Is BlackDouglas on? I'd like to rip into his ridiculous claim that Scotland has a 100 years of oil and gas reserves (and nobody else has any), but I shan't bother if he's not around.
save your pixels, it's numbers and stuff, Nats only do wild romance and hairdressing.
Well, I just supplied them.
In terms of US imports, demand and pricing determinators here are some more:
Net oil imports to the US have fallen, from over 11 million barrels/day in 2007 to 8 million barrels/day in 2013. (Note, they are still importing!)
While, as pointed out by others below the US has increased its oil and gas production, it is slowing demand that has impacted primarily on prices. For example, in 2012, per capita energy use in the US actually fell by 5% versus 2011.
I asked below why a certain comment hadn't been moderated out and was criticised for seeking censorship. Am I to believe that here asking for moderation is an injustice however saying Scottish nationalists would have been Nazi collaborators is just fine? And you wonder why so many Scots seek independence? That aside, thanks for welcoming me, however that said I was active on this board a number of years back..
It really is hard to believe the collection of nutjobs on here, the scope of nuttery is quite breathtaking. A virtual asylum.
That's why we love you on PB. It takes one to know one.
14 posts and it's the PB 'we'.
We Are the Herd. You Will be Assimilated. Resistance is Futile.
Haven't heard of the herd in a while!
Been a Lurker since 2004. I may be one of the Herd but thank goodness I'm not a Sheepie. Will you be passing out bottles of Buckie to all the followers of the Great Leader's parade to the ballot box next Thursday?
I love how so many of these people in the media jumping up at down at Sillars' legitimate objection to businesses making overtly "political" points, are the same people who protest about Oxfam and other charities doing exactly that and threatening to legislate to get them to shut up.
Please don't make sensible points. The Herd just cannot comprehend.
Oop! Another 'herd'. I thought it was a proscribed phrase in these parts?
I wonder whether BOOers are looking at the mobilising of the establishment against Scottish Independence and realising that this is likely to be how it goes in 2017?
Of course 'yes' and 'out' may still both win!
Well except BOO will know they will keep their currency, their military, their seat on the UN Security Council, their membership of NATO, the UK will still be one of the largest economies in the world and one of the largest military powers in the world. Not to mention the Better Together Campaign has 300 years of Union heritage to fall back on whereas the In campaign will have 50 years of dysfunction, division and dishonesty.
Which means the 'In' campaign will have about 20% of the arguments that the Better Together Campaign has with the knock on effect in the potency of their argument. But indeed its interesting to see how a status quo campaign would play out.
7 months is a long time in politics. The Scottish referendum campaign which only recently has occuoied minds and hotted up shows that. We can start thinking about the election following the Autumn Statement.
Any Unionists in London? Just heard that "let's stay together" are having a rally in Trafalgar Square on Monday evening at 6pm. I'm going to be there with my Union flag.
Thanks Mortis Dancer. It's Mrs. D. I did post briefly a few years ago but scurried away after a bit of abuse. I 'm harder now though (I think). Not very good at posting though it keeps messing up.
"Big business warned of 'day of reckoning' if Scots vote Yes Jim Sillars, Alex Salmond's former mentor, says the nationalists will have their revenge by nationalising BP, breaking up the banks and boycotting John Lewis"
You've got me entirely hooked here. I want to know more about snakes with hips.
I'm very fond of snakes and evolution. Where did you gain your herpetological knowledge? My brother kept pythons, and I fell in love with them. And other reptiles.
BTW some snakes do have hips, even if one ignores the usual fossil "missing links". If one gets up and intimate with a python and examines its intimate parts, one will see a couple of very vestigial thighbones, which are attached internally to small pelvic girdle bones. So there is hope ...
Don't know any websites offhand re snakes, but I came across this blog some time ago and it s good for four-legged beasties. I guessed it would have something relevant - and so it does:
Is BlackDouglas on? I'd like to rip into his ridiculous claim that Scotland has a 100 years of oil and gas reserves (and nobody else has any), but I shan't bother if he's not around.
save your pixels, it's numbers and stuff, Nats only do wild romance and hairdressing.
Well, I just supplied them.
In terms of US imports, demand and pricing determinators here are some more:
Net oil imports to the US have fallen, from over 11 million barrels/day in 2007 to 8 million barrels/day in 2013. (Note, they are still importing!)
While, as pointed out by others below the US has increased its oil and gas production, it is slowing demand that has impacted primarily on prices. For example, in 2012, per capita energy use in the US actually fell by 5% versus 2011.
I asked below why a certain comment hadn't been moderated out and was criticised for seeking censorship. Am I to believe that here asking for moderation is an injustice however saying Scottish nationalists would have been Nazi collaborators is just fine? And you wonder why so many Scots seek independence? That aside, thanks for welcoming me, however that said I was active on this board a number of years back..
yes, as malc would say stop whingeing you big Jessie and grow a pair.
maybe malc needs to take you aside for a fireside chat to stop you becoming a wally Doug.
I have been attempting to move a small pension fund from Scottish Widows for over six months..they refuse to reply to any of my letters on the matter..but speedily reply to other letters from me on other matters..I will happily squander the contents of the pension fund by suing them.
I love how so many of these people in the media jumping up at down at Sillars' legitimate objection to businesses making overtly "political" points, are the same people who protest about Oxfam and other charities doing exactly that and threatening to legislate to get them to shut up.
Please don't make sensible points. The Herd just cannot comprehend.
You've got me entirely hooked here. I want to know more about snakes with hips.
I'm very fond of snakes and evolution. Where did you gain your herpetological knowledge? My brother kept pythons, and I fell in love with them. And other reptiles.
BTW some snakes do have hips, even if one ignores the usual fossil "missing links". If one gets up and intimate with a python and examines its intimate parts, one will see a couple of very vestigial thighbones, which are attached internally to small pelvic girdle bones. So there is hope ...
Don't know any websites offhand re snakes, but I came across this blog some time ago and it s good for four-legged beasties. I guessed it would have something relevant - and so it does:
And while on the subject of prime ministers who may or may not resemble the aforesaid beastie (not me who made that comparison, NB), this came to my attention this morning, so you can have it for the Dwonfall parody collection if it appeals:
I wonder whether BOOers are looking at the mobilising of the establishment against Scottish Independence and realising that this is likely to be how it goes in 2017?
