@Carnyx - OK, fair enough, but the central point remains: Scotland is not any way disadvantaged by savings made in the rest of the UK on specific departmental spending. Either the money saved is spent on some other budget, or taxes are reduced, or the deficit is reduced. The only thing which actually matters is the overall spending envelope determined by the Chancellor. For that reason, Scottish MPs who vote in Westminster on matters which don't affect Scotland, and justify this democratic disgrace by reference to the Barnett formula, are being intellectually dishonest. They would vote on the Budget only, if they were being honest.
Thanks. That makes sense, though it does obviously assume that the Scots are happy with the Chancellor's verdict on the envelope - and there is also the obvious issue of "some other budget" calculated outwith Barnett but spent in a non-UK way - e.g. HS2 phase 1 or Olympics. May I also ask your views on a related issue? There appears to be a charge on the Scottish budget made to pay off the national deficit. This puzzles me as one would have thought it was UK spending ...
The Scottish referendum is looking increasingly close. Clearly there is work to be done if the best result for all is to be achieved. May I ask, plead, even beg, those posters on here who reside in Scotland to use their time more wisely. Stop posting on here and, instead, use the time to persuade your compatriots to vote YES .
It is not surprising that English posters on here who back a Scottish Yes tend to be Ukipers or crypto Ukipers who basically are happy to see Scotland commit economic hari-kari to further their real interest which is to pull the rest of the UK out of the EU. I think the recent intervention by big business in the Scottish debate is a mere foretaste of what you'd see with an EU in/out referendum. As hopefully we'll see next week enough nervous middle ground voters will take fright and opt for the status quo (albeit with devo plus in Scotland or whatever concessions DC obtains from our EU partners in that debate*).
* if it ever happens
UKIP is in favour of Scotland remaining within the UK.
Indeed so as are a few individual europhobes on PB but I'd say far more have stated they'd be delighted to see the back of Scotland a la Simon Heffer and his ilk. A Yes vote spikes Cameron's referendum and possibly Cameron himself and will increase nationalist sentiment in England making an eventual in/out referendum on their favoured terms more likely. Personally I wish Farage would stay away from Scotland tomorrow as unlike the positive impact of three leaders yesterday he could damage the No vote whatever UKIP's officially stated line is.
Can the Cyberunionists explain why if we are "better together" we play our three most popular team sports, football, rugby and cricket, as separate teams and leagues? And in the case of the first two, we have done so since the mid-19th century?
Geography - was too far to travel to Inverness from Plymouth by stagecoach in 1872.
The Great Western Railway and the Highland Railway, not to mention the Midland, would be very surprised by that statement!
"Rangers manager Ally McCoist displaying his support for the No campaign in the Scottish Referendum with a badge on his training shirt"
This small gesture means a lot in West Scotland where Ally McCoist is a god to a certain group. The Rangers vote is even bigger in Scotland than the Celtic vote and are key voters that the Yes campaign needs. Going against your club is harder than going against your political allegiance.
The Scottish referendum is looking increasingly close. Clearly there is work to be done if the best result for all is to be achieved. May I ask, plead, even beg, those posters on here who reside in Scotland to use their time more wisely. Stop posting on here and, instead, use the time to persuade your compatriots to vote YES .
It is not surprising that English posters on here who back a Scottish Yes tend to be Ukipers or crypto Ukipers who basically are happy to see Scotland commit economic hari-kari to further their real interest which is to pull the rest of the UK out of the EU. I think the recent intervention by big business in the Scottish debate is a mere foretaste of what you'd see with an EU in/out referendum. As hopefully we'll see next week enough nervous middle ground voters will take fright and opt for the status quo (albeit with devo plus in Scotland or whatever concessions DC obtains from our EU partners in that debate*).
* if it ever happens
UKIP is in favour of Scotland remaining within the UK.
Indeed so as are a few individual europhobes on PB but I'd say far more have stated they'd be delighted to see the back of Scotland a la Simon Heffer and his ilk. A Yes vote spikes Cameron's referendum and possibly Cameron himself and will increase nationalist sentiment in England making an eventual in/out referendum on their favoured terms more likely. Personally I wish Farage would stay away from Scotland tomorrow as unlike the positive impact of three leaders yesterday he could damage the No vote whatever UKIP's officially stated line is.
I think that in purely partisan terms, a Yes vote would help UKIP. But, most UKIP supporters want this country to hold together (54/25% in last Sunday's poll).
Can the Cyberunionists explain why if we are "better together" we play our three most popular team sports, football, rugby and cricket, as separate teams and leagues? And in the case of the first two, we have done so since the mid-19th century?
If we are so "United" as a Kingdom, would you argue for a united UK football team and football league?
Can the Cyberunionists explain why if we are "better together" we play our three most popular team sports, football, rugby and cricket, as separate teams and leagues? And in the case of the first two, we have done so since the mid-19th century?
If we are so "United" as a Kingdom, would you argue for a united UK football team and football league?
Manchester, Liverpool, London, Birmingham, are all single cities with more than one football team.
Nottingham, Stoke and Sheffield also have two league clubs apiece.
Why did Salmond declare war on the BBC? And why had he brought along a band of supporters to a press conference to applaud him? The answer lies in one of the SNP’s most successful strategies: its persecution complex.
Anyone have thoughts on the next leader of the SNP market? Not sure if Salmond is on borrowed time, if he goes then all the promissory notes he has issued to the likes of Murdoch and Souter, on behalf of the SNP, can be torn up.
Ladbrokes have Sturgeon at 1/2 but the rest of the list could make some good returns.
I must have missed your appointment as moderator. And I have already denied that I am Dan Hodges or 'Reggie', who he may be. Let that be the end of it.
I must have missed your appointment as moderator. And I have already denied that I am Dan Hodges or 'Reggie', who he may be. Let that be the end of it.
May I also ask your views on a related issue? There appears to be a charge on the Scottish budget made to pay off the national deficit. This puzzles me as one would have thought it was UK spending ...
I'm not sure what you mean by that - which Scottish budget? It would make sense for a proportion of any locally-raised taxes to be allocated to the budget of the UK as a whole.
I cannot see how anyone with an ounce of sense would vote YES. The consequences, which are bad, are so starkly obvious.
Will the turkeys really vote for Xmas?
