. Those posters are of course as incompetent and out of touch as Osbrowne was with his omnishambles.
What Capital markets? _The_ capital markets. The ones that buy UK Govt debt - pension funds, insurance companies both domestic and non-domestic all factoring some kind of haircut down the line on their investments if the CotE announced a huge spending plan with the debt and deficit as they stood in 2010.
It's all details - the EU, currency, rebate, Schengen, etc. And unimportant ones at that.
ASalmond is on the final run-in, he has some momentum and he knows it. He will say anything, literally anything at this point to push the numbers over the line because in his analysis independence is the only goal. What happens after is secondary because Scotland will be its own country and will deal with all the problems as they arise as an independent country.
Fine.
I just wish the pretence would end of it being some kind of mathematical equation. It is a matter solely for the heart: both sides should just ask: "are you for us or agin us?"...
An ex-BBC Scotland journo on the Marr-Salmond interview.
'It won’t be presented by Andrew Marr, a fine journalist like James Naughtie who sought fame in London and found it. The problem here it seems is one of assimilation because after 25 or 30 years absorbing London culture and learning about it, embedding themselves there and bringing up families, they lose some aspect of what makes them Scots.
Is it not the same principe that applies to immigrants to Scotland? They adjust and acclimatise and are no longer the same people who left another country through time. It is a natural process but we make the mistake if assuming London or England is the same country when it is not. But like all diaspora they develop a confused impression of their identity and blame the rest of us for not sharing their view. Presenters are notoriously egotistical and are allowed to puff up their egos until they become bullies and Big shots. They think they are bigger than the people they interview. Marr blew his Barroso interview and he now knows it. The lack if a follow up to find out what legal process would follow a Yes vote was inexcusable and laughable. Yesterday he was trying to cover that failing up but made a worse mess by giving us the Marr Declaration on the EU and was embarrassed by Salmond. It is the triumph of vanity over talent. And it is noticeable that the London Scots treat Salmnod with contempt, with a different tone from the one applied to Cameron.'
He seems to "know" that if Scottish journalists living in London ask Salmond a series of questions that Salmond finds uncomfortable it means they have lost "some aspect of what makes them Scots". Some might find that a pretty sinister attitude, others obviously don't.
Its part of the SNP's 'no true Scot' meme - which we see demonstrated here daily by the Nats - any Scot who does not support the SNP and Scottish independence 'hates Scotland'........
That's nationalism for you. It is the same the world over.
I think that you must indeed have missed the posts in which I have stated that they are being as dishonest as the SNP on this. All sides know that there will be a currency union and that it will be on terms dictated by the rUK. The Unionists will not admit this because it will make it easier for Devomaxers to vote Yes; the SNP will not admit it because it means that Scotland will not be anything other than symbolically independent of Westminster.
Evidently I did miss your criticicism of Osborne, Balls & Alexander, though I do remember you being very exercised by the idea that attacking Osborne's Scottish day trip (which you now seem to accept was based on a lie) meant that one was somehow anti-English. I also remember your proposition that the ability to get rid of Trident, decide when and where to go to war, raise and distribute all Scotland's tax and revenue, control immigration and design our own welfare policies would only be 'symbolic'. Perhaps the UK, rump or otherwise, should be working towards handing control of all those piffling, wee things to the wise heads of Europe.
This offends my libertarian principles. *However*, if it means that I can just carry one charger for all my Apple and Android kit, I will be a happy bunny.
Android stuff seems to be standardizing on micro USB anyhow, so there's not that much upside, and there's a huge downside once somebody comes up with a better way to do it and then discovers they're not allowed to sell their phones in the EU.
Surely Apple would make that exact argument now? While rippng off their customers...
Sure they would. And they'd be right. If you don't like being ripped off, don't buy their stuff.
I take it you are one of those anti-Apple types
Why not just make everyone use the same charger? It's for convenience more than anything - so you don't get stranded when away from home.
Why not just let manufacturers do their own thing, and let the consumer decide what they want to spend their cash on? I'd like to think the EU has more pressing matters to legislate on.
Why not just let every manufacturer use different plug sockets too? A: because the benefits of standardisation are massive. I have lost count of the amount of times I have been stranded without a charger because Apple insists on using its proprietary cable.
You want the EU to nanny you because you're too forgetful to remember your charger, and too tight to buy another one?
I have bought two spares. The whole thing is mad though - not to mention the waste it creates it's inconvenient. That's why we have standard plug sockets.
We're not talking about plug sockets though, are we? It's your decision to buy Apple products. Why aren't you bitching about the fact that BMW components won't fit on a Dacia Duster? Should the EU standardise all car parts as well? My coffee machine takes different filters to other types, should I go crying to Brussels?
I'm not sure why this topic is so inflammatory - seems to me to be the epitome of a non-personal debate but it has really riled some! Still, I am merely extolling the benefits of standardisation.
To do so apparently makes me an evil Apple slave whore! Nurse!
This offends my libertarian principles. *However*, if it means that I can just carry one charger for all my Apple and Android kit, I will be a happy bunny.
Android stuff seems to be standardizing on micro USB anyhow, so there's not that much upside, and there's a huge downside once somebody comes up with a better way to do it and then discovers they're not allowed to sell their phones in the EU.
Surely Apple would make that exact argument now? While rippng off their customers...
Sure they would. And they'd be right. If you don't like being ripped off, don't buy their stuff.
I take it you are one of those anti-Apple types
Why not just make everyone use the same charger? It's for convenience more than anything - so you don't get stranded when away from home.
Why not just let manufacturers do their own thing, and let the consumer decide what they want to spend their cash on? I'd like to think the EU has more pressing matters to legislate on.
I take it you think we've been going downhill since Robert Peel invented the police force. It is, after all, a disgraceful infringement of your rights & liberties that my bank prevents you from accessing my account and cleaning it out. You deserve all the money in the world, just because you're you...
This offends my libertarian principles. *However*, if it means that I can just carry one charger for all my Apple and Android kit, I will be a happy bunny.
Android stuff seems to be standardizing on micro USB anyhow, so there's not that much upside, and there's a huge downside once somebody comes up with a better way to do it and then discovers they're not allowed to sell their phones in the EU.