Of course 'yes' and 'out' may still both win!
The Better Off Out campaign and UKIP desperately need to communicate to business what an out would look like. There is a lot of concern right now that leaving the EU would mean an end to trade and we need to make sure that isn't the case. We need to make clear the campaign is "trade, not union" and that we would sign a free trade deal and keep high skilled immigration available. It should also be made clear which regulations we would scrap and which free trade deals elsewhere we would prioritise, with NAFTA, Brazil and India being priorities. It will be a serious mistake if we don't do this.
Looking at MORI, if we use the traditional measure of others - not Labour, Tory or Lib Dem, they're on a whopping 27%. Only half of that going to Ukip.
Any Unionists in London? Just heard that "let's stay together" are having a rally in Trafalgar Square on Monday evening at 6pm. I'm going to be there with my Union flag.
Anyone else?
Inshallah I will be there, however I can't help feeling it should have been done in Edinburgh - like the Big Hug in Quebec.
I love how so many of these people in the media jumping up at down at Sillars' legitimate objection to businesses making overtly "political" points, are the same people who protest about Oxfam and other charities doing exactly that and threatening to legislate to get them to shut up.
Please don't make sensible points. The Herd just cannot comprehend.
Clearly since you are reduced to parroting on about 'the herd' you have run out of arguments.
Sillars can complain all he likes - Scotland is still a free country until he starts running it. But he should not complain about other people giving their opinions on the consequences of political decisions by the likes of him. Your notion that businesses have no legitimate rights to comment tells us all we need to know about both your opinions and your lack of justification for them.
I wonder whether BOOers are looking at the mobilising of the establishment against Scottish Independence and realising that this is likely to be how it goes in 2017?
Of course 'yes' and 'out' may still both win!
Well except BOO will know they will keep their currency, their military, their seat on the UN Security Council, their membership of NATO, the UK will still be one of the largest economies in the world and one of the largest military powers in the world. Not to mention the Better Together Campaign has 300 years of Union heritage to fall back on whereas the In campaign will have 50 years of dysfunction and division.
Which means the 'In' campaign will have about 20% of the arguments that the Better Together Campaign has with the knock on effect in the potency of their argument. But indeed its interesting to see how a status quo campaign would play out.
I think BOO would also get an impetus from a Scottish YES. The BOOers would say, look, FFS, if 5m Scots can (idiotically, to my mind) turn their backs on a successful mighty 300 year old union, then 60 million proud English men and women, can certainly do without a 50 year old, mangy, dysfunctional union that has achieved nothing at all, apart from outlaw decent hoovers and import Roma Big issue sellers.
Given the salience of migration as an issue, I reckon the business arguments would be swept aside and we'd be OUT.
I disagree. I think a Scottish No would be preferable for the BOO campaign, psychologically. I think Britain would be more confident to do its own thing in the world in a way that England would not. Particularly as iScotland would face a lot of problems at first, due to the stupid decisions on currency etc.
I wonder whether BOOers are looking at the mobilising of the establishment against Scottish Independence and realising that this is likely to be how it goes in 2017?
Of course 'yes' and 'out' may still both win!
Well except BOO will know they will keep their currency, their military, their seat on the UN Security Council, their membership of NATO, the UK will still be one of the largest economies in the world and one of the largest military powers in the world. Not to mention the Better Together Campaign has 300 years of Union heritage to fall back on whereas the In campaign will have 50 years of dysfunction and division.
Which means the 'In' campaign will have about 20% of the arguments that the Better Together Campaign has with the knock on effect in the potency of their argument. But indeed its interesting to see how a status quo campaign would play out.
I think BOO would also get an impetus from a Scottish YES. The BOOers would say, look, FFS, if 5m Scots can (idiotically, to my mind) turn their backs on a successful mighty 300 year old union, then 60 million proud English men and women, can certainly do without a 50 year old, mangy, dysfunctional union that has achieved nothing at all, apart from outlaw decent hoovers and import Roma Big issue sellers.
Given the salience of migration as an issue, I reckon the business arguments would be swept aside and we'd be OUT.
Except I don't think there will be a referendum in 2017 if the Scots choose independence. The Government will have enough to deal with with the consequences of the break up of the UK (financial and economic implications, border control implications, military implications, the actual transition etc etc) without embarking on a difficult and precarious negotiation with Brussels.
Who on earth do you think is looking on at this, and thinking, hmmm, yes, that there Scotland looks like a nice, welcoming, stable place to invest.
Imagine this scenario if you will:
Scotland leaves in 2016, rUK leaves EU in 2017, all those Investment Banks reported to be looking at moving to Dublin decide that Edinburgh is a better city to be based in!
Ta da!
That's exactly what some people are talking about. And one wonders why the No campaign have gone so quiet on the EU.
The No side seems to have won the EU issue hands down. Even the SNP now seems to accept that there will have to be a level negotiation before iScotland can join.
More like a points draw especially now Senor B has left - hands down is too strong (I suspect reporting down south has not kept up with it). They'd be going on and on about it otherwise.
It's something I have watched very closely for a very long time, partly for work, partly out of an interest in the Spanish angle. The EU position has not changed: countries that secede from member states put themselves outside the EU and will have to apply for membership. By voting for independence from an EU member state, Scots will be voting to deprive themselves of EU citizenship.
No, I'm pretty sure Salmond had some legal advice on this matter.
Who on earth do you think is looking on at this, and thinking, hmmm, yes, that there Scotland looks like a nice, welcoming, stable place to invest.
Imagine this scenario if you will:
Scotland leaves in 2016, rUK leaves EU in 2017, all those Investment Banks reported to be looking at moving to Dublin decide that Edinburgh is a better city to be based in!
Ta da!
That's exactly what some people are talking about. And one wonders why the No campaign have gone so quiet on the EU.
The No side seems to have won the EU issue hands down. Even the SNP now seems to accept that there will have to be a level negotiation before iScotland can join.
More like a points draw especially now Senor B has left - hands down is too strong (I suspect reporting down south has not kept up with it). They'd be going on and on about it otherwise.
