YOU are part of the reason Labour, and the UK, faces this calamity. Total complacency.
No, you don't get it, do you? I'm not complacent about the result, which could clearly go either way - it was you who were smugly complacent about it just a little while ago, before you flipped back into panic mode. But I can live with either a Yes or a No. I'm mildly concerned, so are my leftie friends, and clearly it's good that the party is trying to persuade supporters to vote no. But it's not a potential calamity - that's just the media selling papers with their usual arm-waving. It's a matter for the Scots - we'd be sorry to lose them, both as Brits and as lefties, but it's really up to them. And if you talked to the average English voter, you'd find that's what most people think.
If anyone is in the Edinburgh area next Monday, Ladbrokes are staging a "Referendum race" at Musselburgh before the afternoon card begins. Two horses, one called Yes We Can, the other Neigh Thanks in a 5f match. http://www.musselburgh-racecourse.co.uk/latest-news.asp?id=MR2-N10391&p=1 You can book free tickets using the link in the article. I'll be there.
I'm not sure that's as clever or amusing as your marketing department believes. Aside from the politics, it devalues the sport of kings.
And against the rules, as those aren't the horses' names. Stiff letter to Wetherby's/Jockey Club called for I think.
I wonder if the Mayor of Zeebrugge is worried - his ferry port may be under siege as immigrants look to board a boat to Rosyth to be part of the socialst utopia ?
Flash get into the 21st century , there is no ferry to Rosyth you stupid turnip.
There is a ferry service, now only a freight service, but it did take passengers until 2010 - so most of the 21st century so far. Good, original put down though. Stupid turnip; ha ha ha
The latest Populus is a mildly encouraging one for the Tories (especially for a Monday), but yet again they appear incapable of breaking through that 34%/35% ceiling. Does anyone know when, according to the Fisher model, they are supposed to catch and indeed overtake Labour, or does that only happen on polling day next May?
Patience, look at the long term trend, a couple of years ago, Labour were polling 40+, and the Tories 28-31.
I expect there'll be further tightening.
Remember in the last parliament, the Tories had a 17% lead at this stage with ICM, and their lead only really started to shrink from January 2010 onwards
So, if you believe all this The (you don't mind me calling you that do you), why do you keep telling us again and again that you expect Labour to win the most seats?
I'm expecting the Tories to win the most votes, but Labour most seats.
I'm expecting the Lib Dems to do better in the Lib/Con marginals, and UKIP to hurt the Tories.
Baxtering Con 35 Lab 33 LD 12 UKIP 12
Gives a seat distribution of Con 289, Lab 309, LD 25, UKIP 0.
So you're expecting the Tories to gain a full one per cent support compared with their showing in today's Populus. I'm wetting my knickers with excitement and anticipation.
The latest Populus is a mildly encouraging one for the Tories (especially for a Monday), but yet again they appear incapable of breaking through that 34%/35% ceiling. Does anyone know when, according to the Fisher model, they are supposed to catch and indeed overtake Labour, or does that only happen on polling day next May?
Patience, look at the long term trend, a couple of years ago, Labour were polling 40+, and the Tories 28-31.
I expect there'll be further tightening.
Remember in the last parliament, the Tories had a 17% lead at this stage with ICM, and their lead only really started to shrink from January 2010 onwards
So, if you believe all this The (you don't mind me calling you that do you), why do you keep telling us again and again that you expect Labour to win the most seats?
I'm expecting the Tories to win the most votes, but Labour most seats.
I'm expecting the Lib Dems to do better in the Lib/Con marginals, and UKIP to hurt the Tories.
Baxtering Con 35 Lab 33 LD 12 UKIP 12
Gives a seat distribution of Con 289, Lab 309, LD 25, UKIP 0.
So you're expecting the Tories to gain a full one per cent support compared with their showing in today's Populus. I'm wetting my knickers with excitement and anticipation.
I can see them going a bit higher, I merely put that in as example of the Tories winning the popular vote but Labour having the most seats.
IIRC, Con 38 and Lab 35 still puts Lab on most seats
Surprised nobody has created an electoral calculus without Scotland - would be excellent propaganda for one side or other.
I have suggested to Lord Ashcroft he conducts some England only and England & Wales only polling.
Name dropper - I suppose it's Michael, or "Mike" and "The" between you two is it?
Talking of names, which does Salmond use to address Murdoch - 'Sir' or 'Master'?