Surely Apple would make that exact argument now? While rippng off their customers...
Sure they would. And they'd be right. If you don't like being ripped off, don't buy their stuff.
I take it you are one of those anti-Apple types
Why not just make everyone use the same charger? It's for convenience more than anything - so you don't get stranded when away from home.
Why not just let manufacturers do their own thing, and let the consumer decide what they want to spend their cash on? I'd like to think the EU has more pressing matters to legislate on.
Why not just let every manufacturer use different plug sockets too? A: because the benefits of standardisation are massive. I have lost count of the amount of times I have been stranded without a charger because Apple insists on using its proprietary cable.
You want the EU to nanny you because you're too forgetful to remember your charger, and too tight to buy another one?
One of the reasons that European companies have been pre-eminent in the mobile phone world (e.g. Vodafone) is that Europe, via ETSI, decided to standardise their mobile telephony on GSM.
In America, they went for the free-market approach and had competing standards, e.g. GSM, AMPS, iDEN, EDGE. This led to the stupid situation where you could fly to a new city and your phone would not work. At least until phones capable of using all systems were launched.
This standardisation has led to a massive boost for UK and European industry.
Note: if we leave the EU, we would still be able to be members of ETSI.
Even as a unionist, I can see that this is a dumb line. The idea that the EU wouldn't embrace what would be the ~17th richest nation on Earth and a £1bn pa net contributor is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
The idea that Spain would rubber stamp the automatic continuous membership of a secessionist state is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
Do you think that the EU would refuse Scotland's application?
A simple yes or no to that question will suffice.
LOL
Watch the shriekers squirm. The most amusing part is we've had all this tosh long ago. Even Iain Gray tried some of that same scaremongering around 2011. We've heard all the 'too poor, too wee and too stupid' idiocy from SLAB long before now. It certainly didn't help them in 2011. When the matter gets debated (and it has been despite the ignorance on show here from the usual PB suspects) that question inevitably comes up and the unionists are forced to start mumbling and look at their feet when the ludicrous scaremongering is clearly exposed.
Let's not forget calamity Clegg is basing his entire May EU elections strategy on being the party of IN. This while the incompetent fop Cameron tries to persuade gullible tory kipper waverers that he really, really, really, really does mean it about having his Cast Iron IN/OUT referendum on Europe.
There really are people on PB who are self evidently just far too stupid to realise that posturing on the ability to stay in the EU might not be the brightest of ideas with that backdrop playing out loud and clear for the scottish public to see. Those posters are of course as incompetent and out of touch as Osbrowne was with his omnishambles.
This offends my libertarian principles. *However*, if it means that I can just carry one charger for all my Apple and Android kit, I will be a happy bunny.
Android stuff seems to be standardizing on micro USB anyhow, so there's not that much upside, and there's a huge downside once somebody comes up with a better way to do it and then discovers they're not allowed to sell their phones in the EU.
Surely Apple would make that exact argument now? While rippng off their customers...
Sure they would. And they'd be right. If you don't like being ripped off, don't buy their stuff.
I take it you are one of those anti-Apple types
Why not just make everyone use the same charger? It's for convenience more than anything - so you don't get stranded when away from home.
Why not just let manufacturers do their own thing, and let the consumer decide what they want to spend their cash on? I'd like to think the EU has more pressing matters to legislate on.
I take it you think we've been going downhill since Robert Peel invented the police force. It is, after all, a disgraceful infringement of your rights & liberties that my bank prevents you from accessing my account and cleaning it out. You deserve all the money in the world, just because you're you...
Obviously I do deserve all the money. I'm just not that upset that Bobafett can't charge his iPhone using my micro USB lead.
All child seats should clip in securely to a standard fixing on cars. All audio/video equipment should include RCA/phono out*
*Apple TV does not - which means you have to route it through your TV to get it out to your amp, unless you have optical in on your amp.
Terrible idea. Why don't you use the HDMI out on your Apple TV? HDMI to the AVR then AVR to the TV. It's how I have everything set up, one connection from the AVR to the TV handles everything.
An ex-BBC Scotland journo on the Marr-Salmond interview.
'It won’t be presented by Andrew Marr, a fine journalist like James Naughtie who sought fame in London and found it. The problem here it seems is one of assimilation because after 25 or 30 years absorbing London culture and learning about it, embedding themselves there and bringing up families, they lose some aspect of what makes them Scots.
Is it not the same principe that applies to immigrants to Scotland? They adjust and acclimatise and are no longer the same people who left another country through time. It is a natural process but we make the mistake if assuming London or England is the same country when it is not. But like all diaspora they develop a confused impression of their identity and blame the rest of us for not sharing their view. Presenters are notoriously egotistical and are allowed to puff up their egos until they become bullies and Big shots. They think they are bigger than the people they interview. Marr blew his Barroso interview and he now knows it. The lack if a follow up to find out what legal process would follow a Yes vote was inexcusable and laughable. Yesterday he was trying to cover that failing up but made a worse mess by giving us the Marr Declaration on the EU and was embarrassed by Salmond. It is the triumph of vanity over talent. And it is noticeable that the London Scots treat Salmnod with contempt, with a different tone from the one applied to Cameron.'
He seems to "know" that if Scottish journalists living in London ask Salmond a series of questions that Salmond finds uncomfortable it means they have lost "some aspect of what makes them Scots". Some might find that a pretty sinister attitude, others obviously don't.
Its part of the SNP's 'no true Scot' meme - which we see demonstrated here daily by the Nats - any Scot who does not support the SNP and Scottish independence 'hates Scotland'........
That's nationalism for you. It is the same the world over.
I'm sure your critique of British Nationalism resides in the same hard-to-find place as that of your dissection of Osball's & Alexander's dishonesty.
This offends my libertarian principles. *However*, if it means that I can just carry one charger for all my Apple and Android kit, I will be a happy bunny.
Android stuff seems to be standardizing on micro USB anyhow, so there's not that much upside, and there's a huge downside once somebody comes up with a better way to do it and then discovers they're not allowed to sell their phones in the EU.
Surely Apple would make that exact argument now? While rippng off their customers...
Sure they would. And they'd be right. If you don't like being ripped off, don't buy their stuff.