It's something I have watched very closely for a very long time, partly for work, partly out of an interest in the Spanish angle. The EU position has not changed: countries that secede from member states put themselves outside the EU and will have to apply for membership. By voting for independence from an EU member state, Scots will be voting to deprive themselves of EU citizenship.
No, I'm pretty sure Salmond had some legal advice on this matter.
I love how so many of these people in the media jumping up at down at Sillars' legitimate objection to businesses making overtly "political" points, are the same people who protest about Oxfam and other charities doing exactly that and threatening to legislate to get them to shut up.
I would say
"This referendum is about power, and when we get a Yes majority, we will use that power for a day of reckoning with BP and the banks. The heads of these companies are rich men, in cahoots with a rich English Tory Prime Minister, to keep Scotland’s poor, poorer through lies and distortions."
goes beyond a "legitimate objection to businesses making overtly political points"
I love how so many of these people in the media jumping up at down at Sillars' legitimate objection to businesses making overtly "political" points, are the same people who protest about Oxfam and other charities doing exactly that and threatening to legislate to get them to shut up.
Charities are forbidden by law from making overtly political points, companies aren't.
Please refrain from making such utterly clueless points, it just invites the Hard of understanding to embarrass themselves by endorsing them.
Aye, it can be a bit grumpy at times, and is, perhaps understandably, tetchy at the moment.
Certainly is grumpy at the moment. I feel so passionately about this that I feel I have to say something. I do feel as if I know you all though , having lurked all these years.
Are we clear? Or I shall put the spam trap to automatically ban people who can't adhere to that.
Is 'piece of dogshit' off limits? Checking for a friend.
if used in the english sense obviously, if used in the Glaswegian sense I believe it's a term of endearment.
But only of differently spelt with a u, and an e added on the end. To use that oroginal spelling in a Gallowgate pub would be seen as insufferably refained and Morningside.
Is BlackDouglas on? I'd like to rip into his ridiculous claim that Scotland has a 100 years of oil and gas reserves (and nobody else has any), but I shan't bother if he's not around.
Still around. Although none of what you said above accurately reflects what I said. I said the global easy to extract supplies were falling while untapped sectors in the West of Scotland and in the North Sea were now expecting to come onstream creating a boom. T Indeed RBS recently released a report showing the sector needed 30,000 new workers. That was before recent announcements of huge discoveries. Plus supplied on the West Coast have not been tapped because it would interfere with Trident operations - admitted by Michael Hestletine..
Oh, you can see the 100 years of oil claim in this recent report published in Oil Industry News. My own claim below was far more modest - 50-100years.
Scotland could be sitting on more than double the amount of oil and gas reserves currently predicted, a new independent industry investigation has found.
Ah yes, the dreaded word 'could'.
Let's start off with first principles. UK oil production is currently around 1.2million barrels a day.
To produce this amount for 50 years, your low bound, would require reserves of:
1.2 x 365 x 50 = 22.8bn barrels of oil
The United Kingdom, according to the BP Statistical Review has 3 billion barrels of proven reserves. It is of course *possible* that is all in Scotland, and is out by an order of magnitude. But it is not likely.
You know what: I'll do you a deal. If you can find discoveries in the UK North Sea with more than - oohhh... - say 500m barrels in extractable reserves the last two years then I will give £100 to a charity of your choosing. Of course, to maintain production at 1.2m barrels a day requires that we find almost a billion barrels every two years. So, I'm being incredibly generous in letting you win if you find HALF the level required for your ridiculous claim,
Are we clear? Or I shall put the spam trap to automatically ban people who can't adhere to that.
Just out of zoological interest, what on earth is so awful about the term? (I understand the louse eggs, no need to explain them.)
The term nits became short hand for Nats, unfortunately, it became very boring to read, for all concerned, ditto the term for the Tories on here, the herd, so Mike Smithson banned both terms.
FPT There is very little evidence that Scottish Casualties in the First war were significantly higher than other nations. The figures on the Scottish National War memorial include not only Scots but also those of Scots ancestry and also other nations serving in Scottish regiments. There is an interesting discussion here on the subject. It is particularly worth reading Martin G's evidence on the subject a little way down the thread
yes, as malc would say stop whingeing you big Jessie and grow a pair.
maybe malc needs to take you aside for a fireside chat to stop you becoming a wally Doug.
Comes over like herd bullying rather than debate. Did you go to private school too?
People on here can and do whine all day about how the Scots just don't seem to get how benevolent and generous and loving our English neighbours have been but come on, calling us nazi collaborators really is a form of little Englander desperation. Ok, if you don't like the moaning then quit telling us relentlessly how unappreciative of the subsidies of lavish English taxpayers we are. It's rubbish. And we are motivated by our own desire to steer our own destiny not by hatred of anyone. I know not a single person who hates the English and I would not tolerate them in my company for a second. So pipe down the lot of ye and have some respect. All the oily Tory squirming on here just makes Scots realise how much London has to lose so have a word with yourselves..
yes, as malc would say stop whingeing you big Jessie and grow a pair.
maybe malc needs to take you aside for a fireside chat to stop you becoming a wally Doug.
yes, as malc would say stop whingeing you big Jessie and grow a pair.
maybe malc needs to take you aside for a fireside chat to stop you becoming a wally Doug.
Comes over like herd bullying rather than debate. Did you go to private school too?
People on here can and do whine all day about how the Scots just don't seem to get how benevolent and generous and loving our English neighbours have been but come on, calling us nazi collaborators really is a form of little Englander desperation. Ok, if you don't like the moaning then quit telling us relentlessly how unappreciative of the subsidies of lavish English taxpayers we are. It's rubbish. And we are motivated by our own desire to steer our own destiny not by hatred of anyone. I know not a single person who hates the English and I would not tolerate them in my company for a second. So pipe down the lot of ye and have some respect. All the oily Tory squirming on here just makes Scots realise how much London has to lose so have a word with yourselves..
I wonder whether BOOers are looking at the mobilising of the establishment against Scottish Independence and realising that this is likely to be how it goes in 2017?
Of course 'yes' and 'out' may still both win!