Unctuous Eck calls him Sir Rupert,
"In a series of letters to Mr Murdoch, with whom he is on first-name terms, the First Minister asked him to be his special guest at events including the Ryder Cup golf tournament. The correspondence shows Mr Salmond repeatedly lavishing praise on Mr Murdoch, even referring to him as “Sir Rupert” in one letter despite the tycoon never being knighted by the Queen."
Surprised nobody has created an electoral calculus without Scotland - would be excellent propaganda for one side or other.
I have suggested to Lord Ashcroft he conducts some England only and England & Wales only polling.
Name dropper - I suppose it's Michael, or "Mike" and "The" between you two is it?
Talking of names, which does Salmond use to address Murdoch - 'Sir' or 'Master'?
Unctuous Eck calls him Sir Rupert,
"In a series of letters to Mr Murdoch, with whom he is on first-name terms, the First Minister asked him to be his special guest at events including the Ryder Cup golf tournament. The correspondence shows Mr Salmond repeatedly lavishing praise on Mr Murdoch, even referring to him as “Sir Rupert” in one letter despite the tycoon never being knighted by the Queen."
Rupert Murdoch does have a Knighthood, from the Pope/Catholic Church, so Sir Rupert is the correct form of address
The latest Populus is a mildly encouraging one for the Tories (especially for a Monday), but yet again they appear incapable of breaking through that 34%/35% ceiling. Does anyone know when, according to the Fisher model, they are supposed to catch and indeed overtake Labour, or does that only happen on polling day next May?
Patience, look at the long term trend, a couple of years ago, Labour were polling 40+, and the Tories 28-31.
I expect there'll be further tightening.
Remember in the last parliament, the Tories had a 17% lead at this stage with ICM, and their lead only really started to shrink from January 2010 onwards
So, if you believe all this The (you don't mind me calling you that do you), why do you keep telling us again and again that you expect Labour to win the most seats?
I'm expecting the Tories to win the most votes, but Labour most seats.
I'm expecting the Lib Dems to do better in the Lib/Con marginals, and UKIP to hurt the Tories.
Baxtering Con 35 Lab 33 LD 12 UKIP 12
Gives a seat distribution of Con 289, Lab 309, LD 25, UKIP 0.
The correspondence shows Mr Salmond repeatedly lavishing praise on Mr Murdoch, even referring to him as “Sir Rupert” in one letter despite the tycoon never being knighted by the Queen."
Maybe 'Sir' is a new honour President Eck can bestow?
The correspondence shows Mr Salmond repeatedly lavishing praise on Mr Murdoch, even referring to him as “Sir Rupert” in one letter despite the tycoon never being knighted by the Queen."
Maybe 'Sir' is a new honour President Eck can bestow?
Scotia Independence Royalty, perhaps?
Murdoch could receive the new Scottish title of 'Boss'.
Surprised nobody has created an electoral calculus without Scotland - would be excellent propaganda for one side or other.
I have suggested to Lord Ashcroft he conducts some England only and England & Wales only polling.
Name dropper - I suppose it's Michael, or "Mike" and "The" between you two is it?
Talking of names, which does Salmond use to address Murdoch - 'Sir' or 'Master'?
Unctuous Eck calls him Sir Rupert,
"In a series of letters to Mr Murdoch, with whom he is on first-name terms, the First Minister asked him to be his special guest at events including the Ryder Cup golf tournament. The correspondence shows Mr Salmond repeatedly lavishing praise on Mr Murdoch, even referring to him as “Sir Rupert” in one letter despite the tycoon never being knighted by the Queen."
Rupert Murdoch does have a Knighthood, from the Pope/Catholic Church, so Sir Rupert is the correct form of address
The correspondence shows Mr Salmond repeatedly lavishing praise on Mr Murdoch, even referring to him as “Sir Rupert” in one letter despite the tycoon never being knighted by the Queen."
Maybe 'Sir' is a new honour President Eck can bestow?
Surprised nobody has created an electoral calculus without Scotland - would be excellent propaganda for one side or other.
I have suggested to Lord Ashcroft he conducts some England only and England & Wales only polling.
Name dropper - I suppose it's Michael, or "Mike" and "The" between you two is it?
Talking of names, which does Salmond use to address Murdoch - 'Sir' or 'Master'?
Unctuous Eck calls him Sir Rupert,
"In a series of letters to Mr Murdoch, with whom he is on first-name terms, the First Minister asked him to be his special guest at events including the Ryder Cup golf tournament. The correspondence shows Mr Salmond repeatedly lavishing praise on Mr Murdoch, even referring to him as “Sir Rupert” in one letter despite the tycoon never being knighted by the Queen."
Rupert Murdoch does have a Knighthood, from the Pope/Catholic Church, so Sir Rupert is the correct form of address
I'm surprised that those would be recognised in this country?
