Effect of Scottish Independence Vote

TCA

islandannie wrote: »

And right here highlights the nationalists duplicitous campaign.

If you didn't get it, I was being sarcastic. Maybe you were too.

The notion of people being scared to speak out and intimidated by nationalists is just ridiculous.

islandannie

TCA wrote: »

If you didn't get it, I was being sarcastic. Maybe you were too.

The notion of people being scared to speak out and intimidated by nationalists is just ridiculous.

No it`s not a quick search of relevant internet blogs will confirm my post.

TCA

islandannie wrote: »

No it`s not a quick search of relevant internet blogs will confirm my post.

Are you and incandescent the same person or are you also googling "Scotland" and "traitor" to find these despicable internet characters who are scaring you witless and putting your very life in jeopardy?

Serious reality check required.

islandannie

TCA wrote: »

Are you and incandescent the same person or are you also googling "Scotland" and "traitor" to find these despicable internet characters who are scaring you witless and putting your very life in jeopardy?

Serious reality check required.

Neither it`s that we Highlanders don`t trust you lowland scots sassenachs.

Archi_Bald

TCA, you probably won't believe this, but you come across as the lovechild of Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon. Ridiculing anyone who doesn't share your opinion, rubbishing people's questions when you don't know the answer, suggesting people with different views don't live in the real world, and generally trying to intimidate them by the way you are talking down on them.

MumOf2

TCA wrote: »

If you didn't get it, I was being sarcastic. Maybe you were too.

The notion of people being scared to speak out and intimidated by nationalists is just ridiculous.

Ridiculous to you maybe, but that's just you ridiculing those who think differently to yourself. Which appears to be the way of a lot of nationalists - if you don't agree then heap ridicule upon ridicule and try to make those who see the benefits of remaining in the UK look stupid, traitors to some cause based on myth and perceived injustices.

The targetting comes from forums like this,. comments on mainstream and alternative media sites, and anti-English (don't want to use the 'r' word here because apparently anti-English isn't r***ist...) insults in person.

Anyway, we're moving south of the border. We just want a peaceful life far from the aggression and stridency that pervades life in Scotland now.

And back to the question of finances, I understand that you can still hold ISAs but, unless you're a UK resident for tax purposes, will not benefit from the tax-free status of the interest/dividends. Not sure about the rest but I personally wouldn't wish to have anything tied up in Scottish based financial institutions because, just as with other foreign banks, etc., there's too much risk for me of non-performance and exposure to currency exchange fluctuations, legislation, currency controls and so on.

TCA

Archi_Bald wrote: »

TCA, you probably won't believe this, but you come across as the lovechild of Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon. Ridiculing anyone who doesn't share your opinion, rubbishing people's questions when you don't know the answer, suggesting people with different views don't live in the real world, and generally trying to intimidate them by the way you are talking down on them.

I've only ridiculed the fact that some people are intimidated by postings on the internet. And go googling to find them.

My lengthier post of this evening recognised that people value things differently and will no doubt vote accordingly. I put over my views on things that were important to me and I criticised the UK government for a few things. Asking people to explain their views is hardly intimidating them and I never suggested that people with different views don't live in the real world.

Calling me the lovechild of Salmond and Sturgeon is pretty childish.

MumOf2, having a different point of view, debating the issues and trying to find holes in the viewpoints of others, is what politics is all about. If you feel intimidated by that, then I'm sorry. Milliband called Cameron the "dunce of Downing Street" last week and Cameron called Milliband and Balls "muppets". And Archi Bald has just called me a name. I don't feel intimidated, except for being called an intimidator.

I'll leave you to it then. You can all just agree with each other and have a right good moan.;)

zagubov

TCA wrote: »

So why are you even on here asking questions about your savings? If the muppets at Holyrood can't answer your questions, do you really think you'll get answers on an internet message board?

Have you ever considered that your last 10 or 20 years have been so difficult in part due to the policies of the UK government? Do you recall the Thatcher years in Scotland? The stuff of nightmares. But of course successive UK governments have done such a great job since - I don't think so. Do you really think your children will have a bright and prosperous future if nothing changes? I admire your optimism. The outlook for the youth of Scotland is as bleak as ever it's been.

I recall the Thatcher years. I had to move across the border to get work. That's no big deal, England's a lovely country with nice people. Settled down here with a lovely wife and kids.

