I'm going to be a real ass here Stan but the way the question is worded perhaps could be different. I think they should stay in the Union but I think it goes without question that its up to them to decide. Maybe it would be better just to get rid of the third option or change it to "Don't care"?
But you can still care whilst believing it is not your decision to make, as you have just demonstrated. And I think you have made your view clear in your post - vote 'Its up to the Scots' and add comment. The other options are for people like Willy, who knows better than the people of Scotland from his command centre in Berkshire. Plus I don't think you can edit polls once posted, and I'm ****ed if I can be bothered.
Thanks SB, although I have voted for the union to remain, mainly for the Olympic team, no extra duties on whiskey and I quite like the new horse heads in Falkirk, I do not think the Scots should have the right to decide on their own. It seems the question could also be are you Celtic or Rangers, question is where will the Partick fans vote
Well, history is on your side, ordinary Scots did not have a say on whether to join the Union in the first place either.
Wait a minute. Are you telling me there's people out there who believe that the decision on what happens to Scotland shouldn't be decided by the Scottish people?!!!! And who then should decide? The Slovaks? The Kazakhs? The Aborigines? I don't believe it, you're making it up.
I found out last night whilst out with a Scottish friend, that he didn't have a vote cause he lives in England yet a brother in law English of Polish decent living in Scotland does, not sure if this is relevant, and If I have received a little dig, then no one decides where they are born, you just get on with life, how far back in history is it acceptable to go.
West London Willy"And the only reason it angers me is that I can see the consequences far better from an objective viewpoint than those being hoodwinked by Salmond into signing away their future for his place in history."
Accept that your example is "unfair" but it is correct... If you are bothered to fill in your electoral registry card...you should have the right to vote. The government (of Scotland and England/Wales/NI) tries its best to get electoral registry cards to all the people it can (no I know its not perfect but...). It is up to you to fill it in...it is then up to you to vote. It is the best system we have, an actually it is a pretty good system. So it is up to the Scots on that registry to decide what they want to do in their country. But currently, whilst Scotland is part of the Union, the British government should make a conclusive and meaningful argument why it is everyone's best interests that they should stay in the union. My opinion, cannot see much wrong with it ....
The bottom line is that only the Scots can decide this issue. The run-up to the referendum will see Salmond spewing more of his fantasy view of their future without spelling out the true financial cost. On the other side, Cameron will dress up the consequences and tell the Scots how much it will cost them, no doubt adding a few noughts on the end. When it comes to the crunch they'll realise they have the best of all worlds with the current set-up and one or two sweetners that Cameron will promise them to clinch it...
It's a decision for the Scots. One just hopes that they really consider the actuality of independence. Salmond has taken a bit of a pick and mix attitude. He wants independence, yet for instance, wants to retain the pound. If the Scots vote with their head, they will stay in the union. If they vote with an unrealistic and romantic view of the future (highly likely, especially if they can vote from 16 years) they may well opt for independence. How they will fund an armed forces and how we will decide who gets the North Sea resources will be huge issues that Salmond has been extremely naive in dealing with.
Salmond is just a common or garden politician, promising things that are barely within anyone's control of delivering, focussing on the 'what do I get out of it' mentality of everyone. These are the tactics he has chosen to achieve his only 'raison d'être', an independent Scotland. If he thought he could achieve it by other means he would go for those, but governments for decades have shied away from principle to focus on trying to be as inoffensive as possible to the right number of voters. He's just playing the same game as Cameron, by the same rules. But I think there should be more naivety, romanticism and idealism in making big decisions. I hope the Scots ask themselves 'are we truly a separate people with our own distinct identity' and 'do I support the idea of an New Scotland' and vote accordingly rather than focussing on the tedious practicalities which no one controls and no one delivers any way. The inhabitants of Bosnia (where are you Pirate?) didn't ask themselves 'are we a viable economic, legal and political unit' before fighting for their freedom. Whichever way they vote I wish them well as long as they aren't solely motivated by 'will my benefits go up' or 'will my tax go down'. If they vote yes and then vote Salmond out, bully for them.
It is up to the people of Scotland to decide. But please stop with all this romanticised rubbish. The move for independence is a political one, nothing more nothing less.
everyone in the union should have a say, the scots for in or out & the English as to wether they want them in or out
Why? Not necessarily disagreeing, would just like some reasons. What if the Scots voted out but were out voted by the rest> not a very happy Union.....
it affects every one, together we are stronger, the few scots i know are against breaking up the union, but thet do all live in England, maybe that effected there opinion