Ignoring the insulting analogy, the answer is YES. Unlike you genuises down south we have on our rose tinted glasses and so unionist lies, threats , bribes and curses actual come through badly. If only we were half witted Lib Dem and Tory drones we maybe do as we are told, but as that is not the case it is YES.
I must have missed your appointment as moderator. And I have already denied that I am Dan Hodges or 'Reggie', who he may be. Let that be the end of it.
Again, denying things that haven't been said... What about Bobafett? Han Dodges?
And where did I try to moderate your posts? I said it would be nice if you came clean before attacking other posters. You've attacked ScottP three times today; each time I've challenged you; each time you've tried to squirm out of it by denying something different.
If you were honest about it it might earn you a little respect. As it is I'm just waiting for another pseudo-flounce, then a swift reappearance as HabbaTheJut
FPT Are we discovering today that charm, guile, engagement and the gift of the gab can take you an awful awful long way in politics - but that when it counts content and a coherent message may prevail?
Eck looking alot like the emperor with no clothes and whimpering, blustering, deflecting. You'd need a heart of stone not to laugh.
(People give a very serious shit about being bankrupted and laughing this stuff off is trite beyond belief. They are potentially days away from committing to becoming country with no money. WTF!).
What a wobbling chicken hearted wimp you are Patrick. No wonder England is down the cludgie and the butt of the world's jokes.
I must have missed your appointment as moderator. And I have already denied that I am Dan Hodges or 'Reggie', who he may be. Let that be the end of it.
But are you the artist formerly known as @Bobafett ?
Don't wish to unnerve any unionists but the £ is slipping back this afternoon, quite steeply. Last time the movement on the markets - the £ going up - anticipated the Survation poll which came later.
Probably just coincidence, and nerves.....
This is an ongoing nightmare promulgated by self serving Nats - the next seven days will be the longest in this country's history.
Don't wish to unnerve any unionists but the £ is slipping back this afternoon, quite steeply. Last time the movement on the markets - the £ going up - anticipated the Survation poll which came later.
Probably just coincidence, and nerves.....
This is an ongoing nightmare promulgated by self serving Nats - the next seven days will be the longest in this country's history.
Well, excluding the Blitz, D Day, Battle of Britain etc
Would you be able to give a running tally of the number of dead and injured during this grave crisis?
Don't wish to unnerve any unionists but the £ is slipping back this afternoon, quite steeply. Last time the movement on the markets - the £ going up - anticipated the Survation poll which came later.
Probably just coincidence, and nerves.....
When one considers he last YouGov Poll especially; I'm not surprised if this is due to nerves.
That said, I've learnt this Referendum to not assume anything.
Though all this poll releasing has frayed my nerves something rotten!
Don't wish to unnerve any unionists but the £ is slipping back this afternoon, quite steeply. Last time the movement on the markets - the £ going up - anticipated the Survation poll which came later.
Probably just coincidence, and nerves.....
This is an ongoing nightmare promulgated by self serving Nats - the next seven days will be the longest in this country's history.
Well, excluding the Blitz, D Day, Battle of Britain etc
"There appears to be a charge on the Scottish budget made to pay off the national deficit."
Did it really say that? Pay off the deficit?
Debt interest, not (alas) deficit (my mistake: I should have said service, not pay off). The GERS has an element called Public Sector Debt Interest. And in so rechecking, I've found an explanation - it's based on UK wide calculation of the national (UK) deficit irrespective of tax take. So, Mr Nabavi, please ignore.
Don't wish to unnerve any unionists but the £ is slipping back this afternoon, quite steeply. Last time the movement on the markets - the £ going up - anticipated the Survation poll which came later.
Probably just coincidence, and nerves.....
When one considers he last YouGov Poll especially; I'm not surprised if this is due to nerves.
That said, I've learnt this Referendum to not assume anything.
Though all this poll releasing has frayed my nerves something rotten!
Can the Cyberunionists explain why if we are "better together" we play our three most popular team sports, football, rugby and cricket, as separate teams and leagues? And in the case of the first two, we have done so since the mid-19th century?
If we are so "United" as a Kingdom, would you argue for a united UK football team and football league?
Can the Cyberunionists explain why if we are "better together" we play our three most popular team sports, football, rugby and cricket, as separate teams and leagues? And in the case of the first two, we have done so since the mid-19th century?
If we are so "United" as a Kingdom, would you argue for a united UK football team and football league?
Manchester, Liverpool, London, Birmingham, are all single cities with more than one football team.
Nottingham, Stoke and Sheffield also have two league clubs apiece.
Pah, that's nothing.
The London Borough of Leyton has two - Orient and West Ham.
Don't wish to unnerve any unionists but the £ is slipping back this afternoon, quite steeply. Last time the movement on the markets - the £ going up - anticipated the Survation poll which came later.
Probably just coincidence, and nerves.....
This is an ongoing nightmare promulgated by self serving Nats - the next seven days will be the longest in this country's history.
Well, excluding the Blitz, D Day, Battle of Britain etc
Would you be able to give a running tally of the number of dead and injured during this grave crisis?
Just imagine if the internet, facebook and twitter existed during the WW2.
May I also ask your views on a related issue? There appears to be a charge on the Scottish budget made to pay off the national deficit. This puzzles me as one would have thought it was UK spending ...
I'm not sure what you mean by that - which Scottish budget? It would make sense for a proportion of any locally-raised taxes to be allocated to the budget of the UK as a whole.
Don't wish to unnerve any unionists but the £ is slipping back this afternoon, quite steeply. Last time the movement on the markets - the £ going up - anticipated the Survation poll which came later.
Probably just coincidence, and nerves.....
This is an ongoing nightmare promulgated by self serving Nats - the next seven days will be the longest in this country's history.
Well, excluding the Blitz, D Day, Battle of Britain etc
lol ok peacetime history
Stand by for an over dramatised article from SeanT entitled simply 'This one peaceful nation, is now at WAR'.
Likening the Cuban Missile Crisis to Bonfire Night, relative to Mankinds current, epic struggle of Unionist Good versus McEvil.
"There appears to be a charge on the Scottish budget made to pay off the national deficit."
Did it really say that? Pay off the deficit?
Debt interest, not (alas) deficit (my mistake: I should have said service, not pay off). The GERS has an element called Public Sector Debt Interest. And in so rechecking, I've found an explanation - it's based on UK wide calculation of the national (UK) deficit irrespective of tax take. So, Mr Nabavi, please ignore.