Well except BOO will know they will keep their currency, their military, their seat on the UN Security Council, their membership of NATO, the UK will still be one of the largest economies in the world and one of the largest military powers in the world. Not to mention the Better Together Campaign has 300 years of Union heritage to fall back on whereas the In campaign will have 50 years of dysfunction and division.
Which means the 'In' campaign will have about 20% of the arguments that the Better Together Campaign has with the knock on effect in the potency of their argument. But indeed its interesting to see how a status quo campaign would play out.
I think BOO would also get an impetus from a Scottish YES. The BOOers would say, look, FFS, if 5m Scots can (idiotically, to my mind) turn their backs on a successful mighty 300 year old union, then 60 million proud English men and women, can certainly do without a 50 year old, mangy, dysfunctional union that has achieved nothing at all, apart from outlaw decent hoovers and import Roma Big issue sellers.
Given the salience of migration as an issue, I reckon the business arguments would be swept aside and we'd be OUT.
Aye, it can be a bit grumpy at times, and is, perhaps understandably, tetchy at the moment.
Certainly is grumpy at the moment. I feel so passionately about this that I feel I have to say something. I do feel as if I know you all though , having lurked all these years.
yes, as malc would say stop whingeing you big Jessie and grow a pair.
maybe malc needs to take you aside for a fireside chat to stop you becoming a wally Doug.
yes, as malc would say stop whingeing you big Jessie and grow a pair.
maybe malc needs to take you aside for a fireside chat to stop you becoming a wally Doug.
Comes over like herd bullying rather than debate. Did you go to private school too?
People on here can and do whine all day about how the Scots just don't seem to get how benevolent and generous and loving our English neighbours have been but come on, calling us nazi collaborators really is a form of little Englander desperation. Ok, if you don't like the moaning then quit telling us relentlessly how unappreciative of the subsidies of lavish English taxpayers we are. It's rubbish. And we are motivated by our own desire to steer our own destiny not by hatred of anyone. I know not a single person who hates the English and I would not tolerate them in my company for a second. So pipe down the lot of ye and have some respect. All the oily Tory squirming on here just makes Scots realise how much London has to lose so have a word with yourselves..
yeah as the man said Nats doesn't equal Scots.
Is that it? Is that your case? With half the population about to vote Yes you are telling everyone that half of Scots can be viewed as nazi collaborators? Nice Al, nice. Let's just say I won't hold your comments against my English pals!
I wonder whether BOOers are looking at the mobilising of the establishment against Scottish Independence and realising that this is likely to be how it goes in 2017?
Of course 'yes' and 'out' may still both win!
Well except BOO will know they will keep their currency, their military, their seat on the UN Security Council, their membership of NATO, the UK will still be one of the largest economies in the world and one of the largest military powers in the world. Not to mention the Better Together Campaign has 300 years of Union heritage to fall back on whereas the In campaign will have 50 years of dysfunction and division.
Which means the 'In' campaign will have about 20% of the arguments that the Better Together Campaign has with the knock on effect in the potency of their argument. But indeed its interesting to see how a status quo campaign would play out.
I think BOO would also get an impetus from a Scottish YES. The BOOers would say, look, FFS, if 5m Scots can (idiotically, to my mind) turn their backs on a successful mighty 300 year old union, then 60 million proud English men and women, can certainly do without a 50 year old, mangy, dysfunctional union that has achieved nothing at all, apart from outlaw decent hoovers and import Roma Big issue sellers.
Given the salience of migration as an issue, I reckon the business arguments would be swept aside and we'd be OUT.
Except I don't think there will be a referendum in 2017 if the Scots choose independence. The Government will have enough to deal with with the consequences of the break up of the UK (financial and economic implications, border control implications, military implications, the actual transition etc etc) without embarking on a difficult and precarious negotiation with Brussels.
I already said exactly that, downthread. A YES vote means no referendum in 2017.
But it does make an EU vote in 2019 or 2022 more likely, and much more winnable.
Not that much more winnable.
I think I saw figures recently that showed support for the UK leaving the EU was 45% in favour and 35% against. In Scotland it was the reverse, 45% want to stay in and 35% wanted to leave. So a reasonable difference....
If we exclude don't knows that means it would be roughly 56% leave and 44% stay. And if you take Scotland out of the equation, it would mean that would change to about 57% to 43%.
I wonder whether BOOers are looking at the mobilising of the establishment against Scottish Independence and realising that this is likely to be how it goes in 2017?
It would be much, much stronger in an EU referendum. That's why I've always thought an Out result is unattainable.
I wonder whether BOOers are looking at the mobilising of the establishment against Scottish Independence and realising that this is likely to be how it goes in 2017?
Of course 'yes' and 'out' may still both win!
Well except BOO will know they will keep their currency, their military, their seat on the UN Security Council, their membership of NATO, the UK will still be one of the largest economies in the world and one of the largest military powers in the world. Not to mention the Better Together Campaign has 300 years of Union heritage to fall back on whereas the In campaign will have 50 years of dysfunction and division.
Which means the 'In' campaign will have about 20% of the arguments that the Better Together Campaign has with the knock on effect in the potency of their argument. But indeed its interesting to see how a status quo campaign would play out.
I think BOO would also get an impetus from a Scottish YES. The BOOers would say, look, FFS, if 5m Scots can (idiotically, to my mind) turn their backs on a successful mighty 300 year old union, then 60 million proud English men and women, can certainly do without a 50 year old, mangy, dysfunctional union that has achieved nothing at all, apart from outlaw decent hoovers and import Roma Big issue sellers.
Given the salience of migration as an issue, I reckon the business arguments would be swept aside and we'd be OUT.
Although if Scotland is outside the EU and a disaster area it might make people scared of (any) change. Even if the reasons why Scotland was a disaster area were nothing to do with the EU.
One thing is for sure: if Scotland did vote for 'out', it would have profound impacts on the UK political scene.
yes, as malc would say stop whingeing you big Jessie and grow a pair.
maybe malc needs to take you aside for a fireside chat to stop you becoming a wally Doug.
yes, as malc would say stop whingeing you big Jessie and grow a pair.
maybe malc needs to take you aside for a fireside chat to stop you becoming a wally Doug.
