A Yes vote means better jobs for young people in Scotland

Generali

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

another on topic discussion point

So Scotland is dominated by SMEs. Just like every other economy in Europe including the rest of the UK.

IveSeenTheLight

Generali wrote: »

Not really, they're self explanatory really.

It doesn't seem to be translating into a Yes vote though.

Give it time, they were only announced this week.

Your banging a historical drum but not considering how these small changes will start to make an impact going forward.

I only hope the "No" campaign continue to be as equally complacent.

Generali wrote: »

According to the betting exchanges, a Yes vote is becoming increasingly unlikely in fact.

Incidentally, all the stats and facts pointed to a Ghana victory last night

Opta stats

• Ghana have met USA in each of their two previous participations in World Cups, winning 2-1 on both occasions (2006 group, 2010 second round).
• Indeed USA were knocked out of the 2010 World Cup by Ghana; the last team to face the same opponent in consecutive World Cup games was Scotland, who were eliminated by Brazil in 1990 before facing them in their 1998 opener (they didn’t qualify in 1994). This will also happen a few days before this match when the Netherlands face Spain.
• Four of Ghana’s previous nine World Cup goals have come against USA.
• The USA have only kept two clean sheets in their last 23 games at the World Cup.
• Ghana scored more goals than any other team in the 2014 African World Cup qualifiers (25).
• No player scored more goals than Ghana’s Asamoah Gyan in the 2014 African World Cup qualifiers (6). The former Sunderland man has also scored four and assisted two of Ghana’s nine World Cup goals, and netted the winner against USA in 2010.
• Landon Donovan has been left out of the USA Squad for the 2014 World Cup. He is USA’s top scorer at World Cups with five goals; he has scored three of their last four at the competition.

Despite these historical stats and facts and betting exchanges pointing to Ghana, who prevailed with the win last night?

Generali

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Give it time, they were only announced this week.

Your banging a historical drum but not considering how these small changes will start to make an impact going forward.

I only hope the "No" campaign continue to be as equally complacent.



Incidentally, all the stats and facts pointed to a Ghana victory last night



Despite these historical stats and facts and betting exchanges pointing to Ghana, who prevailed with the win last night?

I give up. This is pointless. If you don't want a discussion and simply to grind everyone else down with non-sequiturs and assertions then have fun.

You win. Until September...

IveSeenTheLight

Generali wrote: »

I give up. This is pointless. If you don't want a discussion and simply to grind everyone else down with non-sequiturs and assertions then have fun.

You win. Until September...

Crack on Generali,
I'm happy to debate but do find it pointless pointing to historic small respondant poll's, which you seem happy to regurgitate anytime, anybody tries to open up the debate.

Glad you caught onto my subtle point about irrelevance of the polls to the future outcome.

Generali

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Crack on Generali,
I'm happy to debate but do find it pointless pointing to historic small respondant poll's, which you seem happy to regurgitate anytime, anybody tries to open up the debate.

Glad you caught onto my subtle point about irrelevance of the polls to the future outcome.

Not interested. It's pointless.

It takes some time to analyse this rubbish you post. Your response is to post another and another. It's boring and life is short. If you don't want to enter into a discussion about a genuine analysis of this one eyed crap then there's no point in me taking the time to look over it.

Clearly you can't be bother to check it as it bears no analysis.

IveSeenTheLight

Generali wrote: »

Not interested. It's pointless.

It takes some time to analyse this rubbish you post. Your response is to post another and another. It's boring and life is short. If you don't want to enter into a discussion about a genuine analysis of this one eyed crap then there's no point in me taking the time to look over it.

Clearly you can't be bother to check it as it bears no analysis.

Generali, you clearly are not willing to have a sensible discussion on independence going forward and are the one who has closed their eyes and opinions as to what may prevail.

That's your choice. You have no relevance or impact in the matter anyway.

Today, I have posted about: -

• Independence can create more manufacturing jobs
  
• Scotland has a strong private business sector
  
• Scots will suffer if the vote is No, experts on Quebec warn

You have not been willing to engage and discuss in these points, just harping back to your mantra about historical polls (of a small respondent basis) and how in your opinion, this concludes the debate and that the result in September will be a rejection of the vote for Independence.

