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

Thrugelmir

Mistermeaner wrote: »

So ducking the issue by abstaining effectively allowing a minority to ban shale while hundreds of thousands of jobs are lost and tax and investment floods south is OK in your view?

I guess as long as england funds the expenditure it doesn't matter but how does this plan fit with independence?

There never was a plan B. The tide is going out and the SNP appear to have no costumes on.

Shakethedisease

CLAPTON wrote: »

I agree it is masssively unfair and unreasonable.
I'm shocked that the scots don't realise this and stop buying this trash but we have the same stupidity down south.
(I guess it show how a like our nations are)

but anyway you constantly tell me that newspapers are dead and only social media counts now, so what is the concern?

anyway, can't wait for the EU referendum to be over, so we can get back to the Scots independence referendum: sadly it looks like I shall have a double disappointment.

There's no concern. It's just 'there' on tv every night, or on the radio being reported or in front of you in the Tesco newspaper shelves. But these la-la non-stories get picked up, and used well here for example as 'proof' of whatever the SNP has failed at next. There's always something to look forward to in the newspapers over just how badly the SNP are failing.;)

No one is keen on a referendum in Scotland at the present time bar the most die hard impatient indy supporters. I'm not one of those ( impatient ). If a Brexit doesn't happen then most of us are MORE than happy to wait and have a bit of breathing space. A referendum immediately off the back of this Brexit vote isn't something I personally want to see. Too messy. But like I said if it does happen then Scots have another choice to make. UK or EU.

Will wait and see like you what happens next eh. From that shocker poll tonight I would've thought you'd have been quite optimistic rather than looking at being disappointed. Momentum and trend wise in the polls it does look like Leave are at least in with a shout ?

Shakethedisease

Mistermeaner wrote: »

So ducking the issue by abstaining effectively allowing a minority to ban shale while hundreds of thousands of jobs are lost and tax and investment floods south is OK in your view?

I guess as long as england funds the expenditure it doesn't matter but how does this plan fit with independence?

See the above ruggedtoast for posters that are still saying the same stuff as in 2014.

I guess as long as england funds the expenditure

Scots voted for political parties a few weeks ago in a Scottish General Election, who overwhelmingly reject fracking going ahead at the present time in Scotland, or a complete ban. That's how it is, and that's what was in the manifestos. People made their choices quite clear on the subject.

Mistermeaner

Shakethedisease wrote: »

See the above ruggedtoast for posters that are still saying the same stuff as in 2014.



Scots voted for political parties a few weeks ago in a Scottish General Election, who overwhelmingly reject fracking going ahead at the present time in Scotland, or a complete ban. That's how it is, and that's what was in the manifestos. People made their choices quite clear on the subject.

People often don't know what's in their best interests as the vast majority are pretty economically illiterate.

This is where a strong and competent government can lead and influence through change

Pandering to public opinion is easy and often not the best route to follow

The SNP have proven themselves a weak reactive and popularist party

CLAPTON

Mistermeaner wrote: »

People often don't know what's in their best interests as the vast majority are pretty economically illiterate.

This is where a strong and competent government can lead and influence through change

Pandering to public opinion is easy and often not the best route to follow

The SNP have proven themselves a weak reactive and popularist party

the fear and dislike of fracking isn't due to economic illiteracy.

by strong and competent government, you mean an arrogant one one that ignores the wishes of the people because it know what is best :
you know, the sort of thing that lead to group think of all the UK parties that fell in love with the banking sector or that all supported unlimited immigration.
Not of course that these poilicies were wrong : its just that they don't align with peoples hopes and fears.

At the moment scotland doesn't need fracking as it is subsidised by the English.
Once they are independent and the huge welfare cuts and /or tax rises occur, then the people may change their mind.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Shakethedisease wrote: »

A referendum immediately off the back of this Brexit vote isn't something I personally want to see. Too messy. But like I said if it does happen then Scots have another choice to make. UK or EU.

If the UK does vote for Brexit then the British and Scottish economies will be absolutely shafted anyway, the pain is coming no matter what you do, and whilst I still maintain an iScotland would be dramatically worse off outside a UK that was still in the EU..... It would only be somewhat worse off than a UK that had voted to leave.

If Scotland immediately voted to separate there may be a slim legal case it could inherit, ie retain, the UK's membership of the EU and remain in rather than leaving and having to rejoin as would have been the case at the last referendum.

And if that legal case can be made, and if the UK also chose to leave the Single Market as well as the EU, then Scotland would be better served long term as an EU/Single Market member than as part of the UK outside of the EU and Single Market.