I take it you are one of those anti-Apple types
Why not just make everyone use the same charger? It's for convenience more than anything - so you don't get stranded when away from home.
Why not just let manufacturers do their own thing, and let the consumer decide what they want to spend their cash on? I'd like to think the EU has more pressing matters to legislate on.
Why not just let every manufacturer use different plug sockets too? A: because the benefits of standardisation are massive. I have lost count of the amount of times I have been stranded without a charger because Apple insists on using its proprietary cable.
You want the EU to nanny you because you're too forgetful to remember your charger, and too tight to buy another one?
One of the reasons that European companies have been pre-eminent in the mobile phone world (e.g. Vodafone) is that Europe, via ETSI, decided to standardise their mobile telephony on GSM.
In America, they went for the free-market approach and had competing standards, e.g. GSM, AMPS, iDEN, EDGE. This led to the stupid situation where you could fly to a new city and your phone would not work. At least until phones capable of using all systems were launched.
This standardisation has led to a massive boost for UK and European industry.
Note: if we leave the EU, we would still be able to be members of ETSI.
Fair play. The US network experience is a great example - much better than any of mine.
I think that you must indeed have missed the posts in which I have stated that they are being as dishonest as the SNP on this. All sides know that there will be a currency union and that it will be on terms dictated by the rUK. The Unionists will not admit this because it will make it easier for Devomaxers to vote Yes; the SNP will not admit it because it means that Scotland will not be anything other than symbolically independent of Westminster.
Evidently I did miss your criticicism of Osborne, Balls & Alexander, though I do remember you being very exercised by the idea that attacking Osborne's Scottish day trip (which you now seem to accept was based on a lie) meant that one was somehow anti-English. I also remember your proposition that the ability to get rid of Trident, decide when and where to go to war, raise and distribute all Scotland's tax and revenue, control immigration and design our own welfare policies would only be 'symbolic'. Perhaps the UK, rump or otherwise, should be working towards handing control of all those piffling, wee thing to the wise heads of Europe.
I did not say attacking Osborne's day trip meant you anyone was anti-English. I said that if it has come to the stage when anything that an English Tory says is dismissed by Scots on the basis that the person is an English Tory then the Union has run its course. I also said I did not believe that most Scots actually do think in that way.
You make fair points about Trident and going to war. In a currency union and in the EU an independent Scotland will not control the other stuff you mention.
I think that you must indeed have missed the posts in which I have stated that they are being as dishonest as the SNP on this. All sides know that there will be a currency union and that it will be on terms dictated by the rUK. The Unionists will not admit this because it will make it easier for Devomaxers to vote Yes; the SNP will not admit it because it means that Scotland will not be anything other than symbolically independent of Westminster.
Evidently I did miss your criticicism of Osborne, Balls & Alexander, though I do remember you being very exercised by the idea that attacking Osborne's Scottish day trip (which you now seem to accept was based on a lie) meant that one was somehow anti-English. I also remember your proposition that the ability to get rid of Trident, decide when and where to go to war, raise and distribute all Scotland's tax and revenue, control immigration and design our own welfare policies would only be 'symbolic'. Perhaps the UK, rump or otherwise, should be working towards handing control of all those piffling, wee things to the wise heads of Europe.
Surely you know better by now than to upset a Spanish nationalist.
Even as a unionist, I can see that this is a dumb line. The idea that the EU wouldn't embrace what would be the ~17th richest nation on Earth and a £1bn pa net contributor is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
The idea that Spain would rubber stamp the automatic continuous membership of a secessionist state is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
Do you think that the EU would refuse Scotland's application?
A simple yes or no to that question will suffice.
LOL
Watch the shriekers squirm. The most amusing part is we've had all this tosh long ago. Even Iain Gray tried some of that same scaremongering around 2011. We've heard all the 'too poor, too wee and too stupid' idiocy from SLAB long before now. It certainly didn't help them in 2011. When the matter gets debated (and it has been despite the ignorance on show here from the usual PB suspects) that question inevitably comes up and the unionists are forced to start mumbling and look at their feet when the ludicrous scaremongering is clearly exposed.
Let's not forget calamity Clegg is basing his entire May EU elections strategy on being the party of IN. This while the incompetent fop Cameron tries to persuade gullible tory kipper waverers that he really, really, really, really does mean it about having his Cast Iron IN/OUT referendum on Europe.
There really are people on PB who are self evidently just far too stupid to realise that posturing on the ability to stay in the EU might not be the brightest of ideas with that backdrop playing out loud and clear for the scottish public to see. Those posters are of course as incompetent and out of touch as Osbrowne was with his omnishambles.
It’s time the BBC stood up to Alex Salmond The row over Andrew Marr's comments to the First Minister over Scottish independence highlights the danger of kowtowing to the SNP.
Having just read the above document it is typical of an academic who tries to be neutral, but in reality is not and hasn't a clue about what matters to real people.
He says, "telling the viewer that the debate over living standards, employment and taxation was the only debate anyone cared about. No evidence for this view was given."
This is showing extreme naivety in that, are not living standards, employment and taxation the primary and most important interests to the electorate. Nowadays in a global economy most people want those facts and long term trends spelt out in detail. Surely this academic must be living in such a closeted society which is so well protected from the normal economic winds of change that he is unqualified to do such a study. Let him walk out into the street to find the evidence he needs for this view - or would that be a too foreign experience for him.
Actually, to be fair, the main thrust of his research was into biased presentation by the BBC and STV - not on that. Or am I missing something?
Carnyx, No it is just Financier is so used to spouting bollox , he did not even read what the point was but chose to give you the benefit of his multi-billion experience. Probably washing the dishes at the time and got confused.
malcolmg. I read it very carefully - your problem is that you are so obsessed that you are unable to think or read rationally anymore.
An ex-BBC Scotland journo on the Marr-Salmond interview.
'It won’t be presented by Andrew Marr, a fine journalist like James Naughtie who sought fame in London and found it. The problem here it seems is one of assimilation because after 25 or 30 years absorbing London culture and learning about it, embedding themselves there and bringing up families, they lose some aspect of what makes them Scots.
