ELITE 11+ glitch loving, barmy bargain hunters

tweets

Bedtime goodnight cya all tomorrow :wave:

purpledonkey

tweets wrote: »

They will have to wait I am still stuck on level 677 :mad::mad::mad::mad: its impossible

I finally passed that this morning with the aid of the fish thing. It had me swearing like a good'n though!

zippydooda

aau1 wrote: »

If I was English and Scotland broke away I would boycott as many Scottish products in favour of English as possible. Why help another country set itself up at the expense of your own country?

that's the big point Galloway made the other night. England is scotlands main export, it outstrips all other countries put together. why turn England into scotlands biggest competitor? (or something like that)

for the record im all for a united kingdom, I don't like the concessions being offered.

fairclaire

lookinforabargain wrote: »

Yay, we can have an Elite meet

BB and I will bring the rolls and FC can bring the cheap booze :rotfl::rotfl:

I hope the holes in the fence are big enough to pass the bottles through :eek: :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Savvybuyer

Arthien wrote: »

It is not at all certain that Scotland will be independent with a yes vote, I don't know many people who would call a shared currency true independence. And it doesn't avoid all the so-called 'risks' of staying in the union, and it certainly adds a fair few more risks of its own. It's all a big unknown really, which is why the politicians' promises on both sides are daft, because no-one can guarantee what will happen in an unknown future situation.

As someone who works in exports, I look at the comments from other countries saying that they want to deal with a united country and take that seriously as a representation of how an independent Scotland's economic future would go. I cannot see how other countries would take Scotland seriously as a business partner. If I tell my customers I'm Welsh, not English, they look at me like I've got two heads because it doesn't mean anything to them, and I can see it being the same with Scotland. I mean North Korea is one of the main countries who have suggested they would welcome an independent Scotland, that's hardly reassuring from an economic perspective is it? :eek:

That's of course one of the arguments of the "No" campaign, that you are leaving the control of one of the fiscal features to another country.

Really, I think there is a lot of sentimentality here. I think Alex Salmond is promising the pound because he knows that, if he said anything else, the public wouldn't vote for it. People generally do hold the pound very close to their hearts.

So, any post of mine will itself be inappropriate if I even dare to question or challenge that! But, listen up! Really, any currency or anything at all could be used. The only requirement for something to be used as money is that it is accepted by the people in the society using it. If we don't have 'money' we live in a barter society. The only requirement for anything to be used as currency though is acceptance. We, anyone, could use the pound. We could use anything, APG vouchers or anything (actually I wouldn't mind if they were made legal tender:D:rotfl:, would help, could pay for fuel with them:cool:). It doesn't matter. But, the point is people are "sentimental" about the pound.

So, maybe Alex Salmond promises the pound in order to get the vote to be for independence. But, if that's done, look at it that way - that it's the means for a desirable (in my view) end and there's no reason why Scotland, with the government it wants each time, could not at some point in the future decide, for itself, what currency it wants. It could even ditch the pound if that became a risk. Whereas the 'rest of the UK' would be stuck with it, as its own currency.

You mention it not avoiding risks of staying in the Union and it being an "unknown". But I'm not sure what you mean there - are you saying there is a risk of keeping the pound? In which case, surely staying in the Union, and keeping the pound, continues that risk for both Scotland and the rest of the UK. Whereas independence allows the flexibility to change and avoid that risk if the pound itself was risky keeping.

If it's a big unknown and no-one can guarantee, then why not choose independence? Surely each independent country, whatever it was, could take the best option for itself as the as-yet-unknown circumstances arose? And adapt and change policies to deal with any economic crises. They certainly wouldn't deliberately mismanage the economy, whether that was Scotland, the rest of the UK or the current UK including Scotland. It may be better if Scotland did have its own policies, which apart from the keeping of the pound, would be intact - and anyway that could still change, as you say, nothing is guaranteed (and perhaps nor should it be - gives everyone ability to cope with the situations that arise). It may be a good thing to have different policies to the rest of the UK - would Scotland want to be part of a UK economic recession again? Anyway, we in an interdependent world, so independence or no, we still have influences from the world, and the world economy, that determine whether we are in recession or not.

Just finally mention the Deutsche Bank. What they were saying, about depression, was based on the assumption that the Scottish banks would remain registered in Scotland and therefore wouldn't have access to the Bank of England in the event of runs on them. However, the Scottish banks were going to change their registrations to England, as a purely technical matter, so that they would have such protection. Making the whole argument that there would be depression as a result - wrong. Besides, do we trust the banks?

Someone on some place in the internet (I know, great research:D:rotfl:) I saw posted wondered if Clydesbank Bank comes to England, does that mean Yorkshire Bank will come back to Leeds? There would be many people who would think that would be a good thing! Besides, as regards Royal Bank of Scotland, who would want that anyway, given the substantial liabilities owned by the current UK taxpayer? Far better if that be registered in London, one of the world's big financial markets, having the protection of the Bank of England, but operating in other territories of the world that it chooses to operate in, including Scotland. Businesses operate to make profit. Scotland has three big city areas of population in Glasgow, Edinburgh and Aberdeen and no reason why it cannot work. As for farther north, or west, of that, you stand far better chance of being noticed by Edinburgh/Glasgow than by London.

Tinyshoes

Sunshinemummy wrote: »

If you get past the border controls and make it down here hiding in a lorry, you can hide in my spare bedroom!

:D:D:D:D

They can hide in my new self contained garage if they bring down some of that Edinburgh Rock.

lookinforabargain

fairclaire wrote: »

I hope the holes in the fence are big enough to pass the bottles through :eek: :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

I seem to remember you being partial to a power tool or two, shouldn't be too much of an issue BB and I will keep the edgy :rotfl::rotfl:

Tinyshoes

fairclaire wrote: »

I hope the holes in the fence are big enough to pass the bottles through :eek: :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

FC we would have drunk it all by the time they cut the holes big enough for our stashes. :rotfl:

fairclaire

Bananababe wrote: »

:eek::eek::eek: calm down dear its a roll ! Not a bap ! Baps are something entirely different where I come from !!!

Tell me about it!
My OH, although as Scottish as me (but much more anglicised) asks me every Sunday morning if I want a sausage bap

.........I just say no, Ive got my bra on now :rotfl::rotfl:

:eek:

scottishshortie

Good evening

Bananababe wrote: »

We put anything in a pie. Haggies and turnip(swede) Tatties and beans. Macaroni (not my favourite sorry FC) one hole or two :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl: no you would have to be scottish to get that.

You missed out Chicken Curry and Bean n tattie as well