Under those very specific circumstances, an iScotland remaining in the single market while the rUK leaves the single market, I genuinely believe iScotland would see a surge of inward investment and employment as multinational companies located in the UK for the purposes of serving the single market moved their EU facilities and HQ's across the border to Scotland.

And that an iScotland would inherit much of the UK's pole position as favoured launching pad for EU/Single Market headquartering of businesses given that locating in the rUK to access the single market would no longer be possible.

It's Sturgeons best chance - go for it immediately after if the UK voted to leave.

Even I would vote to leave the UK under those circumstances.

Leanne1812

I'm personally voting remain though I was undecided up until quite recently.

I think brexit will happen. Everywhere I look most seem to be in favour of Leave. Unless the silent majority come out to vote once again.

Not quite sure if Scotland will vote to stay either. Polls do seem to show we are more in favour of staying though.

What's really frustrated me about this debate is the focus on immigration & the implications with terrorists being shipped in by the thousands. Really pathetic small minded thinking in my opinion.

Leanne1812

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

If the UK does vote for Brexit then the British and Scottish economies will be absolutely shafted anyway, the pain is coming no matter what you do, and whilst I still maintain an iScotland would be dramatically worse off outside a UK that was still in the EU..... It would only be somewhat worse off than a UK that had voted to leave.

If Scotland immediately voted to separate there may be a slim legal case it could inherit, ie retain, the UK's membership of the EU and remain in rather than leaving and having to rejoin as would have been the case at the last referendum.

And if that legal case can be made, and if the UK also chose to leave the Single Market as well as the EU, then Scotland would be better served long term as an EU/Single Market member than as part of the UK outside of the EU and Single Market.

Under those very specific circumstances, an iScotland remaining in the single market while the rUK leaves the single market, I genuinely believe iScotland would see a surge of inward investment and employment as multinational companies located in the UK for the purposes of serving the single market moved their EU facilities and HQ's across the border to Scotland.

And that an iScotland would inherit much of the UK's pole position as favoured launching pad for EU/Single Market headquartering of businesses given that locating in the rUK to access the single market would no longer be possible.

It's Sturgeons best chance - go for it immediately after if the UK voted to leave.

Even I would vote to leave the UK under those circumstances.

While I'm not surprised to hear you say this Hamish as I know you voiced this before I wonder do you feel enough No voters share your views to change the outcome should we have another referendum quickly?

We need 200,000 assuming Yessers remain committed.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Leanne1812 wrote: »

While I'm not surprised to hear you say this Hamish as I know you voiced this before I wonder do you feel enough No voters share your views to change the outcome should we have another referendum quickly?

We need 200,000 assuming Yessers remain committed.

If most people understood the influence that economics have over every aspect of their lives and the quality of life they will have, then 45% of Scots would not have voted for Indy under the circumstances known as fact at the time, and the polls in the EU ref would show a commanding lead for Remain given the facts we know today.

So no I have no faith in the general public to be rational....

But the window of potential success for claiming the possibility of 'residual state' EU membership in case of Brexit will be very short.

And it's that alone which could make an iScotland a viable economic proposition under terms likely to be even remotely acceptable to a majority of Scots.

This is the only window of opportunity the Indy crowd are likely to get.

If they wait and lose the prospect of remaining in the EU, and having to spend years outside and reapply for new membership instead, the medium term costs would be too severe for the public to handle.

CLAPTON

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

If most people understood the influence that economics have over every aspect of their lives and the quality of life they will have, then 45% of Scots would not have voted for Indy under the circumstances known as fact at the time, and the polls in the EU ref would show a commanding lead for Remain given the facts we know today.

So no I have no faith in the general public to be rational....

But the window of potential success for claiming the possibility of 'residual state' EU membership in case of Brexit will be very short.

And it's that alone which could make an iScotland a viable economic proposition under terms likely to be even remotely acceptable to a majority of Scots.

This is the only window of opportunity the Indy crowd are likely to get.

If they wait and lose the prospect of remaining in the EU, and having to spend years outside and reapply for new membership instead, the medium term costs would be too severe for the public to handle.

well I suppose that Iscotland would have to be quick if they wanted to join the EU: if they delay the EU would probably have collapsed and free trade area established instead.

without the subsidy from the english and a general slashing of wasteful spending, the new thistle party (ex conservatives) will enable iscotland to make a decent living and within 50 years or so will lose their chip on the shoulder and may even support the english rugby/football teams(ok maybe that is 100 years hence)