Is it not the same principe that applies to immigrants to Scotland? They adjust and acclimatise and are no longer the same people who left another country through time. It is a natural process but we make the mistake if assuming London or England is the same country when it is not. But like all diaspora they develop a confused impression of their identity and blame the rest of us for not sharing their view. Presenters are notoriously egotistical and are allowed to puff up their egos until they become bullies and Big shots. They think they are bigger than the people they interview. Marr blew his Barroso interview and he now knows it. The lack if a follow up to find out what legal process would follow a Yes vote was inexcusable and laughable. Yesterday he was trying to cover that failing up but made a worse mess by giving us the Marr Declaration on the EU and was embarrassed by Salmond. It is the triumph of vanity over talent. And it is noticeable that the London Scots treat Salmnod with contempt, with a different tone from the one applied to Cameron.'
He seems to "know" that if Scottish journalists living in London ask Salmond a series of questions that Salmond finds uncomfortable it means they have lost "some aspect of what makes them Scots". Some might find that a pretty sinister attitude, others obviously don't.
Its part of the SNP's 'no true Scot' meme - which we see demonstrated here daily by the Nats - any Scot who does not support the SNP and Scottish independence 'hates Scotland'........
That's nationalism for you. It is the same the world over.
The likes of Marr are the ultimate traitors in the eyes of Scottish Nationalists, they left Scotland and became Londoners. They are beyond the pale.
I think that you must indeed have missed the posts in which I have stated that they are being as dishonest as the SNP on this. All sides know that there will be a currency union and that it will be on terms dictated by the rUK. The Unionists will not admit this because it will make it easier for Devomaxers to vote Yes; the SNP will not admit it because it means that Scotland will not be anything other than symbolically independent of Westminster.
Evidently I did miss your criticicism of Osborne, Balls & Alexander, though I do remember you being very exercised by the idea that attacking Osborne's Scottish day trip (which you now seem to accept was based on a lie) meant that one was somehow anti-English. I also remember your proposition that the ability to get rid of Trident, decide when and where to go to war, raise and distribute all Scotland's tax and revenue, control immigration and design our own welfare policies would only be 'symbolic'. Perhaps the UK, rump or otherwise, should be working towards handing control of all those piffling, wee thing to the wise heads of Europe.
In a currency union and in the EU an independent Scotland will not control the other stuff you mention.
I'm sure it will come as a great shock to the 18 countries that are members of the EU and the Eurozone that they have no control over any of these things.
All child seats should clip in securely to a standard fixing on cars. All audio/video equipment should include RCA/phono out*
*Apple TV does not - which means you have to route it through your TV to get it out to your amp, unless you have optical in on your amp.
Terrible idea. Why don't you use the HDMI out on your Apple TV? HDMI to the AVR then AVR to the TV. It's how I have everything set up, one connection from the AVR to the TV handles everything.
I go ATV>TV>AMP (using RCA). I'd rather go straight to the amp as it is more direct and removes a stage. I assume adding stages is lossy, but can't test it because I have no optional in...
BBC News 24 carries Higgins' statement about HS2, and cut away just as he gets to his conclusions. Literally at the moment he says, "Firstly ..."
BTW, Higgins is a very poor public speaker. I'd expect better for the amount we're paying him (and I say that as a very poor public speaker myself).
The move to extend phase 1 to Crewe is interesting, and not what I was expecting. It will allow much greater connectivity with the north, as well as helping Crewe. It will also not have much of what I saw as the deal-killer on doing both phases consecutively - tunnel expertise.
He's also mentioning Old Oak Common, a prospect that should get SeanT salivating.
An ex-BBC Scotland journo on the Marr-Salmond interview.
'It won’t be presented by Andrew Marr, a fine journalist like James Naughtie who sought fame in London and found it. The problem here it seems is one of assimilation because after 25 or 30 years absorbing London culture and learning about it, embedding themselves there and bringing up families, they lose some aspect of what makes them Scots.
Is it not the same principe that applies to immigrants to Scotland? They adjust and acclimatise and are no longer the same people who left another country through time. It is a natural process but we make the mistake if assuming London or England is the same country when it is not. But like all diaspora they develop a confused impression of their identity and blame the rest of us for not sharing their view. Presenters are notoriously egotistical and are allowed to puff up their egos until they become bullies and Big shots. They think they are bigger than the people they interview. Marr blew his Barroso interview and he now knows it. The lack if a follow up to find out what legal process would follow a Yes vote was inexcusable and laughable. Yesterday he was trying to cover that failing up but made a worse mess by giving us the Marr Declaration on the EU and was embarrassed by Salmond. It is the triumph of vanity over talent. And it is noticeable that the London Scots treat Salmnod with contempt, with a different tone from the one applied to Cameron.'
He seems to "know" that if Scottish journalists living in London ask Salmond a series of questions that Salmond finds uncomfortable it means they have lost "some aspect of what makes them Scots". Some might find that a pretty sinister attitude, others obviously don't.
Its part of the SNP's 'no true Scot' meme - which we see demonstrated here daily by the Nats - any Scot who does not support the SNP and Scottish independence 'hates Scotland'........
That's nationalism for you. It is the same the world over.
I'm sure your critique of British Nationalism resides in the same hard-to-find place as that of your dissection of Osball's & Alexander's dishonesty.
British nationalism is just as bad: you can't be properly British unless you wave the flag, love the queen etc. People that set themselves up as arbiters of national identity and culture, and who pontificate on who and who doesn't fit the bill, are much of a muchness wherever in the world you find them.
On topic, I'd expect George Osborne to be looking for measures that boost the economy while amazingly coincidentally helping hardworking families. Preferably, from his viewpoint, through tax cuts and spending cuts.
A lot depends on whether he's learned his lesson from two years ago. This budget is for disappointing his friends while cheering up the working poor and grumpy suburbanites. He probably realises that but I doubt he has the will to do it.
All child seats should clip in securely to a standard fixing on cars. All audio/video equipment should include RCA/phono out*
*Apple TV does not - which means you have to route it through your TV to get it out to your amp, unless you have optical in on your amp.
Terrible idea. Why don't you use the HDMI out on your Apple TV? HDMI to the AVR then AVR to the TV. It's how I have everything set up, one connection from the AVR to the TV handles everything.
I go ATV>TV>AMP (using RCA). I'd rather go straight to the amp as it is more direct and removes a stage. I assume adding stages is lossy, but can't test it because I have no optional in...