Phew! I thought we must have really screwed you through Barnett if there was a deduction for paying down the deficit
This is from the comments section of the Scotsman this morning. Obviously I don't know anything further about it, except to say the commentator "revisionism rules" is normally a very restrained and not at all partisan. We will see more of this, sadly. Other commentators were saying the same thing was happening in their firms:
Well, after a difficult board meeting yesterday today I start the sad task of relocating the business from Scotland to England formally.
The investors, primarily English based, have decided that no matter what the vote next week, continuing to trade as a Scottish business with primarily English customers is a risk too far for them. Even if the vote is NO they believe that too much damage has been done to the 'Scottish Brand' in the eyes of rUK/England. One of them even phoned me this morning to rant about Salmond comparing apartheid South Africa with the situation in Scotland. He, like many in England was deeply offended.
This, of course is his personal opinion, however the decision to relocate the business is purely a business decision and there was nothing I could say to avoid it being made. I was surprised as I had at least thought that they would wait until the result is known but the jitters in the financial markets and the increasingly hostile attitude of the mostly English customer base is a step too far. The final straw, apparently was the decision of a major Kent based customer to move their business to a firm based in England.
So, we will start to dismantle the business in Scotland, I have 20 jobs. Incumbents will be offered relocation or redundancy. The business will move its headquarters to our site in Northumberland. I have not decided whether or not to move as well. I am torn between my country and the business I put the last ten years of my life into.
I hope this scenario doesn't repeat itself with other businesses in Scotland. It also shows how, in a modern integrated country, our futures depend on the interest of 3rd parties who are, to a degree, beyond our control. They are only interested in their return on investment and will take action when they see a threat to this. Sadly, in our case they believe that the association with Scotland puts us at a commercial disadvantage with 80% of our customer base.
Don't wish to unnerve any unionists but the £ is slipping back this afternoon, quite steeply. Last time the movement on the markets - the £ going up - anticipated the Survation poll which came later.
Probably just coincidence, and nerves.....
When one considers he last YouGov Poll especially; I'm not surprised if this is due to nerves.
That said, I've learnt this Referendum to not assume anything.
Though all this poll releasing has frayed my nerves something rotten!
It's the tweets that fray mine.
Aye. Come to think of it, the tweets have also drained the colour on more than one occasion. Rumours fray!!
"There appears to be a charge on the Scottish budget made to pay off the national deficit."
Did it really say that? Pay off the deficit?
Debt interest, not (alas) deficit (my mistake: I should have said service, not pay off). The GERS has an element called Public Sector Debt Interest. And in so rechecking, I've found an explanation - it's based on UK wide calculation of the national (UK) deficit irrespective of tax take. So, Mr Nabavi, please ignore.
Phew! I thought we must have really screwed you through Barnett if there was a deduction for paying down the deficit
I suppose that it has had much the same effect in the long run, given the geographical distribution of tax revenues and the GERS balance. Though (as Prof Midwinter pointed out) pooling tax revenue and allocating spending are very much the UK model. But we have more immediate issues to worry about!
Betfair's current price on an outright YES win is 4.7, equivalent to the pro-independents having a 21.3% chance of winning the referendum. Set against this Betfair currently shows the 45.0% - 50% of the vote as being the favourite band for the YES vote, equivalent to it having a 39.3% probability. By contrast the price 40.0% - 45.0% band is 3.85, equivalent to it having only a 26.0% probability. These odds look strange to me and given the seemingly modest percentage chance of a YES win, of whatever proportions, I feel the odds for these two 5% bands should probably be reversed or thereabouts. Am I missing something?
"Rangers manager Ally McCoist displaying his support for the No campaign in the Scottish Referendum with a badge on his training shirt"
This small gesture means a lot in West Scotland where Ally McCoist is a god to a certain group. The Rangers vote is even bigger in Scotland than the Celtic vote and are key voters that the Yes campaign needs. Going against your club is harder than going against your political allegiance.
Yes they will all be polishing their flutes , ironing their sashes and getting ready to bigot. What will you do when they are bankrupt again in a few months. Be lucky to get into 3rd division this time.
Can the Cyberunionists explain why if we are "better together" we play our three most popular team sports, football, rugby and cricket, as separate teams and leagues? And in the case of the first two, we have done so since the mid-19th century?
If we are so "United" as a Kingdom, would you argue for a united UK football team and football league?
You are drifitng off into irellevances and absurdities. First - take Rugby Union. It is played as All Ireland not simply Eire. Secondly - sport is not politics or economics. Witness the Irish RU Team. Have you never heard of the British Isles RU team? Thirdly Cricket - 'England' (formerly known as the MCC) is in effect all the UK, it has been captained by Scots and Welsh. Fourthly - History. Leaving aside sport, Scotland has always had a seperate legal system, so a seperate FA is hardly unusual. The Home FAs coincided with codifying the sport and setting up the international game. And there is no English FA - it is 'The' FA - another accident of history.
Soctland is an entity. There is nothing illogical in suggesting that it and the rest are better together. The entity that is Scotland can be itself in many many ways, just as much as say England can and both can be better together in other ways in a united kingdom.
Betfair's current price on an outright YES win is 4.7, equivalent to the pro-independents having a 21.3% chance of winning the referendum. Set against this Betfair currently shows the 45.0% - 50% of the vote as being the favourite band for the YES vote, equivalent to it having a 39.3% probability. By contrast the price 40.0% - 45.0% band is 3.85, equivalent to it having only a 26.0% probability. These odds look strange to me and given the seemingly modest percentage chance of a YES win, of whatever proportions, I feel the odds for these two 5% bands should probably be reversed or thereabouts. Am I missing something?
The polling numbers ^
However, I do agree the 45-50% band is probably a lay at odds under 2.5, given the polling uncertainty.
"There appears to be a charge on the Scottish budget made to pay off the national deficit."
Did it really say that? Pay off the deficit?
Debt interest, not (alas) deficit (my mistake: I should have said service, not pay off). The GERS has an element called Public Sector Debt Interest. And in so rechecking, I've found an explanation - it's based on UK wide calculation of the national (UK) deficit irrespective of tax take. So, Mr Nabavi, please ignore.
