Censored : the debate

beecher2

Tromking wrote: »

Maybe!
I'll be writing to my Tory MP exhorting him to take the Scots to the cleaners if a yes vote comes to pass, that'll be the game we're in I'm afraid.

Posts like this are interesting when you think that some believe that Yes voters are anti-English. So much for the lovebombing.

chewmylegoff

sss555s wrote: »

We don't want to dictate all the terms.

If we did we would want to keep the banking as it is and not pay any of the UK's debt.

We are happy to work together for the better of both sides (as in the Edinburgh agreement) and give and take.

Sounds like you want us to take some UK debt and have no banking "union".

That sounds a lot like you want it all your own way and nothing like the Edinburgh agreement.

Not at all. If we had it all our own way we would keep all of the oil and give you all the debt.

Anyone who thinks that the can leave a political union whilst maintaining selected benefits of being in that political union as it pleases them is living in cloud cuckoo land. It's like quitting your job but then expecting your employer to continue to pay your private health insurance because your new employer doesn't offer that benefit.

Tromking

beecher2 wrote: »

Posts like this are interesting when you think that some believe that Yes voters are anti-English. So much for the lovebombing.

In my English circles there not much love I'm afraid, it's either ignorance of the vote completely or a burgeoning antipathy toward Scotland and Scottish generally.

BobQ

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/11012774/Scottish-independence-Yes-camp-deluding-itself-on-currency-union.html

This seems to be a fair warning that job relocations are coming too....

sss555s

Tromking wrote: »

In my English circles there not much love I'm afraid, it's either ignorance of the vote completely or a burgeoning antipathy toward Scotland and Scottish generally.

So your all anti Scot's.

I expect a YES vote will suit your English circles fine.

IronWolf

sss555s wrote: »

We don't want to dictate all the terms.

If we did we would want to keep the banking as it is and not pay any of the UK's debt.

We are happy to work together for the better of both sides (as in the Edinburgh agreement) and give and take.

Sounds like you want us to take some UK debt and have no banking "union".

That sounds a lot like you want it all your own way and nothing like the Edinburgh agreement.

So are rUK going to keep 92% of North Sea oil? If we have to split all assets then that's only fair.

In the event of a yes vote things could go three ways.
1. All the UK government statements about no monetary union turn out to be just scare tactics and Scotland get everything they want.
2. The UK government, knowing its lost the vote, shows its true colours and screws Scotland out of everything they can, knowing there is nothing they can do about it.
3. The UK has been telling the truth all along and acts in a fair way to Scotland but refuses to enter a monetary union with them.

SNP seem to have all their chips on no. 1. That doesn't seem the most likely to me. At the end of the day it is Scotland leaving the UK, the UK's assets are in its name, so it is the one arguing from a position of strength. All the UK has to do is say 'no', it can hold out for however long it wants because it is Scotland that is eager to break away.

Tromking

sss555s wrote: »

So your all anti Scot's.

I expect a YES vote will suit your English circles fine.

That's not what I said.
As others have said there is no way of gauging the attitude of rUK negotiators post a yes vote. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if the question of the north sea oil wasn't as clear cut as most Scots seem to think it is. A Tory party promising in its manifesto to play hard ball would probably win by a landslide in the GE, and while we're talking about the law of unintended consequences I'm surprised a possible anti-Scottish backlash from English consumers hasn't been mooted more often. I hope if the breakaway happens it's amicable but the UK has a fine record of standing up for our national interest sometimes at odds with world opinion, so I would expect no favours whatsoever from a smarting team of rUK negotiators.

.string.

On assets - have a look at this short article:

Breakaway Scottish state 'could not claim a cut of UK assets'

I've seen similar analyses elsewhere. The SNP response is typical of the "don't worry everything will be wonderful" stategy with which they strive to con the Scottish people. Plus of course this sort of nonsense. Scots to demand cash for English services.

So basically a separate Scotland would only keep UK assets located in Scotland plus the liquid assets and debts.

As for the oil, it depends on what is deemed to be Scottish waters, a matter of debate. UK Institutions are UK Institutions; so are the armed forces.


As for Salmond threatening not to pay Scotland's share of the national debt, if there are any positive assets which would otherwise accrue to Scotland, they would, I imagine, be confiscated in such a situation.

It's clear that the "negotiation" could very spirited to say the least and why the demeanour of the two parties is important.

So it's ironic that the SNP strategy uses divisive tactics to explain why they propose Separation aka independence and is hell bent on destroying inter UK respect.

.string.

So your all anti Scot's...[/QUOTE]

No just the SNP.

The SNP is not Scotland.

lostinrates

sss555s wrote: »

I watched it all.

It wasn't all that exciting and the usual points and non points were being argued. There was nothing new and it was often a rabble.
I think Salmond came out on top slightly because of his better debating skills.

They were both stumped for a few minutes not answering each others questions.

I think it has swayed me to vote YES!

Just skimming, but dear all the sss's , if this swayed you in any direction because you were on a fence, those fences where you are must lean most frightfully inefficiently!