I think that you must indeed have missed the posts in which I have stated that they are being as dishonest as the SNP on this. All sides know that there will be a currency union and that it will be on terms dictated by the rUK. The Unionists will not admit this because it will make it easier for Devomaxers to vote Yes; the SNP will not admit it because it means that Scotland will not be anything other than symbolically independent of Westminster.
Evidently I did miss your criticicism of Osborne, Balls & Alexander, though I do remember you being very exercised by the idea that attacking Osborne's Scottish day trip (which you now seem to accept was based on a lie) meant that one was somehow anti-English. I also remember your proposition that the ability to get rid of Trident, decide when and where to go to war, raise and distribute all Scotland's tax and revenue, control immigration and design our own welfare policies would only be 'symbolic'. Perhaps the UK, rump or otherwise, should be working towards handing control of all those piffling, wee thing to the wise heads of Europe.
In a currency union and in the EU an independent Scotland will not control the other stuff you mention.
I'm sure it will come as a great shock to the 18 countries that are members of the EU and the Eurozone that they have no control over any of these things.
The idea that the sterling currency zone will resemble the current Eurozone is ridiculous, precisely because the Eurozone as currently constructed has shown itself to be deeply flawed.
Even as a unionist, I can see that this is a dumb line. The idea that the EU wouldn't embrace what would be the ~17th richest nation on Earth and a £1bn pa net contributor is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
The idea that Spain would rubber stamp the automatic continuous membership of a secessionist state is far-fetched to say the least. Better to drop this line of thinking entirely - it's embarrassing.
Do you think that the EU would refuse Scotland's application?
A simple yes or no to that question will suffice.
LOL
Watch the shriekers squirm. The most amusing part is we've had all this tosh long ago. Even Iain Gray tried some of that same scaremongering around 2011. We've heard all the 'too poor, too wee and too stupid' idiocy from SLAB long before now. It certainly didn't help them in 2011. When the matter gets debated (and it has been despite the ignorance on show here from the usual PB suspects) that question inevitably comes up and the unionists are forced to start mumbling and look at their feet when the ludicrous scaremongering is clearly exposed.
Let's not forget calamity Clegg is basing his entire May EU elections strategy on being the party of IN. This while the incompetent fop Cameron tries to persuade gullible tory kipper waverers that he really, really, really, really does mean it about having his Cast Iron IN/OUT referendum on Europe.
There really are people on PB who are self evidently just far too stupid to realise that posturing on the ability to stay in the EU might not be the brightest of ideas with that backdrop playing out loud and clear for the scottish public to see. Those posters are of course as incompetent and out of touch as Osbrowne was with his omnishambles.
What a waste of words to say nothing of import.
Especially since all the replies were 'yes, but you may not like the terms'.
I'd like to think the EU has more pressing matters to legislate on.
Like plugs. British plugs don't work in France and vice versa. WTF? This is exactly the kind of thing the EU should be fixing.
Who's going to pay for the rewiring?
Who cares. Let's just have a whip round and buy Edmund some travel adapters.
I'm more concerned with Boba's audio problems, and his flat cell phone battery. Perhaps the EU could send him a text message every time he leaves home, reminding him to take a spare charger?
I'd like to think the EU has more pressing matters to legislate on.
Like plugs. British plugs don't work in France and vice versa. WTF? This is exactly the kind of thing the EU should be fixing.
Who's going to pay for the rewiring?
Consumers are already paying the cost of manufacturers having to put different plugs on things depending where they're going to be sold. Make a new standard, make the transition once, then you're done and you don't have to do any more dicking around.
During the transition period you'd use adapters so new appliances would work with your old sockets, but it would be the same, simple design, mass-produced and extremely cheap. They could have a big bucket of the things in the shop to give you one free when you bought a new appliance, which would be more efficient than coordinating getting the appliance with the right plug on sale in the right country all the time. Then once the transition is done you never need to bother with it again.
I'd like to think the EU has more pressing matters to legislate on.
Like plugs. British plugs don't work in France and vice versa. WTF? This is exactly the kind of thing the EU should be fixing.
Who's going to pay for the rewiring?
Consumers are already paying the cost of manufacturers having to put different plugs on things depending where they're going to be sold. Make a new standard, make the transition once, then you're done and you don't have to do any more dicking around.
During the transition period you'd use adapters so new appliances would work with your old sockets, but it would be the same, simple design, mass-produced and extremely cheap. They could have a big bucket of the things in the shop to give you one free when you bought a new appliance, which would be more efficient than coordinating getting the appliance with the right plug on sale in the right country all the time. Then once the transition is done you never need to bother with it again.
Anything to do away with the bloody adaptor cartels that seem to operate in airports! Don't know how much money I've wasted on the bloody things.
I'd like to think the EU has more pressing matters to legislate on.
Like plugs. British plugs don't work in France and vice versa. WTF? This is exactly the kind of thing the EU should be fixing.
Who's going to pay for the rewiring?
Consumers are already paying the cost of manufacturers having to put different plugs on things depending where they're going to be sold. Make a new standard, make the transition once, then you're done and you don't have to do any more dicking around.
During the transition period you'd use adapters so new appliances would work with your old sockets, but it would be the same, simple design, mass-produced and extremely cheap. They could have a big bucket of the things in the shop to give you one free when you bought a new appliance, which would be more efficient than coordinating getting the appliance with the right plug on sale in the right country all the time. Then once the transition is done you never need to bother with it again.
It's gonna cost a fortune getting everyone to drive on the left!
I'd like to think the EU has more pressing matters to legislate on.
Like plugs. British plugs don't work in France and vice versa. WTF? This is exactly the kind of thing the EU should be fixing.
Who's going to pay for the rewiring?
Consumers are already paying the cost of manufacturers having to put different plugs on things depending where they're going to be sold. Make a new standard, make the transition once, then you're done and you don't have to do any more dicking around.
During the transition period you'd use adapters so new appliances would work with your old sockets, but it would be the same, simple design, mass-produced and extremely cheap. They could have a big bucket of the things in the shop to give you one free when you bought a new appliance, which would be more efficient than coordinating getting the appliance with the right plug on sale in the right country all the time. Then once the transition is done you never need to bother with it again.