Its the UK wonga system , where they bleed us dry, piling interest on interest
Don't wish to unnerve any unionists but the £ is slipping back this afternoon, quite steeply. Last time the movement on the markets - the £ going up - anticipated the Survation poll which came later.
Probably just coincidence, and nerves.....
I noticed this but it may be simply the normal daily fluctuations after rising earlier - a pattern I've often seen both ways. On the other hand ...someone might know something...
Peter - not so. Leyton is LB Waltham Forest, West Ham is in LB Newham. There is no such borough as Leyton.
However, LB Kensington & Chelsea does have three clubs!
I was looking ahead to the day when West Ham occupies the Olympic Stadium, Bob.
But I was still stretching a point. To be honest, I'm not sure which district the Stadium lies in. It is only a fifteen minute walk from Orient's ground in Leyton but lies at the junction of Stratford, Hackney and Leyton (which itself is of course more properly described as being part of the London Borough of Waltham Forest.)
In case you hadn't realised, my post was a thinly disguised potshot at the FA, which has rules about Clubs not encroaching on each others territories, rules which were comprehensively ignored when West Ham decided to change grounds.
Yes a sad and inevitable result. Whetever the vote now is Salmond has for sure left behind a bitterly divided Scotland and a nervous perhaps resentful UK. Scotland will suffer. Calamitously if a YES, still painfully if a NO.
His head will be on the spike of history soon enough.
"Rangers manager Ally McCoist displaying his support for the No campaign in the Scottish Referendum with a badge on his training shirt"
This small gesture means a lot in West Scotland where Ally McCoist is a god to a certain group. The Rangers vote is even bigger in Scotland than the Celtic vote and are key voters that the Yes campaign needs. Going against your club is harder than going against your political allegiance.
Yes they will all be polishing their flutes , ironing their sashes .
Stereotyping much malc ? No place for that in the free and progressive Scotland..
Betfair's current price on an outright YES win is 4.7, equivalent to the pro-independents having a 21.3% chance of winning the referendum. Set against this Betfair currently shows the 45.0% - 50% of the vote as being the favourite band for the YES vote, equivalent to it having a 39.3% probability. By contrast the price 40.0% - 45.0% band is 3.85, equivalent to it having only a 26.0% probability. These odds look strange to me and given the seemingly modest percentage chance of a YES win, of whatever proportions, I feel the odds for these two 5% bands should probably be reversed or thereabouts. Am I missing something?
The polling numbers ^
However, I do agree the 45-50% band is probably a lay at odds under 2.5, given the polling uncertainty.
This is from the comments section of the Scotsman this morning. Obviously I don't know anything further about it, except to say the commentator "revisionism rules" is normally a very restrained and not at all partisan. We will see more of this, sadly. Other commentators were saying the same thing was happening in their firms:
Well, after a difficult board meeting yesterday today I start the sad task of relocating the business from Scotland to England formally.
The investors, primarily English based, have decided that no matter what the vote next week, continuing to trade as a Scottish business with primarily English customers is a risk too far for them. Even if the vote is NO they believe that too much damage has been done to the 'Scottish Brand' in the eyes of rUK/England. One of them even phoned me this morning to rant about Salmond comparing apartheid South Africa with the situation in Scotland. He, like many in England was deeply offended.
This, of course is his personal opinion, however the decision to relocate the business is purely a business decision and there was nothing I could say to avoid it being made. I was surprised as I had at least thought that they would wait until the result is known but the jitters in the financial markets and the increasingly hostile attitude of the mostly English customer base is a step too far. The final straw, apparently was the decision of a major Kent based customer to move their business to a firm based in England.
So, we will start to dismantle the business in Scotland, I have 20 jobs. Incumbents will be offered relocation or redundancy. The business will move its headquarters to our site in Northumberland. I have not decided whether or not to move as well. I am torn between my country and the business I put the last ten years of my life into.
I hope this scenario doesn't repeat itself with other businesses in Scotland. It also shows how, in a modern integrated country, our futures depend on the interest of 3rd parties who are, to a degree, beyond our control. They are only interested in their return on investment and will take action when they see a threat to this. Sadly, in our case they believe that the association with Scotland puts us at a commercial disadvantage with 80% of our customer base.
Thanks Alex.
Any halfwit stupid enough to even read the Scotsman never mind the comments would know that is a pile of horse manure. Unless it is the halfwit Hamiltonace.
This is from the comments section of the Scotsman this morning. Obviously I don't know anything further about it, except to say the commentator "revisionism rules" is normally a very restrained and not at all partisan. We will see more of this, sadly. Other commentators were saying the same thing was happening in their firms:
Well, after a difficult board meeting yesterday today I start the sad task of relocating the business from Scotland to England formally.
The investors, primarily English based, have decided that no matter what the vote next week, continuing to trade as a Scottish business with primarily English customers is a risk too far for them. Even if the vote is NO they believe that too much damage has been done to the 'Scottish Brand' in the eyes of rUK/England. One of them even phoned me this morning to rant about Salmond comparing apartheid South Africa with the situation in Scotland. He, like many in England was deeply offended.
This, of course is his personal opinion, however the decision to relocate the business is purely a business decision and there was nothing I could say to avoid it being made. I was surprised as I had at least thought that they would wait until the result is known but the jitters in the financial markets and the increasingly hostile attitude of the mostly English customer base is a step too far. The final straw, apparently was the decision of a major Kent based customer to move their business to a firm based in England.
So, we will start to dismantle the business in Scotland, I have 20 jobs. Incumbents will be offered relocation or redundancy. The business will move its headquarters to our site in Northumberland. I have not decided whether or not to move as well. I am torn between my country and the business I put the last ten years of my life into.
I hope this scenario doesn't repeat itself with other businesses in Scotland. It also shows how, in a modern integrated country, our futures depend on the interest of 3rd parties who are, to a degree, beyond our control. They are only interested in their return on investment and will take action when they see a threat to this. Sadly, in our case they believe that the association with Scotland puts us at a commercial disadvantage with 80% of our customer base.
Thanks Alex.
Dreadful news, but not wholly unexpected. Firing a constant barrage of 'Lying Turnips' or equivalent towards Scotland's main marketplace south of the border was never going to win over much custom.
"There appears to be a charge on the Scottish budget made to pay off the national deficit."
Did it really say that? Pay off the deficit?
