A Yes vote means better jobs for young people in Scotland

Bantex_2

As long as we don't have to have their politicians lording over England anymore, I am all for it.

antrobus

CLAPTON wrote: »

if Scotland breaking away from the UK is such a one way street to riches, then presumably Scotland breaking up into say 4 or 5 separate states would be even more beneficial.

Time to dust off the history books and resurrect;

- the kingdom of Strathclyde, capital Dumbarton
- the kingdom of Gododdin, capital Edinburgh
- the kingdom of Pictavia, capital, will Aberdeen do?
- the kingdom of Dal Riata, capital some hill fort somewhere

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

antrobus wrote: »

- the kingdom of Pictavia, capital, will Aberdeen do?

Works for me....

Thrugelmir

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Please articulate your point more specifically with an example

If it costs more to employee people in Scotland than Spain. Where is a Company requiring low cost labour going to base itself. The unemployment rate in Spain for the under 24's is now over 50%.

When push comes to shove. Dog eats dog. The veneer holding the Eurozone together will evaporate.

Hardly surprising given that 2.5 billion Indian and Chinese workers have joined the labour market since the early 90's.

mystic_trev

kabayiri wrote: »

Of course it will be tough and some goals difficult to realize, but what's wrong with having tough goals?

Probably the reason it's 16 years since they last played in a World Cup :rotfl:

vivatifosi

Not so easy to keep up with the Scottish debate now that the thread with the most contributions on has been moved to the dark side.

I was quite swayed by an interview I heard recently with a Scottish actor (James McAvoy?). He said that people shouldn't decide on whether they think it will be better for the economy, or worst for the economy, or for jobs, etc... Politicians lie and the circumstances change over time. He said what was important was whether or not in the heart of Scots they want to be independent. If you do, then you should vote yes, if you don't, vote no... because ultimately the other stuff you can't make your mind up on and people from both sides will lie to you. It's all supposition and theory. I quite liked his outlook.

CLAPTON

vivatifosi wrote: »

Not so easy to keep up with the Scottish debate now that the thread with the most contributions on has been moved to the dark side.

I was quite swayed by an interview I heard recently with a Scottish actor (James McAvoy?). He said that people shouldn't decide on whether they think it will be better for the economy, or worst for the economy, or for jobs, etc... Politicians lie and the circumstances change over time. He said what was important was whether or not in the heart of Scots they want to be independent. If you do, then you should vote yes, if you don't, vote no... because ultimately the other stuff you can't make your mind up on and people from both sides will lie to you. It's all supposition and theory. I quite liked his outlook.

I rather agree, it won't be decided on nominal economic grounds, but basically on how many hate the English sufficiently to want to be rid of them.

zagubov

CLAPTON wrote: »

if Scotland breaking away from the UK is such a one way street to riches, then presumably Scotland breaking up into say 4 or 5 separate states would be even more beneficial.

antrobus wrote: »

Time to dust off the history books and resurrect;

- the kingdom of Strathclyde, capital Dumbarton
- the kingdom of Gododdin, capital Edinburgh
- the kingdom of Pictavia, capital, will Aberdeen do?
- the kingdom of Dal Riata, capital some hill fort somewhere

Of course. If you chop a potato into 3 or 4 chunks for roasting, presumably it's much better to keep going and chop them into many many wafer thin slices and make them into many smaller crisps. Much healthier- no, wait a minute, that's rubbish.

Or why cut some meat into slices when you could presumably improve it if you mince it into tiny fragments.

Why not shorten TV programmes into one minute sequences interrupted by adverts.

Why bother carrying banknotes when you can carry sacks of coins.

Because everything's presumably better if you subdivide it forever, do you think?

CLAPTON wrote: »

I rather agree, it won't be decided on nominal economic grounds, but basically on how many hate the English sufficiently to want to be rid of them.

You're not getting into this "reading" and "thinking" you've got to get into are you?

Nikkster

vivatifosi wrote: »

Not so easy to keep up with the Scottish debate now that the thread with the most contributions on has been moved to the dark side.

I was quite swayed by an interview I heard recently with a Scottish actor (James McAvoy?). He said that people shouldn't decide on whether they think it will be better for the economy, or worst for the economy, or for jobs, etc... Politicians lie and the circumstances change over time. He said what was important was whether or not in the heart of Scots they want to be independent. If you do, then you should vote yes, if you don't, vote no... because ultimately the other stuff you can't make your mind up on and people from both sides will lie to you. It's all supposition and theory. I quite liked his outlook.

I'm glad you posted that viva, I thought the same. Got some funny looks when I said in a conversation with some Scottish colleagues that that was the most sensible thing I'd heard about the whole issue. I'm sure I didn't explain it as eloquently as you though.

ruggedtoast

Have there been any more opinion polls out then?

I havent checked into this much since they moved the other thread to the dentists waiting room of 'discussion time'.

According to Shakey et al's predictions then, by now the SNP should be polling at around 300% of the vote.