Surprised nobody has created an electoral calculus without Scotland - would be excellent propaganda for one side or other.
I have suggested to Lord Ashcroft he conducts some England only and England & Wales only polling.
Name dropper - I suppose it's Michael, or "Mike" and "The" between you two is it?
Talking of names, which does Salmond use to address Murdoch - 'Sir' or 'Master'?
Unctuous Eck calls him Sir Rupert,
"In a series of letters to Mr Murdoch, with whom he is on first-name terms, the First Minister asked him to be his special guest at events including the Ryder Cup golf tournament. The correspondence shows Mr Salmond repeatedly lavishing praise on Mr Murdoch, even referring to him as “Sir Rupert” in one letter despite the tycoon never being knighted by the Queen."
Rupert Murdoch does have a Knighthood, from the Pope/Catholic Church, so Sir Rupert is the correct form of address
Just read Murdoch's biography
Another Oxford PPE, you couldn't make it up.
Really?
I was gutted to find out this weekend, Philip Hammond also read PPE.
Surprised nobody has created an electoral calculus without Scotland - would be excellent propaganda for one side or other.
I have suggested to Lord Ashcroft he conducts some England only and England & Wales only polling.
Name dropper - I suppose it's Michael, or "Mike" and "The" between you two is it?
Talking of names, which does Salmond use to address Murdoch - 'Sir' or 'Master'?
Unctuous Eck calls him Sir Rupert,
"In a series of letters to Mr Murdoch, with whom he is on first-name terms, the First Minister asked him to be his special guest at events including the Ryder Cup golf tournament. The correspondence shows Mr Salmond repeatedly lavishing praise on Mr Murdoch, even referring to him as “Sir Rupert” in one letter despite the tycoon never being knighted by the Queen."
Rupert Murdoch does have a Knighthood, from the Pope/Catholic Church, so Sir Rupert is the correct form of address
I'm surprised that those would be recognised in this country?
We need some Burke's to make a ruling (as in Burke's Peerage)
Surprised nobody has created an electoral calculus without Scotland - would be excellent propaganda for one side or other.
I have suggested to Lord Ashcroft he conducts some England only and England & Wales only polling.
Name dropper - I suppose it's Michael, or "Mike" and "The" between you two is it?
Talking of names, which does Salmond use to address Murdoch - 'Sir' or 'Master'?
Unctuous Eck calls him Sir Rupert,
"In a series of letters to Mr Murdoch, with whom he is on first-name terms, the First Minister asked him to be his special guest at events including the Ryder Cup golf tournament. The correspondence shows Mr Salmond repeatedly lavishing praise on Mr Murdoch, even referring to him as “Sir Rupert” in one letter despite the tycoon never being knighted by the Queen."
Rupert Murdoch does have a Knighthood, from the Pope/Catholic Church, so Sir Rupert is the correct form of address
I'm surprised that those would be recognised in this country?
We need some Burke's to make a ruling (as in Burke's Peerage)
I wonder if the Mayor of Zeebrugge is worried - his ferry port may be under siege as immigrants look to board a boat to Rosyth to be part of the socialst utopia ?
Flash get into the 21st century , there is no ferry to Rosyth you stupid turnip.
There is a ferry service, now only a freight service, but it did take passengers until 2010 - so most of the 21st century so far. Good, original put down though. Stupid turnip; ha ha ha
The correspondence shows Mr Salmond repeatedly lavishing praise on Mr Murdoch, even referring to him as “Sir Rupert” in one letter despite the tycoon never being knighted by the Queen."
Maybe 'Sir' is a new honour President Eck can bestow?
Surprised nobody has created an electoral calculus without Scotland - would be excellent propaganda for one side or other.
I have suggested to Lord Ashcroft he conducts some England only and England & Wales only polling.
Name dropper - I suppose it's Michael, or "Mike" and "The" between you two is it?
Talking of names, which does Salmond use to address Murdoch - 'Sir' or 'Master'?
Unctuous Eck calls him Sir Rupert,
"In a series of letters to Mr Murdoch, with whom he is on first-name terms, the First Minister asked him to be his special guest at events including the Ryder Cup golf tournament. The correspondence shows Mr Salmond repeatedly lavishing praise on Mr Murdoch, even referring to him as “Sir Rupert” in one letter despite the tycoon never being knighted by the Queen."
Rupert Murdoch does have a Knighthood, from the Pope/Catholic Church, so Sir Rupert is the correct form of address
Just read Murdoch's biography
Another Oxford PPE, you couldn't make it up.