Debt interest, not (alas) deficit (my mistake: I should have said service, not pay off). The GERS has an element called Public Sector Debt Interest. And in so rechecking, I've found an explanation - it's based on UK wide calculation of the national (UK) deficit irrespective of tax take. So, Mr Nabavi, please ignore.
Its the UK's Gordon Brown's (hopefully not for much longer, go YES!!!!!) wonga system , where they bleed us dry, piling interest on interest
Don't wish to unnerve any unionists but the £ is slipping back this afternoon, quite steeply. Last time the movement on the markets - the £ going up - anticipated the Survation poll which came later.
Probably just coincidence, and nerves.....
I noticed this but it may be simply the normal daily fluctuations after rising earlier - a pattern I've often seen both ways. On the other hand ...someone might know something...
I thought the chickens on here said it was all to do with the referendum. They seemed to believe it was the first time the pound had actually moved and now you say it happens every day. Next you will be telling me that share prices go up and down regularly
"Rangers manager Ally McCoist displaying his support for the No campaign in the Scottish Referendum with a badge on his training shirt"
This small gesture means a lot in West Scotland where Ally McCoist is a god to a certain group. The Rangers vote is even bigger in Scotland than the Celtic vote and are key voters that the Yes campaign needs. Going against your club is harder than going against your political allegiance.
Yes they will all be polishing their flutes , ironing their sashes .
Stereotyping much malc ? No place for that in the free and progressive Scotland..
He is forever posting about it, and his undying love for Rangers and the union jack. If it looks like a citrus fruit and talks like a citrus fruit then you might as well call it a citrus fruit
I note Charles Kennedy is on This Week tonight. I have to say that even though he's my former party leader I have been a bit disappointed he hasn't taken a higher profile in the No campaign as he's undoubtedly still a politician people do sit up and take notice of.
Betfair's current price on an outright YES win is 4.7, equivalent to the pro-independents having a 21.3% chance of winning the referendum. Set against this Betfair currently shows the 45.0% - 50% of the vote as being the favourite band for the YES vote, equivalent to it having a 39.3% probability. By contrast the price 40.0% - 45.0% band is 3.85, equivalent to it having only a 26.0% probability. These odds look strange to me and given the seemingly modest percentage chance of a YES win, of whatever proportions, I feel the odds for these two 5% bands should probably be reversed or thereabouts. Am I missing something?
Dunno if it's different today but those bands were very illiquid yesterday, so I didn't read too much into them.
I'm not confident as rating NO as a 78% chance to win either. Feels more like 65% at this stage.
I note Charles Kennedy is on This Week tonight. I have to say that even though he's my former party leader I have been a bit disappointed he hasn't taken a higher profile in the No campaign as he's undoubtedly still a politician people do sit up and take notice of.
The problem with all this is, most people (not just in Scotland) see these "credible" institutions like the IMF and IFS, as well as big businesses, as part of the Establishment along with Westminster politicians.
I did not think of it as an insulting analogy, but if you do, then you might wish to reflect on the fact that you hand out a lot of insults. It would seem that you can give it out but not take it.
Unlike you genuises down south we have on our rose tinted glasses
Indeed you do - that is why it is so easy for you to believe the fairy tales and moonbeams that are spun as fact by the YES campaign. Those of us WITHOUT rose-tinted glasses can see through the fantasies of the YES campaign.
This is from the comments section of the Scotsman this morning. Obviously I don't know anything further about it, except to say the commentator "revisionism rules" is normally a very restrained and not at all partisan. We will see more of this, sadly. Other commentators were saying the same thing was happening in their firms:
Well, after a difficult board meeting yesterday today I start the sad task of relocating the business from Scotland to England formally.
The investors, primarily English based, have decided that no matter what the vote next week, continuing to trade as a Scottish business with primarily English customers is a risk too far for them. Even if the vote is NO they believe that too much damage has been done to the 'Scottish Brand' in the eyes of rUK/England. One of them even phoned me this morning to rant about Salmond comparing apartheid South Africa with the situation in Scotland. He, like many in England was deeply offended.
This, of course is his personal opinion, however the decision to relocate the business is purely a business decision and there was nothing I could say to avoid it being made. I was surprised as I had at least thought that they would wait until the result is known but the jitters in the financial markets and the increasingly hostile attitude of the mostly English customer base is a step too far. The final straw, apparently was the decision of a major Kent based customer to move their business to a firm based in England.
So, we will start to dismantle the business in Scotland, I have 20 jobs. Incumbents will be offered relocation or redundancy. The business will move its headquarters to our site in Northumberland. I have not decided whether or not to move as well. I am torn between my country and the business I put the last ten years of my life into.
I hope this scenario doesn't repeat itself with other businesses in Scotland. It also shows how, in a modern integrated country, our futures depend on the interest of 3rd parties who are, to a degree, beyond our control. They are only interested in their return on investment and will take action when they see a threat to this. Sadly, in our case they believe that the association with Scotland puts us at a commercial disadvantage with 80% of our customer base.
Thanks Alex.
Dreadful news, but not wholly unexpected. Firing a constant barrage of 'Lying Turnips' or equivalent towards Scotland's main marketplace south of the border was never going to win over much custom.
I hardly think that the average southerner had heard of Malc (edit: much as we know and love him). And this coincides with the No campaign blitz over the last few days, in the Yougov panic. Conclusions?
So 97% of all those who qualify to vote in the Scots referendum have registered to vote.
Is it just me or does that seem an eye-wateringly improbable figure?
Also, 20% of them have postal votes.
Anyone else find these numbers indicative of something whiffy?
That seems improbably high. There will be some (in any population) who are seriously ill, mentally or physically incapacitated, incorrectly named/registered, moving house/flat, travelling or incapable or understanding how/where to register, plus those who genuinely and utterly can't be arsed about anything.
I'd have thought all of that would add up to at least 10% of the population.
This is from the comments section of the Scotsman this morning. Obviously I don't know anything further about it, except to say the commentator "revisionism rules" is normally a very restrained and not at all partisan. We will see more of this, sadly. Other commentators were saying the same thing was happening in their firms:
Well, after a difficult board meeting yesterday today I start the sad task of relocating the business from Scotland to England formally.
The investors, primarily English based, have decided that no matter what the vote next week, continuing to trade as a Scottish business with primarily English customers is a risk too far for them. Even if the vote is NO they believe that too much damage has been done to the 'Scottish Brand' in the eyes of rUK/England. One of them even phoned me this morning to rant about Salmond comparing apartheid South Africa with the situation in Scotland. He, like many in England was deeply offended.