Comes over like herd bullying rather than debate. Did you go to private school too?
has to lose so have a word with yourselves..
yeah as the man said Nats doesn't equal Scots.
Is that it? Is that your case? With half the population about to vote Yes you are telling everyone that half of Scots can be viewed as nazi collaborators? Nice Al, nice. Let's just say I won't hold your comments against my English pals!
No the case is dead simple if you want Indy vote for it, but don't come on posting absolute bollocks expecting not to be picked up for it.
Anyone who can say that fluctuations in oil prices aren't important for a petro currency nation is a rectiloquist of the highest order.
I wonder whether BOOers are looking at the mobilising of the establishment against Scottish Independence and realising that this is likely to be how it goes in 2017?
It would be much, much stronger in an EU referendum. That's why I've always thought an Out result is unattainable.
No, it wouldn't. As was said below, you're not going to get any of the currency nonsense, which is the main thing freaking out companies in Scotland. Trade barriers are very minor in comparison to not having a central bank.
Are we clear? Or I shall put the spam trap to automatically ban people who can't adhere to that.
Just out of zoological interest, what on earth is so awful about the term? (I understand the louse eggs, no need to explain them.)
The term nits became short hand for Nats, unfortunately, it became very boring to read, for all concerned, ditto the term for the Tories on here, the herd, so Mike Smithson banned both terms.
So Revd Paisley has died, a huge figure, capable of personal charm, but his hypocrisy in opposing David Trimble's attempts to form agreement with Sinn Fein before doing the same himself was his lowest point in my view
A big news day with the death of Sir Donald Sinden and the Pistorius manslaughter verdict
Aye, it can be a bit grumpy at times, and is, perhaps understandably, tetchy at the moment.
Certainly is grumpy at the moment. I feel so passionately about this that I feel I have to say something. I do feel as if I know you all though , having lurked all these years.
It's good to see you back posting, and Bev C. Fitalass doesn't seem to be on so much nowadays though. She has had to withstand a lot of abuse.
Serious question, why should he not be able to get it through pmt given the reasons Mr Charles adduces?
Carnyx, he might be able to, though I suspect that large chunks of Labour and Lib Dems would baulk, if he had the guts to try. Given that Cameron has courage in the way snakes have hips I am not convinced he would even try (also Samantha might not like it).
Even Mr Charles, a High Tory in the good meaning of the phrase, is unconvinced that Cameron would actually have the courage to do something.
Good to see the people who thought Matthew Paris was a high ranking Tory who was beyond the pale, are desperately telling us Sillars is nothing to do with Eck.
Is BlackDouglas on? I'd like to rip into his ridiculous claim that Scotland has a 100 years of oil and gas reserves (and nobody else has any), but I shan't bother if he's not around.
Still around. Although none of what you said above accurately reflects what I said. I said the global easy to extract supplies were falling while untapped sectors in the West of Scotland and in the North Sea were now expecting to come onstream creating a boom. T Indeed RBS recently released a report showing the sector needed 30,000 new workers. That was before recent announcements of huge discoveries. Plus supplied on the West Coast have not been tapped because it would interfere with Trident operations - admitted by Michael Hestletine..
Oh, you can see the 100 years of oil claim in this recent report published in Oil Industry News. My own claim below was far more modest - 50-100years.
Oil from the Scottish Atlantic Margin has been known about for years. But its deep and hard to get at economically. Is an independent Scotland not going to have any ships or submarines then? They would be based at faslane if they do.
I wonder whether BOOers are looking at the mobilising of the establishment against Scottish Independence and realising that this is likely to be how it goes in 2017?
It would be much, much stronger in an EU referendum. That's why I've always thought an Out result is unattainable.
It depends how much people detest the establishment. If we have several more big scandals, the voters may not listen to a word they say.
I wonder whether BOOers are looking at the mobilising of the establishment against Scottish Independence and realising that this is likely to be how it goes in 2017?
Of course 'yes' and 'out' may still both win!
Well except BOO will know they will keep their currency, their military, their seat on the UN Security Council, their membership of NATO, the UK will still be one of the largest economies in the world and one of the largest military powers in the world. Not to mention the Better Together Campaign has 300 years of Union heritage to fall back on whereas the In campaign will have 50 years of dysfunction and division.
Which means the 'In' campaign will have about 20% of the arguments that the Better Together Campaign has with the knock on effect in the potency of their argument. But indeed its interesting to see how a status quo campaign would play out.
I think BOO would also get an impetus from a Scottish YES. The BOOers would say, look, FFS, if 5m Scots can (idiotically, to my mind) turn their backs on a successful mighty 300 year old union, then 60 million proud English men and women, can certainly do without a 50 year old, mangy, dysfunctional union that has achieved nothing at all, apart from outlaw decent hoovers and import Roma Big issue sellers.
Given the salience of migration as an issue, I reckon the business arguments would be swept aside and we'd be OUT.
Except I don't think there will be a referendum in 2017 if the Scots choose independence. The Government will have enough to deal with with the consequences of the break up of the UK (financial and economic implications, border control implications, military implications, the actual transition etc etc) without embarking on a difficult and precarious negotiation with Brussels.
I already said exactly that, downthread. A YES vote means no referendum in 2017.
But it does make an EU vote in 2019 or 2022 more likely, and much more winnable.
Apologies missed that. As for 2019 / 2022 it depends who is leading the political parties then. I don't expect Cameron to fight to 2020 election whatever happens (IIRC back in the dark distant future I'm sure I saw an article where he said he only wanted 8 years max as PM). Miliband will have gone if he doesn't become PM, Clegg likely won't be around. Farage 50/50.
I apply the *evidence* rigour on here to other sites dedicated to TV trivia.
The outbursts of indignation at being asked to substantiate a claim are massive. Newbies to PB think that it's acceptable to lead with their chins purely on the basis of Because I Said So.
They are quickly brought down to Earth. I wish the same rigor was more prevalent on teh interwebs. It's painful to have to explain again and again that Because I Said So isn't a FACT.
Good to see the people who thought Matthew Paris was a high ranking Tory who was beyond the pale, are desperately telling us Sillars is nothing to do with Eck.
Good to see the people who thought Matthew Paris was a high ranking Tory who was beyond the pale, are desperately telling us Sillars is nothing to do with Eck.