All we need now is to discover Murdoch was also enrolled in Common Purpose, and the circle is complete.
well it was a surpise to me at least, I always thought the dirty digger had come up from the university of life, but Oxford ? As silvery spoony as a cameroony.
The correspondence shows Mr Salmond repeatedly lavishing praise on Mr Murdoch, even referring to him as “Sir Rupert” in one letter despite the tycoon never being knighted by the Queen."
Maybe 'Sir' is a new honour President Eck can bestow?
I regularly order steel from a service centre in Dudley. But they are part of a national chain and their invoicing centre is in Scotland. If it's Indy I'll stop ordering from them since I don't want the extra VAT hassle of dealing with export, or they move their billing SOTB.
What extra VAT hassle? In my company, though we're a very small business, we do a lot of cross-border transactions. I haven't noticed any VAT hassle at all, either when trading with other EU nations or outside the EU. Once a quarter we just press the 'Calculate VAT return' button on our accounts package, and it comes out with the figures to send to HMRC. In fact there can even be a small cash-flow advantage in buying from another EU country.
Wow. Just did an indyref tweet which went totally viral (retweeted by Dan Snow et al)
Now got lots of cybernats foaming at me.
Heh.
@thomasknox Dear Scotland. Here is my daughter. She is quarter Scottish. She is British. Please don't take away her identity. pic.twitter.com/GdlReCFUrq
Amongst the wailing and gnashing by Nats, I thought the following more moderate riposte tweet quite instructive:
"@cailean_mac Why is your daughter's identity conditional on which parliament controls welfare, tax powers etc?"
I've had a hunch for some weeks that many north of the border do indeed see this as a "More powers for the Scottish Parliament, yes or no?" plebiscite, and haven't actually registered that a Yes means cutting the ties, going it alone, being a completely independent sovereign nation just like the Irish Republic as the closest obvious parallel. Not entirely surprising when Salmond himself constantly bleats about "keeping the Pound, keeping the Queen, keeping the BBC, a social union with England, blah blah waffle-pish". This particular tweet seems to reinforce that view.
How many of the supposed 51% Yessies understand what this vote is actually about?
I regularly order steel from a service centre in Dudley. But they are part of a national chain and their invoicing centre is in Scotland. If it's Indy I'll stop ordering from them since I don't want the extra VAT hassle of dealing with export, or they move their billing SOTB.
What extra VAT hassle? In my company, though we're a very small business, we do a lot of cross-border transactions. I haven't noticed any VAT hassle at all, either when trading with other EU nations or outside the EU. Once a quarter we just press the 'Calculate VAT return' button on our accounts package, and it comes out with the figures to send to HMRC. In fact there can even be a small cash-flow advantage in buying from another EU country.
good for you richard, but I can't arsed changing my system because my current supplier can't make up his mind which country he's in. It's just easier to ring someone else.
YOU are part of the reason Labour, and the UK, faces this calamity. Total complacency.
No, you don't get it, do you? I'm not complacent about the result, which could clearly go either way - it was you who were smugly complacent about it just a little while ago, before you flipped back into panic mode. But I can live with either a Yes or a No. I'm mildly concerned, so are my leftie friends, and clearly it's good that the party is trying to persuade supporters to vote no. But it's not a potential calamity - that's just the media selling papers with their usual arm-waving. It's a matter for the Scots - we'd be sorry to lose them, both as Brits and as lefties, but it's really up to them. And if you talked to the average English voter, you'd find that's what most people think.
Less hysteria. It's un-British, old boy.
Setting aside the politics, if you don't think independence represents a clear and present economic danger to the wellbeing of all the UK then you are not just fatuous - and complacent. You are dangerously dim.
We can see why now Palmer just let Blair/brown get away with opening our borders to mass immigration.
I bet he wasn't even mildly concerned on that policy.
BTW can somebody explain why the Scandinavia model is unlikely to work for Scotlans?
So Scotland will have strong incentives to try to undercut England with low taxes and light regulation, and probably won't even try to implement the Scandinavia model (if that's still a thing). It'll be like Ireland but even more so.
The only problem is that the YES vote will have been obtained on a series of profound lies saying exactly the opposite - lefty jam tomorrow at the end of the rainbow. The collision of reality with YES expectations after a YES is going to be brutal. Scotland will have a monster deficit, no central bank and serious serious challenges borrowing in a market. Freedom will come a t a heavy heavy price.
That depends - if the UK/EU economies are growing at the time it probably won't feel too bad, but if not it could potentially be quite nasty. But they won't have any other option, they'll just have to suck it up.