This, of course is his personal opinion, however the decision to relocate the business is purely a business decision and there was nothing I could say to avoid it being made. I was surprised as I had at least thought that they would wait until the result is known but the jitters in the financial markets and the increasingly hostile attitude of the mostly English customer base is a step too far. The final straw, apparently was the decision of a major Kent based customer to move their business to a firm based in England.
So, we will start to dismantle the business in Scotland, I have 20 jobs. Incumbents will be offered relocation or redundancy. The business will move its headquarters to our site in Northumberland. I have not decided whether or not to move as well. I am torn between my country and the business I put the last ten years of my life into.
I hope this scenario doesn't repeat itself with other businesses in Scotland. It also shows how, in a modern integrated country, our futures depend on the interest of 3rd parties who are, to a degree, beyond our control. They are only interested in their return on investment and will take action when they see a threat to this. Sadly, in our case they believe that the association with Scotland puts us at a commercial disadvantage with 80% of our customer base.
Thanks Alex.
Any halfwit stupid enough to even read the Scotsman never mind the comments would know that is a pile of horse manure. Unless it is the halfwit Hamiltonace.
If the figures move sharply to No, is there any chance of a yes boycott?
I mean they kindof have a decent justification, given the crazy last minute devomax semi-proposal violating the spirit, if not the terms of the Edinburgh agreement. Especially if BT start backtracking on their back-of-a-fag-packet pledges if No looks inevitable.
I have no real dog in this fight - I'm just looking at things that could impact on the betting - What are the chances of a boycott? 5%? 1%? 0.1%?
Can the Cyberunionists explain why if we are "better together" we play our three most popular team sports, football, rugby and cricket, as separate teams and leagues? And in the case of the first two, we have done so since the mid-19th century?
If we are so "United" as a Kingdom, would you argue for a united UK football team and football league?
Would you please stop flogging this dead horse. It's tedious and frankly stupid, not some killer point as you seem to think.
Can the Cyberunionists explain why if we are "better together" we play our three most popular team sports, football, rugby and cricket, as separate teams and leagues? And in the case of the first two, we have done so since the mid-19th century?
If we are so "United" as a Kingdom, would you argue for a united UK football team and football league?
Would you please stop flogging this dead horse. It's tedious and frankly stupid, not some killer point as you seem to think.
In fact, Ireland is united as it's cricket and rugby team is selected from the whole island.
So 97% of all those who qualify to vote in the Scots referendum have registered to vote.
Is it just me or does that seem an eye-wateringly improbable figure?
Also, 20% of them have postal votes.
Anyone else find these numbers indicative of something whiffy?
That seems improbably high. There will be some (in any population) who are seriously ill, mentally or physically incapacitated, incorrectly named/registered, moving house/flat, travelling or incapable or understanding how/where to register, plus those who genuinely and utterly can't be arsed about anything.
I'd have thought all of that would add up to at least 10% of the population.
A lot of those don't preclude being pukka registrands, of course. And there have been heavy registration campaigns by Yes and, I assume, No (though I read of one place where the Yes people had to help out the No voters as there was no No present to help). Even so ... I'd be interested to see the reactions of people more involved in the front line than I can be.
Well, after a difficult board meeting yesterday today I start the sad task of relocating the business from Scotland to England formally.
The investors, primarily English based, have decided that no matter what the vote next week, continuing to trade as a Scottish business with primarily English customers is a risk too far for them. Even if the vote is NO they believe that too much damage has been done to the 'Scottish Brand' in the eyes of rUK/England. One of them even phoned me this morning to rant about Salmond comparing apartheid South Africa with the situation in Scotland. He, like many in England was deeply offended.
This, of course is his personal opinion, however the decision to relocate the business is purely a business decision and there was nothing I could say to avoid it being made. I was surprised as I had at least thought that they would wait until the result is known but the jitters in the financial markets and the increasingly hostile attitude of the mostly English customer base is a step too far. The final straw, apparently was the decision of a major Kent based customer to move their business to a firm based in England.
So, we will start to dismantle the business in Scotland, I have 20 jobs. Incumbents will be offered relocation or redundancy. The business will move its headquarters to our site in Northumberland. I have not decided whether or not to move as well. I am torn between my country and the business I put the last ten years of my life into.
I hope this scenario doesn't repeat itself with other businesses in Scotland. It also shows how, in a modern integrated country, our futures depend on the interest of 3rd parties who are, to a degree, beyond our control. They are only interested in their return on investment and will take action when they see a threat to this. Sadly, in our case they believe that the association with Scotland puts us at a commercial disadvantage with 80% of our customer base.
Thanks Alex.
Dreadful news, but not wholly unexpected. Firing a constant barrage of 'Lying Turnips' or equivalent towards Scotland's main marketplace south of the border was never going to win over much custom.
I hardly think that the average southerner had heard of Malc (edit: much as we know and love him). And this coincides with the No campaign blitz over the last few days, in the Yougov panic. Conclusions?
Conclusion?
Salmonds point blank refusal or inability to flesh out his fantastical claims for Scotland's financial and economic future has bitten both him, and the nation squarely on the arse, like a rusting man trap on a billionaire's Highland estate.
So 97% of all those who qualify to vote in the Scots referendum have registered to vote.
Is it just me or does that seem an eye-wateringly improbable figure?
...
I'd have thought all of that would add up to at least 10% of the population.
Just wait until the turnout figure is published..... 123% ;-)
That's a point. Who is actually supervising and monitoring this election? What checks are in place to prevent voter intimidation and or ballot box skulduggery?
Votes don't get much more emotive than this and virtually nobody is 'neutral'.
Totally O/T to Scotland - but hearing on Twitter that there is an almighty row brewing over the date of the Heywood by-election between Labour and Rochdale Returning Officer. Interestingly, I believe that if Rochdale ESU have not published the Notice of Election by the end of the day today, then it CANNOT be on the 9th, as the calculated dates work off x days from Notice of Election published etc. Highlights the issue of it being such a tight timetable to work to
Salmonds point blank refusal or inability to flesh out his fantastical claims for Scotland's financial and economic future has bitten both him, and the nation squarely on the arse, like a rusting man trap on a billionaire's Highland estate.