Sounds like an excuse for someone to make loads of money shafting the consumer, just like the great light bulb scam. All the expense and waste of rewiring houses across Europe, over a transition period of a century.
Seriously, do you really think it's a problem that a French toaster cannot be used in England without replacing the plug?
I'd like to think the EU has more pressing matters to legislate on.
Like plugs. British plugs don't work in France and vice versa. WTF? This is exactly the kind of thing the EU should be fixing.
Who's going to pay for the rewiring?
Consumers are already paying the cost of manufacturers having to put different plugs on things depending where they're going to be sold. Make a new standard, make the transition once, then you're done and you don't have to do any more dicking around.
During the transition period you'd use adapters so new appliances would work with your old sockets, but it would be the same, simple design, mass-produced and extremely cheap. They could have a big bucket of the things in the shop to give you one free when you bought a new appliance, which would be more efficient than coordinating getting the appliance with the right plug on sale in the right country all the time. Then once the transition is done you never need to bother with it again.
Anything to do away with the bloody adaptor cartels that seem to operate in airports! Don't know how much money I've wasted on the bloody things.
A fraction of the cost of re-socketing your house!
Anyhow, should we be petitioning Apple to have more legacy sockets on their products? I'd like to see DIN connectors on iPhones.
I'd like to think the EU has more pressing matters to legislate on.
Like plugs. British plugs don't work in France and vice versa. WTF? This is exactly the kind of thing the EU should be fixing.
Who's going to pay for the rewiring?
Consumers are already paying the cost of manufacturers having to put different plugs on things depending where they're going to be sold. Make a new standard, make the transition once, then you're done and you don't have to do any more dicking around.
During the transition period you'd use adapters so new appliances would work with your old sockets, but it would be the same, simple design, mass-produced and extremely cheap. They could have a big bucket of the things in the shop to give you one free when you bought a new appliance, which would be more efficient than coordinating getting the appliance with the right plug on sale in the right country all the time. Then once the transition is done you never need to bother with it again.
Sounds like an excuse for someone to make loads of money shafting the consumer, just like the great light bulb scam. All the expense and waste of rewiring houses across Europe, over a transition period of a century.
Seriously, do you really think it's a problem that a French toaster cannot be used in England without replacing the plug?
Yes, it's a problem. It's a barrier to trade and a waste of money, both of which make people poorer than they need to be.
If you can't see the issue here, would you see the issue if Northern England and Southern England had different standards? (*)
(*) In Japan different parts of the country actually do (the voltage not the plug size) which happened for historical reasons but didn't get fixed because the utilities like having the barrier to trade that prevents them from having to compete with each other.
I have a lot more sympathy with BobaFett's suggestion about Apple chargers than with EiT's suggestion about changing plugs round Europe. The latter seems mainly for the minor convenience of the small number of regular international travellers at the great inconvenience of everyone else.
Actually, to be fair, the main thrust of his research was into biased presentation by the BBC and STV - not on that. Or am I missing something?
Carnyx, No it is just Financier is so used to spouting bollox , he did not even read what the point was but chose to give you the benefit of his multi-billion experience. Probably washing the dishes at the time and got confused.
malcolmg. I read it very carefully - your problem is that you are so obsessed that you are unable to think or read rationally anymore.
When the SNP loses the indyref, will it split into two or more parts, a "conservative" SNP and a "labour" one?
No.
Instead it will whine about how rUK told lies, and ensured that the playing field wasn't level, and allowed/disallowed* postal voting, this disenfranchising Scots.
* delete at appropriate
train.
malcolmg:
This is a decision the Scottish people must take for themselves.
They will stop at nothing to denigrate Scotland and it is people like that who are ensuring that the vote will be YES.
Once again, typical Nat thinking - if you don't support the SNP and unquestioningly accept their (routinely overturned) assertions you "denigrate Scotland"!
Some of us can actually think for ourselves - and my worry is that Scots are being sold independence on a false prospectus. Hence the hysterical reaction when Saint Eck is challenged by an apostate.....
Who mentioned the SNP, it is you that has the fetish on Alex Salmond. I have no connection with the SNP and post based on Scotland and my own opinion.
This offends my libertarian principles. *However*, if it means that I can just carry one charger for all my Apple and Android kit, I will be a happy bunny.
Android stuff seems to be standardizing on micro USB anyhow, so there's not that much upside, and there's a huge downside once somebody comes up with a better way to do it and then discovers they're not allowed to sell their phones in the EU.
Surely Apple would make that exact argument now? While rippng off their customers...
Sure they would. And they'd be right. If you don't like being ripped off, don't buy their stuff.
I take it you are one of those anti-Apple types
Why not just make everyone use the same charger? It's for convenience more than anything - so you don't get stranded when away from home.
Why not just let manufacturers do their own thing, and let the consumer decide what they want to spend their cash on? I'd like to think the EU has more pressing matters to legislate on.
I take it you think we've been going downhill since Robert Peel invented the police force. It is, after all, a disgraceful infringement of your rights & liberties that my bank prevents you from accessing my account and cleaning it out. You deserve all the money in the world, just because you're you...
Obviously I do deserve all the money.
I thought you might say that. I trust other Peebies will share your pain...
I'd like to think the EU has more pressing matters to legislate on.
Like plugs. British plugs don't work in France and vice versa. WTF? This is exactly the kind of thing the EU should be fixing.
Who's going to pay for the rewiring?
Consumers are already paying the cost of manufacturers having to put different plugs on things depending where they're going to be sold. Make a new standard, make the transition once, then you're done and you don't have to do any more dicking around.
During the transition period you'd use adapters so new appliances would work with your old sockets, but it would be the same, simple design, mass-produced and extremely cheap. They could have a big bucket of the things in the shop to give you one free when you bought a new appliance, which would be more efficient than coordinating getting the appliance with the right plug on sale in the right country all the time. Then once the transition is done you never need to bother with it again.
It's gonna cost a fortune getting everyone to drive on the left!
The fact there are things we cannot do, does not mean we shouldn't do the things we can.
If you want another example: the Internet and the web both rely on internationally-agreed standards. This has been to the advantage of all of us, and the fact that many of those standards are not reliant on patents, and are open.
