Economists Urge Scotland to Vote No......

Shakethedisease

Tromking wrote: »

It`s astonishing the amount of Nationalists who think electoral support for the SNP (outside of referenda) equals tacit support for an independent Scotland, yourself included.

No, I don't. I can't speak for others.

Shakethedisease

ruggedtoast wrote: »

I can't help but feel that your desperation to secure independence for Scotland might not be better expended on attempting to convince your countrymen. Rather than us.

Maybe if you hadn't spent half your time in the last two years on here arguing with half a dozen Englishmen (one of whom lives in Australia) there might have been a few more yes votes. And maybe if all other nutty cybernats had toned it down a bit there might have been a few hundred thousand more yes votes.

Not that it matters now.

I enjoy the debate, I assume you post here and on other boards on MSE for the same reasons.

kabayiri

antrobus wrote: »

On a point of order.

It's not within the power of the SNP to "go for another referendum". That is a matter for Parliament to decide. The UK one, you understand.

I doubt the SNP will even ask for one with Brent Crude under $60 a barrel.:)

I agree. It would be politically stupid.

The worrying thing is that it demonstrates how volatile oil can be as a primary income source. This won't escape the notice of the voting public.

They clearly need a wider based economy.

Shakethedisease

antrobus wrote: »

On a point of order.

It's not within the power of the SNP to "go for another referendum". That is a matter for Parliament to decide. The UK one, you understand.

I doubt the SNP will even ask for one with Brent Crude under $60 a barrel.:)

As mentioned before. They haven't said they're going for another referendum. Just haven't ruled out the possibility. And if they ever do decide to run another one. Who's going to stop it them running one on an advisory basis ? Especially if it's what Scots want at the time.

Shakethedisease

kabayiri wrote: »

I agree. It would be politically stupid.

The worrying thing is that it demonstrates how volatile oil can be as a primary income source. This won't escape the notice of the voting public.

They clearly need a wider based economy.

A load of SNP MP's in Westminster holding the balance of power ? You might want to rethink that politically stupid comment. It won't be a cosy Tory/Lib/Lab consensus there for the next few years if that happens.

And we're not stupid. We know oil prices are volatile. Jeez oh.. lol.

Thrugelmir

Shakethedisease wrote: »

A load of SNP MP's in Westminster holding the balance of power ? You might want to rethink that politically stupid comment. It won't be a cosy Tory/Lib/Lab consensus there for the next few years if that happens.

Who ever sits at Westminster has the same challenges to face. Suspect that these novice politicians are in for a shock. Once they grasp the difficulty of turning dreams into realities.

kabayiri

Shakethedisease wrote: »

...
And we're not stupid. We know oil prices are volatile. Jeez oh.. lol.

I don't think a lot of ordinary people do. We are frequently told it's becoming a scarce resource. Plus, people directly equate the cost of the commodity with the cost at the pump, even if this is incorrect.

Okay, a positive challenge to you then.

How do *you* suggest a future independent Scotland ride out volatile oil prices? What does it need to do to adapt it's economy?

You sound like a politician sometimes. Full of negatives but very few positive answers.

antrobus

Shakethedisease wrote: »

As mentioned before. They haven't said they're going for another referendum. Just haven't ruled out the possibility. And if they ever do decide to run another one. Who's going to stop it them running one on an advisory basis ? Especially if it's what Scots want at the time.

Some Scottish unionists prepared to take the issue to court?

Wasn't the recent referendum supposed to "deliver a fair test and a decisive expression of the views of people in Scotland and a result that everyone will respect". Who is that is not respecting the result?

Shakethedisease wrote: »

....And we're not stupid. We know oil prices are volatile. Jeez oh.. lol.

You mean to say that the point has finally sunk in? Wonders never cease.:)

kabayiri

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Who ever sits at Westminster has the same challenges to face. Suspect that these novice politicians are in for a shock. Once they grasp the difficulty of turning dreams into realities.

Very true. It's so much easier to be the opposing party. They will get their share of the blame for the next round of harsh cuts. The next 5 years are going to be extremely tough.

Shakethedisease

antrobus wrote: »

Some Scottish unionists prepared to take the issue to court?

Wasn't the recent referendum supposed to "deliver a fair test and a decisive expression of the views of people in Scotland and a result that everyone will respect". Who is that is not respecting the result?



You mean to say that the point has finally sunk in? Wonders never cease.:)

What court ? And on what basis ?

Everyone has respected the result. There have been no riots on the streets, no declaration of UDI etc etc. I honestly don't see who hasn't respected the result. No-one disputes it.

What hasn't happened however, was the universally predicted SNP meltdown. Sorry about that. But as a political party they will be around for a while yet.

As for oil, independence was still a very bad thing for Scotland when oil prices were $100+ a barrel according to unionists. Nothing much has changed there in narrative. Except that it's now a very, very bad thing. But never mind, we all need to respect the referendum result don't we ? And accept, that low oil prices are the UK's problem for the forseeable future.