Bullshit. rUK will have its own cuurency / central bank and can print if absolutely needed. It is technically impossible for rUK to go hard bankrupt (although we might go soft bankrupt via debauching our cuurency unless we get the deficit sorted). A Sterlingised Scotland would be borrowing in a foreign currency. Ask the GIPSIs how that pans out. They face hard bankruptcy - and possibly on a short timeline.
Borrowing in a foreign currency is OK when everything is OK, but not when it's not. So it really depends on the state of the economy at the time.
Borrowing in a foreign currency is always insane. Economies are cyclical. Things look fine until they look dire. Servicing debt in your own cirrency is hard enough without having forex risk on top and interest rates you can't control. Currency unions don't work without political union, fiscal union and transfer union. Scotland will be in very serious risk until it establishes and stabilisies the Gordo. And balances its books.
There is UK government debt denominated in both dollars and euros. The US government has some euro denominated debt (and may have some yen and Swiss franc) as well.
There are good reasons to borrow in foreign currencies, so long as you remember to keep the quantity modest.
I convened a focus group* yesterday to discuss Quebec. The main point to come out was that the Frenchies are being diluted by inward migration and they don't believe migrants would vote for independence, so can't see it happening.
*Actually, chatted to a couple of switched-on high school students.
Wow. Just did an indyref tweet which went totally viral (retweeted by Dan Snow et al)
Now got lots of cybernats foaming at me.
Heh.
@thomasknox Dear Scotland. Here is my daughter. She is quarter Scottish. She is British. Please don't take away her identity. pic.twitter.com/GdlReCFUrq
Amongst the wailing and gnashing by Nats, I thought the following more moderate riposte tweet quite instructive:
"@cailean_mac Why is your daughter's identity conditional on which parliament controls welfare, tax powers etc?"
I've had a hunch for some weeks that many north of the border do indeed see this as a "More powers for the Scottish Parliament, yes or no?" plebiscite, and haven't actually registered that a Yes means cutting the ties, going it alone, being a completely independent sovereign nation just like the Irish Republic as the closest obvious parallel. Not entirely surprising when Salmond himself constantly bleats about "keeping the Pound, keeping the Queen, keeping the BBC, a social union with England, blah blah waffle-pish". This particular tweet seems to reinforce that view.
How many of the supposed 51% Yessies understand what this vote is actually about?
The brighter ones, but how many are there?
Take the oft repeated claims that Sterling will not be shared, in the sense that it won't have a lender of last resort when used in an independent Scotland. The clever ‘Yessers’ realise that it’s not a bluff, but they have to go along with the pretence that it is, to get their thicker compatriots to vote pro and get separation over the line. The former will worry about the consequences later, when it's too late to change.
I met someone this morning who told me that as Scotland were not likely to be accepted immediately (if at all) into the EU it would be compulsory according to EU rules to have a closed border between Scotland and England.
As I'm sure this will have been examined on these threads ad nauseam can someone answer this smart arse conundrum?
I met someone this morning who told me that as Scotland were not likely to be accepted immediately (if at all) into the EU it would be compulsory according to EU rules to have a closed border between Scotland and England.
As I'm sure this will have been examined on these threads ad nauseam can someone answer this smart arse conundrum?
It was discussed earlier on this very thread, Roger.
I cant conceive of a scenario in which Scotland and England are forced by an outside party to erect border controls. Your friend was over-reaching if he or she was claiming that there would definitely be one.
I met someone this morning who told me that as Scotland were not likely to be accepted immediately (if at all) into the EU it would be compulsory according to EU rules to have a closed border between Scotland and England.
As I'm sure this will have been examined on these threads ad nauseam can someone answer this smart arse conundrum?
In practice, any 'rules' of that sort would be meaningless. In practice, I am quite sure that what would happen is that Scotland would be granted some sort of temporary Associate Member status whilst it applied for membership, and things like that would be covered under the temporary agreement.
Travelling around some of the suburbs of Toronto yesterday, I could see what is required in a country that has a policy to increase its population - large tracts of land covered in new housing, schools, shopping precincts, places of worship and a hospital. People remember when all this were fields, to coin a phrase. That's the big difference between UK and Canada - we are all shoe-horned in, they all have new-build detached houses, those with plenty of dosh set in 10 acre plots.
The latest Populus is a mildly encouraging one for the Tories (especially for a Monday), but yet again they appear incapable of breaking through that 34%/35% ceiling. Does anyone know when, according to the Fisher model, they are supposed to catch and indeed overtake Labour, or does that only happen on polling day next May?
Patience, look at the long term trend, a couple of years ago, Labour were polling 40+, and the Tories 28-31.