I'd like to think the EU has more pressing matters to legislate on.
Like plugs. British plugs don't work in France and vice versa. WTF? This is exactly the kind of thing the EU should be fixing.
Who's going to pay for the rewiring?
Consumers are already paying the cost of manufacturers having to put different plugs on things depending where they're going to be sold. Make a new standard, make the transition once, then you're done and you don't have to do any more dicking around.
During the transition period you'd use adapters so new appliances would work with your old sockets, but it would be the same, simple design, mass-produced and extremely cheap. They could have a big bucket of the things in the shop to give you one free when you bought a new appliance, which would be more efficient than coordinating getting the appliance with the right plug on sale in the right country all the time. Then once the transition is done you never need to bother with it again.
Do you know what it costs to change a socket in an English property (dunno about the reg's in other parts)? You have to have the work done and signed off by a qualified, certified electrician. It'd cost an absolute fortune. Now, I understand what your saying in the long term, but the short term hit would be massive.
British nationalism is just as bad: you can't be properly British unless you wave the flag, love the queen etc. People that set themselves up as arbiters of national identity and culture, and who pontificate on who and who doesn't fit the bill, are much of a muchness wherever in the world you find them.
Except of course British Nationalism is promoted by the state broadcaster, the government, much of the media and the establishment; not so much a pontification as an assumption that it's the cultural norm.
Comments
1. QE ( ie inflating away our debts ) was supporting the economy
2. The Euro crisis was in Osborne's own forecasts but he took no substantive counter action
3. we had long debates on whether infrastructure projects should be brought forward ( spade ready ones as the terminilogy was )
4. Righties didn't want to accept the banks were central to the problem
5. tax, bank reform, reduced legislation and a growth agenda were debated endlessly with supply siders like myself saying get a move on and the Osbornites claiming nothing more could possibly be done until it was. Usually forced, usually too late. usually more than was asked for upfront since that's the price of catchback
Osborne's main failing has been to get the real economy moving again. The treasury\cash management side in reality has been straightforward as the BoE has underwritten HMG and may have to do so again if Balls screws things up. As I have said before Osborne is an ordinary chancellor in extraordinary time. That's the tragedy.
LOL
On this day before Osborne’s 2012 Budget ICM had the Tories 3 points ahead, the last time any poll had a CON lead
And in this March 2012 poll UKIP was on just 1%
If it should be that the Conservatives are not in government after the next general election then a lot of the blame will be attributed to the March 2012 budget and the way the government reacted in the weeks and months that followed.
It's already been pointed out often enough but it's hardly a surprise that it hasn't sunk in for the most amusing usual suspects on here. After all, so many of the PB tories were hilariously wrong about Osbrowne's omnishambles and kept trying to pretend it was just a matter of not spinning it right. Always remember the golden rule on PB.
The PB tories are always wrong. The PB tories never learn.
The fact is it was the incompetence of the omnishambles that really kickstarted the kippers off of what had been fairly unremarkable low polling to where they are now. That was the omnishambles pattern across all the pollsters, not just ICM.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/96/UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png
Farage has Osbrowne and Cammie to thank for all those disaffected tories finally deciding enough was enough and starting to jump ship over the the kippers. Farage doesn't even need to keep hold of all of those voters. Just enough to do better than the kipper 3.1% in 2010 and Cammie's own 2015 target of sub 5% for the kipper VI. A task which looks very achievable when you look at where the kippers are now and factor in yet more fop incompetence like Cameron's Cast Iron immigration Pledge blowing up in his face. A Cast Iron Pledge which Farage will happily go huge on in the debate with Calamity Clegg as well as in the EU campaign itself on the ground.
The attempts by the SNP to pretend that there is no controversy about Scotland remaining an EU member state is laughable. Time and again senior Commission officials, as well as various EU member states, have stated that should part of an EU member state decide to leave that member state, it would automatically place itself outside the EU. This has been a consistent position for a number of years.
(ends gratuitous baiting of Apple fans).
I bloody well hope that the EU hasn't inadvertently blocked that being adopted.
No one (ie the capital markets) was in the mood for anything other than austerity talk (of course he didn't act austerely, as you often point out).
But to say that he should have would have could have done this that or the other is to misunderestimate the precarious nature of our position at that time.
The entire SNP campaign is based on saying what it takes to get 50% plus one in September. Whether what is said is true or not is entirely immaterial to them - once they get a Yes, there is no going back and to a nationalist Scotland being independent is all that matters. The Unionist side have every right to point that out. If the Scottish people do not believe it, then so be it. At least they will have been given the opportunity to make a judgement call. Should the Unionists turn out to be correct those who voted Yes will not be able to say they have not been warned. That, surely, is a good thing.
Oh that's right. We aren't allowed to discuss ANY aspect whatsoever about the biggest press story in decades on PB.
How VERY convenient.
LOL
Probably all just noise, despite the usual over-analysing of tiny Tory upticks on here.
And I was chum for a brief moment there, I feel honoured. ;-)
A simple yes or no to that question will suffice.
Scotland is NOT a member of the EU - the UK is - so if Scots vote to leave the UK, they vote to leave the EU.
Would they get back in? Almost certainly. But on what terms (Euro/Schengen/no rebate)? And to pretend it could be done in 18 months is 'optimistic' at best.
And of course Eck's assertion is that Scotland would not need to be 'accepted'. His claim is that Scotland is already a member (wrong) and will continue to be a member (wrong) with all of the UK opt-outs intact (wrong)
That's good enough for most Scots I should imagine. Thanks.
Would the SNP agree to apply if joining the Euro is a requirement?
In the interim, I expect it would get EEA terms.
I have bought two spares. The whole thing is insane though - I have bought two spares. The whole thing is mad though - not to mention the waste it creates it's inconvenient. That's why we have standard plug sockets.
All child seats should clip in securely to a standard fixing on cars.
All audio/video equipment should include RCA/phono out*
*Apple TV does not - which means you have to route it through your TV to get it out to your amp, unless you have optical in on your amp.
Big news - UKIP seems to have been unprompted in the ComRes Euro poll yet still came out top "
twitter.com/oflynndirector/status/445491963018903553
My coffee machine takes different filters to other types, should I go crying to Brussels?