I didn't even know who he was! (Except something to do with the Times.)
So Revd Paisley has died, a huge figure, capable of personal charm, but his hypocrisy in opposing David Trimble's attempts to form agreement with Sinn Fein before doing the same himself was his lowest point in my view
You know, I pray a prayer continually. I say, “Lord, if ever this mind of mine suggests that I should compromise, put a shroud on me. Put me into the coffin and get me out of this world.” [Dr I.K. Paisley, 2 March 1969]
I wonder whether BOOers are looking at the mobilising of the establishment against Scottish Independence and realising that this is likely to be how it goes in 2017?
It would be much, much stronger in an EU referendum. That's why I've always thought an Out result is unattainable.
No, it wouldn't. As was said below, you're not going to get any of the currency nonsense, which is the main thing freaking out companies in Scotland. Trade barriers are very minor in comparison to not having a central bank.
True, I believe what the Scottish economist Ronald MacDonald said about the SNP's policy on currency - that it was a mistake and would be their undoing. I believed that Yes would get eaten alive over currency however all the negativity from the No campaign has made voters immune to warnings which are genuine. The boy who cried wolf..
It is crazy to complain that rUK will not enter into a currency union with an independent Scotland. Germany cannot force Scotland into the Euro, how can Scotland force rUK into a sterling zone? Nuts!
If Yes does not win, it will be because of the currency issue. Had they gone for an independent Scottish currency the campaign would be over and independence would be in the bag.
It depends how much people detest the establishment. If we have several more big scandals, the voters may not listen to a word they say.
It will be all the big employers, all the unions, all the mainstream UK, European and even US politicians, Japanese and other foreign companies, most of the newspapers, and above all the Beeb. Not just politicians.
And the message will be incredibly simple: jobs. Whether it's true or not, that's an incredibly hard one for the Out side to overcome, especially since they have so far shown themselves absolutely hopeless at even beginning to put together the case. I'm still gobsmacked that UKIP and the BOOers have morphed into some sort of bizarre anti-politics, Cameron-hating whingefest group, rather than putting in some serious work to answer all the difficult questions. The Brexit winner paper would have been a good place to start, but: silence.
I'm still gobsmacked that UKIP and the BOOers have morphed into some sort of bizarre anti-politics, Cameron-hating whingefest group, rather than putting in some serious work to answer all the difficult questions.
Aye, it can be a bit grumpy at times, and is, perhaps understandably, tetchy at the moment.
Certainly is grumpy at the moment. I feel so passionately about this that I feel I have to say something. I do feel as if I know you all though , having lurked all these years.
It's good to see you back posting, and Bev C. Fitalass doesn't seem to be on so much nowadays though. She has had to withstand a lot of abuse.
I'm still gobsmacked that UKIP and the BOOers have morphed into some sort of bizarre anti-politics, Cameron-hating whingefest group, rather than putting in some serious work to answer all the difficult questions.
It depends how much people detest the establishment. If we have several more big scandals, the voters may not listen to a word they say.
It will be all the big employers, all the unions, all the mainstream UK, European and even US politicians, Japanese and other foreign companies, most of the newspapers, and above all the Beeb. Not just politicians.
And the message will be incredibly simple: jobs. Whether it's true or not, that's an incredibly hard one for the Out side to overcome, especially since they have so far shown themselves absolutely hopeless at even beginning to put together the case. I'm still gobsmacked that UKIP and the BOOers have morphed into some sort of bizarre anti-politics, Cameron-hating whingefest group, rather than putting in some serious work to answer all the difficult questions. The Brexit winner paper would have been a good place to start, but: silence.
Once again, you are showing your absolute double standard here. What have the Tories done on your supposed renegotiation? There's absolutely nothing beyond what has been done by outside groups.
I'm still gobsmacked that UKIP and the BOOers have morphed into some sort of bizarre anti-politics
There is a market for "regular politics is broken, and we're the new broom, and here's some hope right over here, and we're not like the other establishment lot."
In fact it's a huge market: perhaps 20% of the LibDems' 25% was "new politics", Obama rode to power on changing a broken system via a lot of hoping, Le Pen and Grillo ride the anti-establishment wave too.
UKIP is now the party of hope and change and new politics.
And they will continue to be this until they are sullied by the grubby realities of government.
Once again, you are showing your absolute double standard here. What have the Tories done on your supposed renegotiation? There's absolutely nothing beyond what has been done by outside groups.
That point is politically feeble. It's not a question of what the Tories do, or what comes out of the renegotiation, it's a question of whether you can get a Yes, in any circumstances. I believe the answer to that is no, and even more so since there is clearly no appetite for any serious thinking.
Cameron has a much easier problem, if it comes to the referendum, since, irrespective of how successful the renegotiation is, if he recommends a Stay In (which I agree is likely) he'll have the entire establishment on his side.
I'm still gobsmacked that UKIP and the BOOers have morphed into some sort of bizarre anti-politics
There is a market for "regular politics is broken, and we're the new broom, and here's some hope right over here, and we're not like the other establishment lot."
In fact it's a huge market: perhaps 20% of the LibDems' 25% was "new politics", Obama rode to power on changing a broken system via a lot of hoping, Le Pen and Grillo ride the anti-establishment wave too.
UKIP is now the party of hope and change and new politics.
And they will continue to be this until they are sullied by the grubby realities of government.
They are a party of protest working to put Labour into power, and they may well succeed in that limited sense.
Any Unionists in London? Just heard that "let's stay together" are having a rally in Trafalgar Square on Monday evening at 6pm. I'm going to be there with my Union flag.
Anyone else?
Inshallah I will be there, however I can't help feeling it should have been done in Edinburgh - like the Big Hug in Quebec.
But better than nothing.
I'll try - I have a dinner at Villandry St James (highly recommended and not too expensive) at 7, and a conversation with someone about the reproductive systems of pigs at 6.30, but I may make it for a few minutes.
Once again, you are showing your absolute double standard here. What have the Tories done on your supposed renegotiation? There's absolutely nothing beyond what has been done by outside groups.
That point is politically feeble. It's not a question of what the Tories do, or what comes out of the renegotiation, it's a question of whether you can get a Yes, in any circumstances. I believe the answer to that is no, and even more so since there is clearly no appetite for any serious thinking.