I expect there'll be further tightening.
Remember in the last parliament, the Tories had a 17% lead at this stage with ICM, and their lead only really started to shrink from January 2010 onwards
So, if you believe all this The (you don't mind me calling you that do you), why do you keep telling us again and again that you expect Labour to win the most seats?
I'm expecting the Tories to win the most votes, but Labour most seats.
I'm expecting the Lib Dems to do better in the Lib/Con marginals, and UKIP to hurt the Tories.
Baxtering Con 35 Lab 33 LD 12 UKIP 12
Gives a seat distribution of Con 289, Lab 309, LD 25, UKIP 0.
So you're expecting the Tories to gain a full one per cent support compared with their showing in today's Populus. I'm wetting my knickers with excitement and anticipation.
I can see them going a bit higher, I merely put that in as example of the Tories winning the popular vote but Labour having the most seats.
IIRC, Con 38 and Lab 35 still puts Lab on most seats
Con 38-35 will give the Tories more seats. Why do we use seat calculators? Possibly as there is nothing else, but they are only a little bit more reliable than my shadow predicting next year's weather on Xmas Day.
Wow. Just did an indyref tweet which went totally viral (retweeted by Dan Snow et al)
Now got lots of cybernats foaming at me.
Heh.
@thomasknox Dear Scotland. Here is my daughter. She is quarter Scottish. She is British. Please don't take away her identity. pic.twitter.com/GdlReCFUrq
Amongst the wailing and gnashing by Nats, I thought the following more moderate riposte tweet quite instructive:
"@cailean_mac Why is your daughter's identity conditional on which parliament controls welfare, tax powers etc?"
I've had a hunch for some weeks that many north of the border do indeed see this as a "More powers for the Scottish Parliament, yes or no?" plebiscite, and haven't actually registered that a Yes means cutting the ties, going it alone, being a completely independent sovereign nation just like the Irish Republic as the closest obvious parallel. Not entirely surprising when Salmond himself constantly bleats about "keeping the Pound, keeping the Queen, keeping the BBC, a social union with England, blah blah waffle-pish". This particular tweet seems to reinforce that view.
How many of the supposed 51% Yessies understand what this vote is actually about?
What Salmond describes is basically Devo Max. What Osborne et al are offering is basically Devo Max. Ironically, the government had Devo Max removed from the ballot paper. Gordon Brown's fault, I expect.
YOU are part of the reason Labour, and the UK, faces this calamity. Total complacency.
No, you don't get it, do you? I'm not complacent about the result, which could clearly go either way - it was you who were smugly complacent about it just a little while ago, before you flipped back into panic mode. But I can live with either a Yes or a No. I'm mildly concerned, so are my leftie friends, and clearly it's good that the party is trying to persuade supporters to vote no. But it's not a potential calamity - that's just the media selling papers with their usual arm-waving. It's a matter for the Scots - we'd be sorry to lose them, both as Brits and as lefties, but it's really up to them. And if you talked to the average English voter, you'd find that's what most people think.
Less hysteria. It's un-British, old boy.
Setting aside the politics, if you don't think independence represents a clear and present economic danger to the wellbeing of all the UK then you are not just fatuous - and complacent. You are dangerously dim.
We can see why now Palmer just let Blair/brown get away with opening our borders to mass immigration.
I bet he wasn't even mildly concerned on that policy.
Not so. He knew perfectly well he was importing millions of Labour voters.
I regularly order steel from a service centre in Dudley. But they are part of a national chain and their invoicing centre is in Scotland. If it's Indy I'll stop ordering from them since I don't want the extra VAT hassle of dealing with export, or they move their billing SOTB.
What extra VAT hassle? In my company, though we're a very small business, we do a lot of cross-border transactions. I haven't noticed any VAT hassle at all, either when trading with other EU nations or outside the EU. Once a quarter we just press the 'Calculate VAT return' button on our accounts package, and it comes out with the figures to send to HMRC. In fact there can even be a small cash-flow advantage in buying from another EU country.
good for you richard, but I can't arsed changing my system because my current supplier can't make up his mind which country he's in. It's just easier to ring someone else.
Intrastat returns, EC Sales, Proof of Export documents - not much hassle but a bit nonetheless.
Travelling around some of the suburbs of Toronto yesterday, I could see what is required in a country that has a policy to increase its population - large tracts of land covered in new housing, schools, shopping precincts, places of worship and a hospital. People remember when all this were fields, to coin a phrase. That's the big difference between UK and Canada - we are all shoe-horned in, they all have new-build detached houses, those with plenty of dosh set in 10 acre plots.