That may turn out to be the case, but I'm not narrow minded to make such presumptions or predictions

IveSeenTheLight

Guess what, there's an interesting new poll out

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/yes-48-no-52-breakthrough-poll-has-yes-at-record-high.24488719

he Panelbase survey found a record 43% of voters now say they will back independence on September 18, compared to 47% voting No.

The figures are 48% for Yes and 52% for No once undecided voters are removed, suggesting the Yes camp needs just a two-point swing for victory.

The gap between the two sides has halved from eight points to four since last month, when Panelbase put Yes on 46% and No on 54%.

Looks like this latest poll may indicate the gap is narrowing in contradiction to the perception that it is not.

Generali

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Generali, you clearly are not willing to have a sensible discussion on independence going forward and are the one who has closed their eyes and opinions as to what may prevail.

That's your choice. You have no relevance or impact in the matter anyway.

Today, I have posted about: -

• Independence can create more manufacturing jobs
• Scotland has a strong private business sector
• Scots will suffer if the vote is No, experts on Quebec warn

You have not been willing to engage and discuss in these points, just harping back to your mantra about historical polls (of a small respondent basis) and how in your opinion, this concludes the debate and that the result in September will be a rejection of the vote for Independence.

That may turn out to be the case, but I'm not narrow minded to make such presumptions or predictions

I put in analysis of the first 2. As I say, this is pointless.

You engage more than most of your fellow nationalists with your opponents but you aren't prepared to engage with any well reasoned point.

You won't discuss how infrastructure will be paid for. You won't explain how Scotland having the same economic structure as most of the rest of the world makes independence better, you won't discuss how Yes is going to turn a losing proposition into a winning one.

This is a monologue because you have no good points to raise. If you did you'd raise them.

IveSeenTheLight

Generali wrote: »

This is a monologue because you have no good points to raise. If you did you'd raise them.

I believe I do, maybe you do not recognise or see them

Generali wrote: »

I put in analysis of the first 2. As I say, this is pointless.

the first one, you have responded to and as such so will I.
The second point, you did not add anything to respond to, rather that confirming that Scotland is dominated by SME's.
Are you in agreement with the article that this demonstrates that Scotland has what it takes to be a wealthy, independent country

Generali wrote: »

You won't discuss how infrastructure will be paid for. You won't explain how Scotland having the same economic structure as most of the rest of the world makes independence better, you won't discuss how Yes is going to turn a losing proposition into a winning one.

I've on many occasions agreed there will be a cost for generating infrastructure and this is something I am willing to accept.

I believe the Scottish Government has proposed that there are savings to be made such as on defense which can be better utilised

I am not a member of the government nor the SNP and cannot answer some of the questions you ask.

Some of these will be negotiated between the Scottish Government and Westminster post Independence.

I'd be happy if the two bodies were willing to discuss earlier, but it seems one side does not wish to come to the negotiating table to do so.

The Scottish government seeked backing from Westminster to boost the economy by bringing forward capital funding and unlock 300 ‘shovel-ready’ infrastructure projects.

This was rejected by Westminster.

This is in contrast to Westminster's decision to borrow billions of pounds for the high-speed rail project supporting infrastructure development in London and the south-east

Therein lies the paradox of those who claim that we are better together. Efforts to develop the Scottish economy in a different way are stifled by a government invariably hostile to such efforts.

This is why, I believe, that as an Independent country, the government (and by proxy the Scottish people through the voting system) can make the best choices for the people of Scotland

http://www.heraldscotland.com/comment/letters/swinneys-borrowing-proposal-generates-new-level-of-interest.24508735

N1AK

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Since you love a poll (I take with a pinch of salt given outcomes can vary vastly from the polls), what do you think on this poll

I think they're clear signs of issues but if anything they should make a rational person think a vote for independence is even less likely. Why is that so, it does sound rather counter-intuitive right? Because if people already don't trust Westminster and they still are polling against independence then you're unlikely to sway them on that issue. If Scots trusted Westminster and were close to voting for independence then attacking that trust would be a potential strategy.