Shame so many people had to do that and throughout the course of the union it's never really been the other way round.

rpc wrote: »

Which brings us back to one of the main arguments in favour of a No vote.

Remaining in the union, we broadly know what to expect. It may not be perfect, but we have financial stability, we can plan into the future and a great many other money-related things are roughly known (even down to the currency in my wallet).

By seceding, we don't know what lies ahead. We do know interest rates will almost certainly go up, it is highly likely that we will not use the pound (a great many Yes supporters see a currency union as a temporary measure, even if they can agree one). The deficit will probably increase initially, if for no other reason than the setup costs of a new EU-compliant state. We may be forced into Schengen. We will probably lose a number of private sector jobs initially, to be replaced much more slowly.

This being the savings and investment boards, most posters probably know that your average Joe and Jane Bloggs have a cautious risk profile. Tolerance for loss is very low and most people would rather forgo the chance of a high return in order to protect against the chance of a significant loss.

Do all Yes voters have their life savings tied up in AIM? That's probably a similar risk profile... I suspect most won't even venture away from cash because of "the risks."

What I cannot for the life of me work out is why that doesn't apply to the future of our country. There is potential to achieve great things, but there is also potential to be significantly worse off than we are just now. The only answer I can come up with is that (encouraged by the present government) Yes are blind to the downsides and see only positive outcomes.

We are told that we can't have the answers until after negotiations, but when some of the questions have a large possible downside we are told that it will all be fine. It can't be both - either we can have the answers now or a Yes vote leaves us exposed to risk.

No may be a bit too negative (and the media certainly help spin it that way) but Yes are outright dishonest with their denial of the risks.

Don't really know where to start here.
Remaining in the union we do know what to expect. A raft of nukes next to the Clyde so Scotlands kids will act as NATO's nuclear shield. Your sons and daughters going off to wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Terrorist attacks. Having to ask the government for funding for TV shows in one of the national languages. Austerity. Incompetent financial regulation. Beef exports being shunned because your neighbours shoddy feeding practices.

Youy can't have the answers until after the negotiations? Only because that's Westminster's stance. Take it up with thme if you think that's causing uncertainty!

The yes campaign aren't denying the risks . They're correctly identfying them not as risks but as threats issued in advance by the other negotiating party to bolster their position.

"Jobs will be at risk - that's not a threat, just a fact " as Hammond said.

"You can't have the Sterling currency we jointly built- we won't let you!" said the three numpties in charge of unionist finance, in a totaly factual and non-threatening way apparently.:rotfl:

In a Europe that's desperately looking for energy sources not under Putin's control, Scotland's in a position of strength regarding EU negotiations.

It would be sensible to not simply read the newpapers - they're mostly owned outside Scotland and read as if independence is a bizarre anomaly uniquely unsuitable for Scotland , but perhaps also read some of the websites( Wings, Newsnet etc.), and then either accepting some of their ideas or not, depending on your juedgement. Is that not fair?

System

The benefits are quite obvious, for any objective person, to see.

Scotland is run in a sub-optimal fashion to maintain a political union with it larger neighbour. In the past, this was probably outweighed with free access to the markets of the empire and remainder of the UK. The former is gone and latter can be accessed effectively via the EU or EEA.

As for muppets, I don't totally trust politicians but I trust the Holyrood variety alot more than the scammers in the Commons and washed out old wannabes in the Lords.

incandescent wrote: »

I don't want to respond to every point you made in that post but the part I've quoted probably cuts to the heart of the matter.


I am simply not prepared to sacrifice another 10 or 20 years of economic improvement or risk what I've worked hard for, for potential benefits somewhere down the line. I'm not prepared to do that to myself, nor am I prepared to wait until my children are in their 30s or 40s before they have the same chances I did at their age.

And do I believe the muppets (of all parties) in Holyrood are actually capable of managing a country's finances? No, absolutely not.

I've only spoken about financial matters here because it is a financial website but I also disagree profoundly with most of the social, cultural and political bases for independence.

It just feels that I've worked very hard, under difficult circumstances, to manage my own life and my own circumstances and look after my family as best as I can, but other people now want to take massive risks with my life. Risks they generally won't even acknowledge are real, never mind discuss how they might be mitigated. I can't begin to articulate how angry and frustrated that makes me.

ColdIron

Happy St George's day chaps