Watch the shriekers squirm. The most amusing part is we've had all this tosh long ago. Even Iain Gray tried some of that same scaremongering around 2011. We've heard all the 'too poor, too wee and too stupid' idiocy from SLAB long before now. It certainly didn't help them in 2011. When the matter gets debated (and it has been despite the ignorance on show here from the usual PB suspects) that question inevitably comes up and the unionists are forced to start mumbling and look at their feet when the ludicrous scaremongering is clearly exposed.
Let's not forget calamity Clegg is basing his entire May EU elections strategy on being the party of IN. This while the incompetent fop Cameron tries to persuade gullible tory kipper waverers that he really, really, really, really does mean it about having his Cast Iron IN/OUT referendum on Europe.
There really are people on PB who are self evidently just far too stupid to realise that posturing on the ability to stay in the EU might not be the brightest of ideas with that backdrop playing out loud and clear for the scottish public to see. Those posters are of course as incompetent and out of touch as Osbrowne was with his omnishambles.
What Capital markets? _The_ capital markets. The ones that buy UK Govt debt - pension funds, insurance companies both domestic and non-domestic all factoring some kind of haircut down the line on their investments if the CotE announced a huge spending plan with the debt and deficit as they stood in 2010.
@Scotland
It's all details - the EU, currency, rebate, Schengen, etc. And unimportant ones at that.
ASalmond is on the final run-in, he has some momentum and he knows it. He will say anything, literally anything at this point to push the numbers over the line because in his analysis independence is the only goal. What happens after is secondary because Scotland will be its own country and will deal with all the problems as they arise as an independent country.
Fine.
I just wish the pretence would end of it being some kind of mathematical equation. It is a matter solely for the heart: both sides should just ask: "are you for us or agin us?"...
...and let the people decide.
To do so apparently makes me an evil Apple slave whore! Nurse!
In America, they went for the free-market approach and had competing standards, e.g. GSM, AMPS, iDEN, EDGE. This led to the stupid situation where you could fly to a new city and your phone would not work. At least until phones capable of using all systems were launched.
This standardisation has led to a massive boost for UK and European industry.
Note: if we leave the EU, we would still be able to be members of ETSI.
Obviously I do deserve all the money.
I'm just not that upset that Bobafett can't charge his iPhone using my micro USB lead.
You make fair points about Trident and going to war. In a currency union and in the EU an independent Scotland will not control the other stuff you mention.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkMFO6gTLxM
*chortle*
"What a waste of words to say nothing of import."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26609993
How Michael Gove and George Osborne are trying to halt Boris Johnson, the great pretender http://bit.ly/1iQtJaW | Telegraph
AgnesG @AgnesGitau 22m
Michael Gove says the number of Etonians surrounding David Cameron is 'preposterous' http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/michael-gove-says-the-number-of-etonians-surrounding-david-cameron-is-preposterous-9193640.htmlrt …
Incompetent fops.
BBC News 24 carries Higgins' statement about HS2, and cut away just as he gets to his conclusions. Literally at the moment he says, "Firstly ..."
BTW, Higgins is a very poor public speaker. I'd expect better for the amount we're paying him (and I say that as a very poor public speaker myself).
The move to extend phase 1 to Crewe is interesting, and not what I was expecting. It will allow much greater connectivity with the north, as well as helping Crewe. It will also not have much of what I saw as the deal-killer on doing both phases consecutively - tunnel expertise.
He's also mentioning Old Oak Common, a prospect that should get SeanT salivating.
Addition: it's online at:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-26609993
LOL
Keep the Comedy Gold coming 'Financier'.
This is even better than your usual inept recycled CCHQ spin and press releases.
A lot depends on whether he's learned his lesson from two years ago. This budget is for disappointing his friends while cheering up the working poor and grumpy suburbanites. He probably realises that but I doubt he has the will to do it.
The only 'shrieking' here is the Nat's......
I'm more concerned with Boba's audio problems, and his flat cell phone battery. Perhaps the EU could send him a text message every time he leaves home, reminding him to take a spare charger?
During the transition period you'd use adapters so new appliances would work with your old sockets, but it would be the same, simple design, mass-produced and extremely cheap. They could have a big bucket of the things in the shop to give you one free when you bought a new appliance, which would be more efficient than coordinating getting the appliance with the right plug on sale in the right country all the time. Then once the transition is done you never need to bother with it again.
Seriously, do you really think it's a problem that a French toaster cannot be used in England without replacing the plug?
Anyhow, should we be petitioning Apple to have more legacy sockets on their products? I'd like to see DIN connectors on iPhones.
And even if I did, it would probably be on par. It wouldn't be a problem if the type G became a standard ;-)
If you can't see the issue here, would you see the issue if Northern England and Southern England had different standards? (*)
(*) In Japan different parts of the country actually do (the voltage not the plug size) which happened for historical reasons but didn't get fixed because the utilities like having the barrier to trade that prevents them from having to compete with each other.
.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/alancochrane/10701835/Its-time-the-BBC-stood-up-to-Alex-Salmond.html
Could you post links to this academic research please?
It'd be more interesting reading than the specs I need to read and understand today (grumbles to himself).
http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/john-robertson/bbc-bias-and-scots-referendum-new-report
Thanks. I've had a skim and that is quite interesting (tm). Will try to read more thoroughly later.
I've just done a quick Google, and the academic involved doesn't really do himself, or the research, any favours in a Q&A.
http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/john-robertson-oliver-huitson/interview-bbc-bias-bullying-and-scottish-referendum
.
Actually, to be fair, the main thrust of his research was into biased presentation by the BBC and STV - not on that. Or am I missing something?
Carnyx, No it is just Financier is so used to spouting bollox , he did not even read what the point was but chose to give you the benefit of his multi-billion experience. Probably washing the dishes at the time and got confused.
malcolmg. I read it very carefully - your problem is that you are so obsessed that you are unable to think or read rationally anymore.
Financier , I am not sure what you re Who mentioned the SNP, it is you that has the fetish on Alex Salmond. I have no connection with the SNP and post based on Scotland and my own opinion.
If you want another example: the Internet and the web both rely on internationally-agreed standards. This has been to the advantage of all of us, and the fact that many of those standards are not reliant on patents, and are open.