The New Fat Scotland 'Thanks for all the Fish' Thread.

Shaka_Zulu

INDY-CISIVE Nicola Sturgeon says IndyRef2 might not happen.........


I thought the mantra has been "when" not "if"?

And some still pretend to believe the GE is not about independence! Nicola obviously thinks it does. The local elections have obviously terrified the powers that be at SNP HQ.

Pity I was hoping they would carry on digging that hole they were in .

.string.

Shaka_Zulu wrote: »

INDY-CISIVE Nicola Sturgeon says IndyRef2 might not happen.........


I thought the mantra has been "when" not "if"?

And some still pretend to believe the GE is not about independence! Nicola obviously thinks it does. The local elections have obviously terrified the powers that be at SNP HQ.

Pity I was hoping they would carry on digging that hole they were in .

I don't give that story much credibility. I think Sturgeon is only trying to insert an element of "maybe there won't be a neverendum" into the GE process in order to dissuade those who don't want one from giving their vote to another party. It was the same in the last Scottish election I believe.

You may note that Shakey mentioned 2021 a couple of posts above; I think we can reasonably assume that this a part of the collective's misinformation project.

Tromking

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Wake up to what a union means and you'll find that neither can England. England/Wales can leave if that's what the people in England/Wales want. Scotland can choose not it if that's what the people of Scotland want. If it destroys the union in the process than that's just tough. England/Wales are 'only part of the UK' too. In fact without Scotland the UK doesn't actually exist.

Why should Scotland have to kowtow and go along with every decision England/Wales make in a union yet the same not be true in the other direction ? Get over yourself. England and Wales can't demand what they like either and still expect to be in a union.

You can't go on about unions meaning anything, then just ignore the Scottish Parliament, the Welsh and NI as if they don't matter and are of no relevance to the UK. What kind of union is that ?

As usual you retreat into 'grievance mode' whenever it suits.
The problem for you and the SNP is that for every Scot that falls for the now hackneyed England or the Union is repressing us 'line' there are increasingly more Scots who are rejecting this juvenile rhetoric and many are quite frankly embarrassed by it.
As much as you want it to, the Scottish Parliament cannot operate totally free from the constraints of our Union, to do that you`ll have to persuade enough of your fellow Scots to vote for independence, and there`s the rub.

Enterprise_1701C

.string. wrote: »

I don't give that story much credibility. I think Sturgeon is only trying to insert an element of "maybe there won't be a neverendum" into the GE process in order to dissuade those who don't want one from giving their vote to another party. It was the same in the last Scottish election I believe.

You may note that Shakey mentioned 2021 a couple of posts above; I think we can reasonably assume that this a part of the collective's misinformation project.

Agreed. I am still absolutely convinced that she wants to be president of the eu and will destroy Scotland to get there.

But she is currently acting like a teenager who thinks that if they give mummy what she wants for a few days she can then go off to the festival she wants to go to and get away with taking all the drugs she wants and getting drunk constantly, and then come home and have mummy pander to her for a while while she recovers.

As for the currency, she reckons she wants a currency union with us at the start. Does it occur to her that we might not want a currency union with them, might not want the consequences of that?

.string.

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

....

As for the currency, she reckons she wants a currency union with us at the start. Does it occur to her that we might not want a currency union with them, might not want the consequences of that?

Salmond and his Sturgeon side-kick were told that during the last referendum but if that idea is still being mooted the result will be the same.

It's nothing to do with any anti-Scotish backlash thing, it's due to the conviction of everyone, except the SNP's gullible following, that the Scottish economy would take a nose-dive and the rUK not wanting to be in any way liable for the financial consequences. Unfortunately (unfortunate because there could be some secondary negative impact on sterling) they can use the currency outside a formal currency union although where the SNP would get the physical money from I cannot guess. Printing Scottish "money" tied to the pound won't work since no-one would want it.

IveSeenTheLight

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

I've tried to educate you on this topic (which is clearly sorely required) but you refuse to listen.

You're just going to lead others astray, like a drug dealer peddling wares that might seem like a good idea at the time but lead to disaster in the end due to a lack of understanding, care, or both.

Your attempts at "educating" me are lost because of the illogical point you make.

I've answered your scaremongering point and turned the same point round on you which you conveniently opt to ignore stating its irrelevant.

Well its not.

Each time you pedal your wares on the streets regarding this scaremongering, I'll be right here to expose it and let the real educated people make an educated decision.

Once again, in your hypothetical extreme world where 500,000 Scottish jobs is at risk because as part of the EU, we cannot trade £50B with rUK, what is the impact on the rUK jobs where they would lose £65B export to Scotland?