So what you're saying is that the UK needs is some "living space"
Just looked at the population densities for both countries, 661.9 per sq mile for the UK, for Canada it is 8.3 per sq mile.
Very easy to look overlook that Canada is the world's second largest country
It's 100% certain that Scotland would be welcomed into the EU, following negotiations.
The same is also true of a Sterling currency union, despite UK scaremongering.
The problem the No camp have is that their claims are farcically unbelievable.
As for a temporary closed border? Patrol boats on the Tweed. I can't see it but who knows? It would not be permanent however
Do you honesty, sincerely, really believe there will be a formal currency union? The ONLY way such a thing would be acceptable to English voters, bankers and politicians is if England had total, unilateral control over Scotland's taxes, borrowing, spending, etc: as we know, from bitter experience in euroland, that is the only way currency unions can work.
Scotland would be significantly less independent than she is now: she would be told what to do by England, without any MPs in Westminster.
Therefore, a formal currency union would surely be unacceptable to an independent Scotland.
Consequently, if you do believe that a formal currency union will happen, you are very stupid, or you accept that independence will be a sham.
What concerns me is how many Scots haven't realised this: how many share your beliefs.
A brutally honest but true post. As previously noted here, many Scots believe that since their banks already print sterling bank notes, they can simply continue doing so, no problem!
Muslims 1per cent of US, basically very well integrated. UK 4 plus and France 5, man more joining ISIS and majority far from integrated
I love the term "reverse racism". It implies that there's default racism, in which whities hate darkies. Anything else is so different it requires its own label - "reverse" racism - because racism just doesn't describe it. Racism is something white people do.
Travelling around some of the suburbs of Toronto yesterday, I could see what is required in a country that has a policy to increase its population - large tracts of land covered in new housing, schools, shopping precincts, places of worship and a hospital. People remember when all this were fields, to coin a phrase. That's the big difference between UK and Canada - we are all shoe-horned in, they all have new-build detached houses, those with plenty of dosh set in 10 acre plots.
So what you're saying is that the UK needs is some "living space"
Just looked at the population densities for both countries, 661.9 per sq mile for the UK, for Canada it is 8.3 per sq mile.
Very easy to look overlook that Canada is the world's second largest country
We have the option of countryside or people - Canada has plenty of room for both. Not that I'm advocating a mass cull, or anything that drastic (just yet!).
I'm not that fussed about us being 'overpopulated'. As long as green spaces are preserved, we've all got deodorant, I don't see the issue. You can be proud of your home whether its a bedsit or a sprawling ranch.
I met someone this morning who told me that as Scotland were not likely to be accepted immediately (if at all) into the EU it would be compulsory according to EU rules to have a closed border between Scotland and England.
As I'm sure this will have been examined on these threads ad nauseam can someone answer this smart arse conundrum?
Not true.
The Channel Islands are not in the EU, but are in the Common Travel area (along with Eire). The longer term issue for Scotland would be negotiating a Shengen opt out. Provided the Scots are sufficiently accommodating I suspect a fudge could be reached. Getting out of VAT on food and the other UK exemptions on the other hand....
It's 100% certain that Scotland would be welcomed into the EU, following negotiations.
The same is also true of a Sterling currency union, despite UK scaremongering.
The problem the No camp have is that their claims are farcically unbelievable.
As for a temporary closed border? Patrol boats on the Tweed. I can't see it but who knows? It would not be permanent however
Do you honesty, sincerely, really believe there will be a formal currency union? The ONLY way such a thing would be acceptable to English voters, bankers and politicians is if England had total, unilateral control over Scotland's taxes, borrowing, spending, etc: as we know, from bitter experience in euroland, that is the only way currency unions can work.
Scotland would be significantly less independent than she is now: she would be told what to do by England, without any MPs in Westminster.
Therefore, a formal currency union would surely be unacceptable to an independent Scotland.
Consequently, if you do believe that a formal currency union will happen, you are very stupid, or you accept that independence will be a sham.
What concerns me is how many Scots haven't realised this: how many share your beliefs.
A brutally honest but true post. As previously noted here, many Scots believe that since their banks already print sterling bank notes, they can simply continue doing so, no problem!
The banks issue rather than print Sterling. I believe RBS and BOS notes are printed in England, so it would be easy enough for the Treasury to obtain the plates.
The problem for the Yes camp is that Salmond has been claiming this type of probability for things that are simply not in his gift to deliver, now or ever.
Not only he is lying to all the Scots all the time, he is also insulting all of the rest of the people in the UK by pretending that we will have obey his little potempkin fantasies.