Cameron has a much easier problem, if it comes to the referendum, since, irrespective of how successful the renegotiation is, if he recommends a Stay In (which I agree is likely) he'll have the entire establishment on his side.
There's clearly an appetite for serious thinking. There's a whole bunch of outers on this very board that can debate the details of various elements of the European Arrest Warrants or agricultural subsidies or trade treaties. The same can be said for plenty of people I've met within UKIP. You're basically the only one on here that can even sustain a conversation at that level. Most pro-EU Tories (including many in the party and some that work at CCHQ) don't even know the difference between the EU, EFTA and the EAA.
Good to see the people who thought Matthew Paris was a high ranking Tory who was beyond the pale, are desperately telling us Sillars is nothing to do with Eck.
I didn't even know who he was! (Except something to do with the Times.)
I know who Sillars is, he's the bloke standing shoulder to shoulder with Eck at recent press opportunities.
Comments
In terms of US imports, demand and pricing determinators here are some more:
Here you can see oil prices following global GDP forecasts: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-09-12/oil-price-plunge-its-global-economy-stupid
Net oil imports to the US have fallen, from over 11 million barrels/day in 2007 to 8 million barrels/day in 2013. (Note, they are still importing!)
While, as pointed out by others below the US has increased its oil and gas production, it is slowing demand that has impacted primarily on prices. For example, in 2012, per capita energy use in the US actually fell by 5% versus 2011.
I asked below why a certain comment hadn't been moderated out and was criticised for seeking censorship. Am I to believe that here asking for moderation is an injustice however saying Scottish nationalists would have been Nazi collaborators is just fine? And you wonder why so many Scots seek independence? That aside, thanks for welcoming me, however that said I was active on this board a number of years back..
The best Downfall of all IMO. Even better than mine about Derek Draper!
200k views on YTube - it never fails to make me LOL. There's a lot of similarity with Wee Eck right now too.
https://youtube.com/watch?v=iMi776jah1w
Which means the 'In' campaign will have about 20% of the arguments that the Better Together Campaign has with the knock on effect in the potency of their argument. But indeed its interesting to see how a status quo campaign would play out.
We can start thinking about the election following the Autumn Statement.
Are we clear? Or I shall put the spam trap to automatically ban people who can't adhere to that.
"Big business warned of 'day of reckoning' if Scots vote Yes
Jim Sillars, Alex Salmond's former mentor, says the nationalists will have their revenge by nationalising BP, breaking up the banks and boycotting John Lewis"
Has Sillars just thrown it all away?
Probably.
http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2010/09/03/ing-ser-2-monster-python/
maybe malc needs to take you aside for a fireside chat to stop you becoming a wally Doug.
And while on the subject of prime ministers who may or may not resemble the aforesaid beastie (not me who made that comparison, NB), this came to my attention this morning, so you can have it for the Dwonfall parody collection if it appeals:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsRzO18nM8A
I'm enjoying the Glaswegian one - thanks!
Sillars can complain all he likes - Scotland is still a free country until he starts running it. But he should not complain about other people giving their opinions on the consequences of political decisions by the likes of him.
Your notion that businesses have no legitimate rights to comment tells us all we need to know about both your opinions and your lack of justification for them.
https://www.falkirk.gov.uk/news/article.aspx?aid=3257
(Not far off my extrapolation of 124,792 although I haven't got round to increasing the total electorate to 4.285 million yet).
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/txcTnTqEF6hmKvzevjiZyZw/htmlview#gid=0
Aye, it can be a bit grumpy at times, and is, perhaps understandably, tetchy at the moment.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/43-million-registered-to-vote-in-indyref.1410440107
"This referendum is about power, and when we get a Yes majority, we will use that power for a day of reckoning with BP and the banks. The heads of these companies are rich men, in cahoots with a rich English Tory Prime Minister, to keep Scotland’s poor, poorer through lies and distortions."
goes beyond a "legitimate objection to businesses making overtly political points"
Please refrain from making such utterly clueless points, it just invites the Hard of understanding to embarrass themselves by endorsing them.
Ah yes, the dreaded word 'could'.
Let's start off with first principles. UK oil production is currently around 1.2million barrels a day.
To produce this amount for 50 years, your low bound, would require reserves of:
1.2 x 365 x 50 = 22.8bn barrels of oil
The United Kingdom, according to the BP Statistical Review has 3 billion barrels of proven reserves. It is of course *possible* that is all in Scotland, and is out by an order of magnitude. But it is not likely.
You know what: I'll do you a deal. If you can find discoveries in the UK North Sea with more than - oohhh... - say 500m barrels in extractable reserves the last two years then I will give £100 to a charity of your choosing. Of course, to maintain production at 1.2m barrels a day requires that we find almost a billion barrels every two years. So, I'm being incredibly generous in letting you win if you find HALF the level required for your ridiculous claim,
FPT There is very little evidence that Scottish Casualties in the First war were significantly higher than other nations. The figures on the Scottish National War memorial include not only Scots but also those of Scots ancestry and also other nations serving in Scottish regiments. There is an interesting discussion here on the subject. It is particularly worth reading Martin G's evidence on the subject a little way down the thread
http://1914-1918.invisionzone.com/forums/index.php?s=34062a1a9745af9898101062b303b555&showtopic=168089&page=2
however he was good fun if you knew how not to take offence.
yes, as malc would say stop whingeing you big Jessie and grow a pair.
maybe malc needs to take you aside for a fireside chat to stop you becoming a wally Doug.
Comes over like herd bullying rather than debate. Did you go to private school too?
People on here can and do whine all day about how the Scots just don't seem to get how benevolent and generous and loving our English neighbours have been but come on, calling us nazi collaborators really is a form of little Englander desperation. Ok, if you don't like the moaning then quit telling us relentlessly how unappreciative of the subsidies of lavish English taxpayers we are. It's rubbish. And we are motivated by our own desire to steer our own destiny not by hatred of anyone. I know not a single person who hates the English and I would not tolerate them in my company for a second. So pipe down the lot of ye and have some respect. All the oily Tory squirming on here just makes Scots realise how much London has to lose so have a word with yourselves..
maybe malc needs to take you aside for a fireside chat to stop you becoming a wally Doug.
yes, as malc would say stop whingeing you big Jessie and grow a pair.
maybe malc needs to take you aside for a fireside chat to stop you becoming a wally Doug.