I was thinking more of the news reports on the banks - much of which has been quietly retracted today, e.g. in emails to staff, and countered by the likes of Sir Angus Grossart and the head of Aberdeen Asset Mgmt.
Scotland was flat broke in 1707. And then thrived hugely after Union as the union with England gave them access to not only the English market but the whole empire and opportunities to work and progress throughout. The size and wealth of Scotland's cities exploded. Glasgow in the early c18th was a dirty village - by the c19th an industrial powerhouse. The 8% got the freedom to participate fully in the 100%. And so it is today.
But take away the other 92%, put them behind an international barrier with a 'fcuk you' message - well what will happen?
It is the blithe assumption of the Malcs of the world that things will carry on much as before that sticks in the craw. NOTHING will will carry on as before. Banking jobs and taxes, defence jobs, public sector jobs servicing the whole UK, asset mangement jobs and taxes, pan-UK pricing structures, companies whose customer base is mainly outside Scotland, etc, etc, etc ad nauseam - will go. Some overnight, some over years. iScot would implode economically. And un-rescuably. Add to that the cultural and institutional loss - BBC, mail service, generally positive attitudes from the 92%, passports, met office, DVLC, etc, etc ad naueam. As the Blunt song goes 'you only miss the sunshine when it snows'. And it's going to snow on Scotland. 'I'll give you a winter prediction: It's gonna be cold, it's gonna be grey, and it's gonna last you for the rest of your life'.
And all that grief for what? Really for what? Scotland already governs itself for all the things people really care about most (devolved stuff) and they get a hugely preferential share of it (11-15% more per head). So..all the shit because they don't like the UK's defence policy? or the foreign policy? Cameron's face? Ed's teeth? Ozzy's accent?
History will judge this as an example of crowd behaviour, a collective wobbly moment. Induced on the gullible by those not quite right in the head.
Betfair's current price on an outright YES win is 4.7, equivalent to the pro-independents having a 21.3% chance of winning the referendum. Set against this Betfair currently shows the 45.0% - 50% of the vote as being the favourite band for the YES vote, equivalent to it having a 39.3% probability. By contrast the price 40.0% - 45.0% band is 3.85, equivalent to it having only a 26.0% probability. These odds look strange to me and given the seemingly modest percentage chance of a YES win, of whatever proportions, I feel the odds for these two 5% bands should probably be reversed or thereabouts. Am I missing something?
Dunno if it's different today but those bands were very illiquid yesterday, so I didn't read too much into them.
I'm not confident as rating NO as a 78% chance to win either. Feels more like 65% at this stage.
Very illiquid indeed
I had great fun yesterday evening arbing the two betfair markets against each other. I made about £60 all in, so although not hugely lucrative it was still worthwhile. Hopefully having a betfair market out there will encourage more bookies to offer vote% band bets in the next few days - and we'll get more BF liquidity.
"Scot goes Pop has similar thoughts about the Survation poll as I do"
Just read James's blog and its very good. A great shame that he was lost to this site and i'd suggest if at all possible he's encouraged to come back at least for the next week and then when it's over perhaps a guest article?
The judge in the Oscar Pistorius trial has cleared him of murder, but has left it to Friday to announce whether the athlete is guilty of culpable homicide.
OK! But why has Judge Thokozile Masipa delayed her verdict until tomorrow? Is she grandstanding, trying to boost her profile while making even more of a name for herself? The whole thing smells to me.
This is from the comments section of the Scotsman this morning. Obviously I don't know anything further about it, except to say the commentator "revisionism rules" is normally a very restrained and not at all partisan. We will see more of this, sadly. Other commentators were saying the same thing was happening in their firms:
Well, after a difficult board meeting yesterday today I start the sad task of relocating the business from Scotland to England formally.
The investors, primarily English based, have decided that no matter what the vote next week, continuing to trade as a Scottish business with primarily English customers is a risk too far for them. Even if the vote is NO they believe that too much damage has been done to the 'Scottish Brand' in the eyes of rUK/England. One of them even phoned me this morning to rant about Salmond comparing apartheid South Africa with the situation in Scotland. He, like many in England was deeply offended.
Thanks Alex.
Any halfwit stupid enough to even read the Scotsman never mind the comments would know that is a pile of horse manure. Unless it is the halfwit Hamiltonace.
Given I have already voted YES that will be difficult
Comments
This small gesture means a lot in West Scotland where Ally McCoist is a god to a certain group. The Rangers vote is even bigger in Scotland than the Celtic vote and are key voters that the Yes campaign needs. Going against your club is harder than going against your political allegiance.
What a fine pair they'd make as an electoral choice. I'd now encourage a Yes vote to get rid of Gordon forever.
"There appears to be a charge on the Scottish budget made to pay off the national deficit."
Did it really say that? Pay off the deficit?
I must have missed your appointment as moderator. And I have already denied that I am Dan Hodges or 'Reggie', who he may be. Let that be the end of it.
There are also two Bristols...Oooh-err...
And where did I try to moderate your posts? I said it would be nice if you came clean before attacking other posters. You've attacked ScottP three times today; each time I've challenged you; each time you've tried to squirm out of it by denying something different.
If you were honest about it it might earn you a little respect. As it is I'm just waiting for another pseudo-flounce, then a swift reappearance as HabbaTheJut
Would you be able to give a running tally of the number of dead and injured during this grave crisis?
That said, I've learnt this Referendum to not assume anything.
Though all this poll releasing has frayed my nerves something rotten!
The London Borough of Leyton has two - Orient and West Ham.
If the pound got tonked after a yes, its a huge buy. RUK would be more conservative, rich, business orientated and fiscally sound.
A sort of mega Switzerland.
Likening the Cuban Missile Crisis to Bonfire Night, relative to Mankinds current, epic struggle of Unionist Good versus McEvil.
@LadPolitics: Ladbrokes quote 500/1 that Kim Jong-un visits Scotland before #indyref vote
Just wondering how many members the Guardian will have to sign up to pay for it...
However, LB Kensington & Chelsea does have three clubs!
Set against this Betfair currently shows the 45.0% - 50% of the vote as being the favourite band for the YES vote, equivalent to it having a 39.3% probability. By contrast the price 40.0% - 45.0% band is 3.85, equivalent to it having only a 26.0% probability.