At some time, the 'Eck rhetorical balloon will pop.
If it is after they vote yes, then I pity the poor gullible saps who believed him.
They will be building their own shed and they will have to live in it.
Comments
Less hysteria. It's un-British, old boy.
Edit: That and touch screens.
http://en.delfi.lt/lithuania/foreign-affairs/russia-reopens-criminal-cases-against-lithuanians-who-refused-to-serve-in-soviet-army.d?id=65776132
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosyth_–_Zeebrugge_ferry_service
IIRC, Con 38 and Lab 35 still puts Lab on most seats
"In a series of letters to Mr Murdoch, with whom he is on first-name terms, the First Minister asked him to be his special guest at events including the Ryder Cup golf tournament.
The correspondence shows Mr Salmond repeatedly lavishing praise on Mr Murdoch, even referring to him as “Sir Rupert” in one letter despite the tycoon never being knighted by the Queen."
Con 288, Lab 309, LD 25, UKIP 1.
Scotia Independence Royalty, perhaps?
Another Oxford PPE, you couldn't make it up.
Another entry for @JohnRentoul's QTWTAIN list. Note the first comment
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BxAwlm5IAAArVXu.jpg
I was gutted to find out this weekend, Philip Hammond also read PPE.
Malcs brain is as barren as the Nat panda.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/political-news/salmond-cleared-of-influence-on-souter-honour.15963022
"@cailean_mac Why is your daughter's identity conditional on which parliament controls welfare, tax powers etc?"
I've had a hunch for some weeks that many north of the border do indeed see this as a "More powers for the Scottish Parliament, yes or no?" plebiscite, and haven't actually registered that a Yes means cutting the ties, going it alone, being a completely independent sovereign nation just like the Irish Republic as the closest obvious parallel. Not entirely surprising when Salmond himself constantly bleats about "keeping the Pound, keeping the Queen, keeping the BBC, a social union with England, blah blah waffle-pish". This particular tweet seems to reinforce that view.
How many of the supposed 51% Yessies understand what this vote is actually about?
I bet he wasn't even mildly concerned on that policy.
There are good reasons to borrow in foreign currencies, so long as you remember to keep the quantity modest.
I'm going for England to defeat Switzerland this evening by a two goal margin.
Unlikely I know, but decent odds of 9/1 from SkyBet.
DYOR.
*Actually, chatted to a couple of switched-on high school students.
Take the oft repeated claims that Sterling will not be shared, in the sense that it won't have a lender of last resort when used in an independent Scotland. The clever ‘Yessers’ realise that it’s not a bluff, but they have to go along with the pretence that it is, to get their thicker compatriots to vote pro and get separation over the line. The former will worry about the consequences later, when it's too late to change.
http://www.quick-break.net/c/2012/12/06/Jesus_Christ_came_back_and_saw_bunch_of_crosses.jpeg
As I'm sure this will have been examined on these threads ad nauseam can someone answer this smart arse conundrum?
Big Yessies?
I cant conceive of a scenario in which Scotland and England are forced by an outside party to erect border controls. Your friend was over-reaching if he or she was claiming that there would definitely be one.
It's 100% certain that Scotland would be welcomed into the EU, following negotiations.
The same is also true of a Sterling currency union, despite UK scaremongering.
The problem the No camp have is that their claims are farcically unbelievable.
As for a temporary closed border? Patrol boats on the Tweed. I can't see it but who knows? It would not be permanent however
Thanks. He seemed to know what he was talking about (either that or he was a Telegraph reader).
http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2010/09/21/david-miliband-has-won-says-dan-hodges/
"Not so. He knew perfectly well he was importing millions of Labour voters."
Living the dream...
Just looked at the population densities for both countries, 661.9 per sq mile for the UK, for Canada it is 8.3 per sq mile.
Very easy to look overlook that Canada is the world's second largest country
Salmond has turned Sep 18 into a referendum on the LibLabCon but May 7 next year is when that will really occur.
The Channel Islands are not in the EU, but are in the Common Travel area (along with Eire). The longer term issue for Scotland would be negotiating a Shengen opt out. Provided the Scots are sufficiently accommodating I suspect a fudge could be reached. Getting out of VAT on food and the other UK exemptions on the other hand....
Not only he is lying to all the Scots all the time, he is also insulting all of the rest of the people in the UK by pretending that we will have obey his little potempkin fantasies.
At some time, the 'Eck rhetorical balloon will pop.
If it is after they vote yes, then I pity the poor gullible saps who believed him.
They will be building their own shed and they will have to live in it.