Comes over like herd bullying rather than debate. Did you go to private school too?
People on here can and do whine all day about how the Scots just don't seem to get how benevolent and generous and loving our English neighbours have been but come on, calling us nazi collaborators really is a form of little Englander desperation. Ok, if you don't like the moaning then quit telling us relentlessly how unappreciative of the subsidies of lavish English taxpayers we are. It's rubbish. And we are motivated by our own desire to steer our own destiny not by hatred of anyone. I know not a single person who hates the English and I would not tolerate them in my company for a second. So pipe down the lot of ye and have some respect. All the oily Tory squirming on here just makes Scots realise how much London has to lose so have a word with yourselves..
yeah as the man said Nats doesn't equal Scots.
I joined the Tories last summer as an act of solidarity. I felt I needed to stand up against Labour/EdM and do it with cash, not pixels.
I found it rather liberating to take a stand. I did it all the time in my business life, but not so much otherwise unless I was really irked.
I'd recommend it to anyone who feels passionate about their side or defeating a foe.
yes, as malc would say stop whingeing you big Jessie and grow a pair.
maybe malc needs to take you aside for a fireside chat to stop you becoming a wally Doug.
Comes over like herd bullying rather than debate. Did you go to private school too?
People on here can and do whine all day about how the Scots just don't seem to get how benevolent and generous and loving our English neighbours have been but come on, calling us nazi collaborators really is a form of little Englander desperation. Ok, if you don't like the moaning then quit telling us relentlessly how unappreciative of the subsidies of lavish English taxpayers we are. It's rubbish. And we are motivated by our own desire to steer our own destiny not by hatred of anyone. I know not a single person who hates the English and I would not tolerate them in my company for a second. So pipe down the lot of ye and have some respect. All the oily Tory squirming on here just makes Scots realise how much London has to lose so have a word with yourselves..
yeah as the man said Nats doesn't equal Scots.
Is that it? Is that your case? With half the population about to vote Yes you are telling everyone that half of Scots can be viewed as nazi collaborators? Nice Al, nice. Let's just say I won't hold your comments against my English pals!
They were pretty WTFFFF??? about it.
Check your calendar Malc. And maybe your medication.
Actually quite pleased with the simple formula I was using hitherto, which was the 2011 census population figure x0.8.
I think I saw figures recently that showed support for the UK leaving the EU was 45% in favour and 35% against. In Scotland it was the reverse, 45% want to stay in and 35% wanted to leave. So a reasonable difference....
If we exclude don't knows that means it would be roughly 56% leave and 44% stay. And if you take Scotland out of the equation, it would mean that would change to about 57% to 43%.
One thing is for sure: if Scotland did vote for 'out', it would have profound impacts on the UK political scene.
has to lose so have a word with yourselves..
yeah as the man said Nats doesn't equal Scots.
Is that it? Is that your case? With half the population about to vote Yes you are telling everyone that half of Scots can be viewed as nazi collaborators? Nice Al, nice. Let's just say I won't hold your comments against my English pals!
No the case is dead simple if you want Indy vote for it, but don't come on posting absolute bollocks expecting not to be picked up for it.
Anyone who can say that fluctuations in oil prices aren't important for a petro currency nation is a rectiloquist of the highest order.
(Ditties isn't the right word is it).
A big news day with the death of Sir Donald Sinden and the Pistorius manslaughter verdict
;-)
Is an independent Scotland not going to have any ships or submarines then? They would be based at faslane if they do.
The outbursts of indignation at being asked to substantiate a claim are massive. Newbies to PB think that it's acceptable to lead with their chins purely on the basis of Because I Said So.
They are quickly brought down to Earth. I wish the same rigor was more prevalent on teh interwebs. It's painful to have to explain again and again that Because I Said So isn't a FACT.
http://i.newsrt.co.uk/upload/news/large/14/37/1933061738.jpg
It's even funnier when you look at the gesture Eck is making
@Plato
It's the tactics of internet idiots everywhere drag you down to their level and beat you on experience.
It is crazy to complain that rUK will not enter into a currency union with an independent Scotland. Germany cannot force Scotland into the Euro, how can Scotland force rUK into a sterling zone? Nuts!
If Yes does not win, it will be because of the currency issue. Had they gone for an independent Scottish currency the campaign would be over and independence would be in the bag.
And the message will be incredibly simple: jobs. Whether it's true or not, that's an incredibly hard one for the Out side to overcome, especially since they have so far shown themselves absolutely hopeless at even beginning to put together the case. I'm still gobsmacked that UKIP and the BOOers have morphed into some sort of bizarre anti-politics, Cameron-hating whingefest group, rather than putting in some serious work to answer all the difficult questions. The Brexit winner paper would have been a good place to start, but: silence.
TBH, when I want abuse I can start a fan war elsewhere - PB is tame in comparison to riled fandom. That takes vile to an incomprehensible level.
Even footie fans would blush at how personal it can get. Over made-up characters. I find it surreal, but intriguing from a psychological perspective.
I'd no idea things could get so heated about *entertainment*.
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/sep/12/samantha-morton-reveals-sexual-abuse-child-residential-care
Shine the light in ALL the dark corners.
Alex Salmond and Jim Sillars will want to have another bitter together rant about The Guardian after it supports The Union.
In fact it's a huge market: perhaps 20% of the LibDems' 25% was "new politics", Obama rode to power on changing a broken system via a lot of hoping, Le Pen and Grillo ride the anti-establishment wave too.
UKIP is now the party of hope and change and new politics.
And they will continue to be this until they are sullied by the grubby realities of government.
Cameron has a much easier problem, if it comes to the referendum, since, irrespective of how successful the renegotiation is, if he recommends a Stay In (which I agree is likely) he'll have the entire establishment on his side.
New poll shows 20% of Londoners want independence http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/one-in-five-londoners-want-capital-to-split-from-rest-of-uk-and-become-independent-9722652.html