Taking it a step further, what will happen to the jobs in the UK reliant on the £240B out of £550B (44%) export to the EU?

sss555s

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Look, clearly some of us are well read on the topic and others not.

I'm done placating on this thread, it gets me and others nowhere because you and others simply are not open to evidence based reasoning.

You constantly quote 500k when it was never inferred that was jobs at risk but just jobs linked and you refuse to answer if you think Westminster will impose a trade embargo on Scotland which may mean the EU also.
That report was commissioned by Mundell with some dubious methods collating and processing the information. We may as well start quoting everything from Wings of Scotland as evidence based reasoning.

You also never consider the added trade Scotland would benefit from by being a Country on it's own nor the benefits that would suit Scotland by remaining in the European UNION.

Your only argument seems to be this Mundell commissioned thing and that is you saying you are well read :rotfl:

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

500,000 jobs if the rest of the EU is on WTO terms.

There's that number again. The way you imply it is a lie which you are constantly peddling on this thread.

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

As for the currency, she reckons she wants a currency union with us at the start. Does it occur to her that we might not want a currency union with them, might not want the consequences of that?

That's not something that would put me off in the slightest. I'd rather we were clear about our currency (and probably will be by the time it matters) and hope we aren't in the position where Westminster and it's media circus can push the fear button to sway the weak minded.
Basically Westminster played a game of double bluff while controlling the media and won the last time.

sss555s

.string. wrote: »

Unfortunately (unfortunate because there could be some secondary negative impact on sterling)

How do you justify the negative impact on sterling from Brexit?

TrickyTree83

sss555s wrote: »

You constantly quote 500k when it was never inferred that was jobs at risk but just jobs linked and you refuse to answer if you think Westminster will impose a trade embargo on Scotland which may mean the EU also.
That report was commissioned by Mundell with some dubious methods collating and processing the information. We may as well start quoting everything from Wings of Scotland as evidence based reasoning.

You also never consider the added trade Scotland would benefit from by being a Country nor the benefits that would suit Scotland by remaining in the European UNION.

Your only argument seems to be this Mundell commissioned thing and that is you saying you are well read :rotfl:

Incorrect, as per.

Westminster will impose nothing. Clearly you don't understand the situation, I'm done trying to help you understand it, I'll just tell you how it is.

Whoever commissioned the report did not compose the report, do you know who composed it? The Fraser of Allander institute, do you know who else they composed a report for? The SNP, about jobs at risk from Brexit in a worst case scenario.

The trade Scotland would benefit from by being a country... so lets see, have you looked into the "Border Effect"? That the erection of a border, soft or hard has an impact on trade. That it is estimated based on formulae developed by Yale University in the USA (are they bias too now?) that the Border Effect will wipe up to 5.5% of Scotland's GDP just by having a border. That's before any trade arrangements are taken into account.

Then there's the indisputable fact that Scotland does most of its trade with the rest of the UK. You cannot run away from that one, even to someone who hasn't looked at any statistics this is a blatantly obvious fact. You will need to replace vast amounts of Scottish trade, do you not think it odd that the Netherlands and Ireland are worried about percentages far smaller than that which the Scottish nationalists have to contend with? Your EU friends are worried about recession from, in some cases, single digit trade percentages, and you're talking as if two thirds of Scottish trade will just magically swap from the UK to the EU.

sss555s wrote: »

There's that number again. The way you imply it is a lie which you are constantly peddling on this thread.



That's not something that would put me off in the slightest. I'd rather we were clear about our currency (and probably will be by the time it matters) and hope we aren't in the position where Westminster and it's media circus can push the fear button to sway the weak minded.
Basically Westminster played a game of double bluff while controlling the media and won the last time.

It's a lie is it?

Then there must not be 120,000 jobs at risk from Brexit then? That must be a lie too, is it?

You've scrambled around for ways to discredit the figure of 500,000 jobs at risk. You're not the only one, ISTL just said "I don't believe the figure".

It actually appears to be a tactical masterstroke to use the very same institute that the SNP have used for their propaganda to demonstrate the importance of the union to Scotland. You've got no comeback. It is what it is, reality sucks if you're a nationalist right now. You need to hope and pray for a good deal between the EU and the UK, and you should keep in mind:

- iScotland would only be economically viable in such a situation.
- voters who want to remain in the EU but not at all costs could swing away from "Yes" if the deal is good.
- the SNP will need to change tack and somehow distance themselves from their lie regarding a "cliff edge Tory Brexit" meaning independence is the only way forward, they're liars from top to bottom on this one.

.string.

sss555s wrote: »

How do you justify the negative impact on sterling from Brexit?

Liability by association with a failing economy, so some decrease in the value of Sterling.