These odds look strange to me and given the seemingly modest percentage chance of a YES win, of whatever proportions, I feel the odds for these two 5% bands should probably be reversed or thereabouts.
Am I missing something?
Sadly Bristol Rovers lost their league status last season. A sad day.
First - take Rugby Union. It is played as All Ireland not simply Eire.
Secondly - sport is not politics or economics. Witness the Irish RU Team. Have you never heard of the British Isles RU team?
Thirdly Cricket - 'England' (formerly known as the MCC) is in effect all the UK, it has been captained by Scots and Welsh.
Fourthly - History. Leaving aside sport, Scotland has always had a seperate legal system, so a seperate FA is hardly unusual. The Home FAs coincided with codifying the sport and setting up the international game. And there is no English FA - it is 'The' FA - another accident of history.
Soctland is an entity. There is nothing illogical in suggesting that it and the rest are better together. The entity that is Scotland can be itself in many many ways, just as much as say England can and both can be better together in other ways in a united kingdom.
However, I do agree the 45-50% band is probably a lay at odds under 2.5, given the polling uncertainty.
I was looking ahead to the day when West Ham occupies the Olympic Stadium, Bob.
But I was still stretching a point. To be honest, I'm not sure which district the Stadium lies in. It is only a fifteen minute walk from Orient's ground in Leyton but lies at the junction of Stratford, Hackney and Leyton (which itself is of course more properly described as being part of the London Borough of Waltham Forest.)
In case you hadn't realised, my post was a thinly disguised potshot at the FA, which has rules about Clubs not encroaching on each others territories, rules which were comprehensively ignored when West Ham decided to change grounds.
Yes a sad and inevitable result. Whetever the vote now is Salmond has for sure left behind a bitterly divided Scotland and a nervous perhaps resentful UK. Scotland will suffer. Calamitously if a YES, still painfully if a NO.
His head will be on the spike of history soon enough.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29160535
Any halfwit stupid enough to even read the Scotsman never mind the comments would know that is a pile of horse manure. Unless it is the halfwit Hamiltonace.
Dreadful news, but not wholly unexpected. Firing a constant barrage of 'Lying Turnips' or equivalent towards Scotland's main marketplace south of the border was never going to win over much custom.
Is it just me or does that seem an eye-wateringly improbable figure?
Also, 20% of them have postal votes.
Anyone else find these numbers indicative of something whiffy?
BluffingTipping pointhttps://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Tox5O34WT4w
I'm not confident as rating NO as a 78% chance to win either. Feels more like 65% at this stage.
My apols - I actually meant h&f. That has three clubs.
Indeed you do - that is why it is so easy for you to believe the fairy tales and moonbeams that are spun as fact by the YES campaign. Those of us WITHOUT rose-tinted glasses can see through the fantasies of the YES campaign.
I cannot make any sense of that sentence. Perhaps you could clarify for me?
I hardly think that the average southerner had heard of Malc (edit: much as we know and love him). And this coincides with the
No campaign blitz over the last few days, in the Yougov panic. Conclusions?
I'd have thought all of that would add up to at least 10% of the population.
http://www.greens-efa.eu/new-eu-commission-12696.html
You're keeping me highly entertained.
Who knew a turnip could be such fun? Any halfwit stupid enough to even read the Scotsman never mind the comments would know that is a pile of horse manure. Unless it is the halfwit Hamiltonace.
If the figures move sharply to No, is there any chance of a yes boycott?
I mean they kindof have a decent justification, given the crazy last minute devomax semi-proposal violating the spirit, if not the terms of the Edinburgh agreement. Especially if BT start backtracking on their back-of-a-fag-packet pledges if No looks inevitable.
I have no real dog in this fight - I'm just looking at things that could impact on the betting - What are the chances of a boycott? 5%? 1%? 0.1%?
@malcolmG @Alistair @StuartDickson ?
No campaign blitz over the last few days, in the Yougov panic. Conclusions?
Conclusion?
Salmonds point blank refusal or inability to flesh out his fantastical claims for Scotland's financial and economic future has bitten both him, and the nation squarely on the arse, like a rusting man trap on a billionaire's Highland estate.
Votes don't get much more emotive than this and virtually nobody is 'neutral'.
http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/survation-appear-to-be-showing-yes-on.html
But take away the other 92%, put them behind an international barrier with a 'fcuk you' message - well what will happen?
It is the blithe assumption of the Malcs of the world that things will carry on much as before that sticks in the craw. NOTHING will will carry on as before. Banking jobs and taxes, defence jobs, public sector jobs servicing the whole UK, asset mangement jobs and taxes, pan-UK pricing structures, companies whose customer base is mainly outside Scotland, etc, etc, etc ad nauseam - will go. Some overnight, some over years. iScot would implode economically. And un-rescuably. Add to that the cultural and institutional loss - BBC, mail service, generally positive attitudes from the 92%, passports, met office, DVLC, etc, etc ad naueam. As the Blunt song goes 'you only miss the sunshine when it snows'. And it's going to snow on Scotland. 'I'll give you a winter prediction: It's gonna be cold, it's gonna be grey, and it's gonna last you for the rest of your life'.
And all that grief for what? Really for what? Scotland already governs itself for all the things people really care about most (devolved stuff) and they get a hugely preferential share of it (11-15% more per head). So..all the shit because they don't like the UK's defence policy? or the foreign policy? Cameron's face? Ed's teeth? Ozzy's accent?
History will judge this as an example of crowd behaviour, a collective wobbly moment. Induced on the gullible by those not quite right in the head.
I had great fun yesterday evening arbing the two betfair markets against each other. I made about £60 all in, so although not hugely lucrative it was still worthwhile. Hopefully having a betfair market out there will encourage more bookies to offer vote% band bets in the next few days - and we'll get more BF liquidity.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOuCjzVAO_w
"Scot goes Pop has similar thoughts about the Survation poll as I do"
Just read James's blog and its very good. A great shame that he was lost to this site and i'd suggest if at all possible he's encouraged to come back at least for the next week and then when it's over perhaps a guest article?
OK! But why has Judge Thokozile Masipa delayed her verdict until tomorrow? Is she grandstanding, trying to boost her profile while making even more of a name for herself?
The whole thing smells to me.
Given I have already voted YES that will be difficult
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=961907097159482&id=283348121682053&refsrc=http://t.co/KjngLISmFO&_rdr