Poll - Does Scotland really want to go it alone?

[morag]

oops, think that's another dodgy post Viv !

[Richard]

Retsum: No I was not being mischievous. I was GENUINELY intrigued.
I can back up my concerns about wee Eck & SNP policy as I alluded to in my post.
And although I agree with your suggestion of the referendum being more important than any individual
or party, a lot of people make up their decisions on how they perceive the person who is trying to sell
them the policy. When someone deliberately tries to discredit someone, it is designed to muddy the
waters and plant the seed of doubt in the mind of others, therefore, having an effect on the way that
some people vote. And that matters. Malicious stories of individuals should always be challenged,
regardless of who they are. I was also trying to make-light of the situation and what she was saying
without making it look as though I was having a go at her but why bother.

Viv: Interesting to note the length of time it took you to respond and after reading what Retsum had
posted, you decided to have ANOTHER pop at me. I was NOT getting at you. Read my post again.
A word of advise, and this is getting at you: I would pay VERY strong attention to Morag's comment to
you. You might be getting away with making up stories about people that supposedly came from some
"little old woman at a bus stop ?" but you will NOT get away with making up malicious stories about me.
That is the second time you have had a personal pop at me. AND I'M NOT LAUGHING.
Try that once more and I'll be reporting you. I suggest you read my post again and take it in the manner
in which it was meant.

[Meg]

The referendum is not about a party or a person but whether or not WE want Scotland to be an independent nation and the result will long outlive any individual currently involved in the debate.

Sorry to be a bit po-faced about this but I totally agree with Retsum. Please be aware that this forum is read by a LOT of people, not just those who post and our reputation is second to none. Please keep the less serious postings to the appropriate forum.

Meg

[Meg]

Can't seem to edit now. Must be because it is posts from yesterday. i don't suppose any dodgy things will be worse than richard alexander.

As there are no emoticons or smilies in this post Viv, I am assuming you are serious. Please re-read the forum rules on posting and flaming then perhaps edit your post.

Meg

[VivAyrshire]

Right, richard. I have no wish to spread malicious gossip about anyone, including yourself. as to the length of time it took me to edit.... I simply wasn't online. i have more to do with my time (esp at the moment when trying to move house) than sit on forums all day. i do hope the correct decisions are made for scotland. i am pretty sure you knew that though. no wish to cause further upset, but someone calling salmond "slippery" also appears to have no further posts to back it up.

[Richard]

Viv: Fair enough, let's just move on

I noticed that we have, at least, one member who is undecided in our poll ?
I have come across the following video footage that may help the undeciced in their decision making ?
But failing that, it makes for some interesting and thought provoking viewing and would recommend
even if your mind is already made up. Ex-pats may get a "twinge" or two of homesickness ?
WARNING: The video footage does contain some swear words. These take place between the
4min.50sec point and the 5min.30sec point. I believe that the swearing has been included because it
is how a lot of the youth felt, of that time, and a lot still do. And I believe that the footage that
contains the swearing is from the film Train Spotting ?
ENJOY: http://vimeo.com/12458284

[Retsum]

And although I agree with your suggestion of the referendum being more important than any individual or party, a lot of people make up their decisions on how they perceive the person who is trying to sell them the policy.

Unfortunately I have to agree that this is true although I would wish it otherwise. My grandfather - an ordinary working man - voted conservative all his life because that was how his bosses voted. He reckoned they were educated gentlemen and knew better than he did what was good for the country and for him. Equally Scotland reliably returned around 70 MPs to Westminster, based on a solid working class vote. Even when Blair turned his back on them when he formed New Labour, family tradition continued to support the party. As you say there will be many in the referendum who will vote along party lines. What we need to understand is that politicians are interested in only one thing: gaining and retaining power. What we want is only of interest if they think it will gain them votes.

We can be sure that those opposed to independence will produce a plausible economic case to show that Scotland would be worse off on its own while those in favour of independence will produce an equally plausible case to show that Scotland would be better off. When the 'experts' are divided it is time for us to make up our own minds. We are taking a decision that will affect our children or grandchildren and their children and grandchildren. Personally I hope we will find the confidence and the courage (as I have already said) to opt for independence, irrespective of the vehicle that will take us there.

[Richard]

Retsum:
Can't disagree with anything you've said

[morag]

I find it interesting that for years Scotland has been 'carried' by England, gets more than it's share, is a drain on resources..etc., why you'd think they'd be more than anxious to be rid of us! All of a sudden it's 'Oh no! Don't go!' Wonder if North sea oil has any part of this, or Britain losing seats in EU? To be honest, I'd rather Scotland founder on it's own than be dragged under gurgling and helpless by the union.

[Richard]

Me too Morag.
And if we make mistakes, which we will, they will be OUR mistakes.
A baby can't learn to walk without falling over a few times.
Take a look at this. It crushes the financial myths used by unionists
and makes the same points that you raised:

http://www.voteindependence.org/

[Retsum]

I find it interesting that for years Scotland has been 'carried' by England, gets more than it's share, is a drain on resources..etc., why you'd think they'd be more than anxious to be rid of us! All of a sudden it's 'Oh no! Don't go!' Wonder if North sea oil has any part of this, or Britain losing seats in EU? To be honest, I'd rather Scotland founder on it's own than be dragged under gurgling and helpless by the union.

As you say Morag, it is surprising that the Tories are keen to keep us within the UK. They only have one MP in Scotland and that would be no great loss. Moreover, if we were independent, Labour would lose its reliably block of Scottish MPs and that would make it almost impossible for Labour to win a general election in England. The Tories would be guaranteed power for the foreseeable future in England. So it would appear to be in their interests to support independence.

On the other hand Cameron would have his power reduced and no politician willingly gives up power. More important, however, is the potential loss of the nuclear bases and Trident when the SNP insist on their removal. Experts are agreed that there are no suitable locations in England and they may be forced to abandon nuclear weapons completely. That would mean a big reduction in international influence with a possible loss of a seat at the high table. And all that is before we even talk about oil and renewable energy.

As I have suggested, the Labour party have a problem. Although it was they who obtained devolution and a Scottish Parliament, they cannot support independence without handing England to the Tories. At the same time they feel they cannot be seen to support the Tory position on independence - that would never do. They probably wish the whole issue would go away and they could continue with the status quo.

[John Donnelly]

[quote="Richard Alexander"]Take a look at this. It crushes the financial myths used by unionists
and makes the same points that you raised:

'History can erupt with a volcanic ferocity, and change can become fraught with bloodletting and sorrow.'

A sample of this 'unbiased' article; short on facts; (not a single one), and long, (very), on rhetoric.

Time we forgot the emotion and looked to the facts. I hope that we will have a full, frank and free debate on this before we make a decision, which, if it goes wrong, will go VERY wrong. Imagine having to crawl back to Westminster, cap in hand.

Be very careful what you wish for; you might get it. This is a VERY difficult one. Don't be persuaded by spurious, emotional arguments.

I don't think it will be for the good of Scotland, but I'm still open to be convinced.

I'm a convinced European. In these days of multinational businesses and super-powers, we should be looking at consolidating with partners, not splitting off into smaller units. I see it as a choice. We can join and become full members with all the rights, (and responsibilities), or be swallowed up later and have to do what we are told.

Nationalism is yesterday's argument. Political, social and economic stability is what we should be striving for today. I wonder whether national independence will provide this.

Scotland today, while not perfect, is not a third-world land. Don't throw away what we have got.

JD.