"If Scotland is not in the EU, then nor would rUK be. I don't see the difference. Both are different entities after a Yes vote." And you would expect UKminus to immediately re-apply, and immediately still meet all the criteria. Especially chapter 17 : UKminus will still use its own currency (GBP) a strong and established currency on the exchange market, and have its own central bank. Economic policy will still be in line with general EU economic goals. Of course, UKminus could decide to use this event to decide whether to leave the EU as a member state. Which of course is no problem as GBP is an independent currency.
Was there this Sunday and then over to Barrhead if you know it. Although to be fair I did see a lot of people who looked like they wouldn't make it past 69, even if they lived a more rich life. Scotland supposedly becoming a richer country doesn't mean the wealth translates to the people you believe need help the most as that's the spin coming from Spurf but if Scotland votes yes, there isn't going to be a tidal wave of positive change, it will be selective and if the projections aren't as positive as you believe then areas such as Glasgow could stand still. It's not as clear cut as vote yes and Scotland improves for everyone.
That is correct, just as you have NO idea in relation to the UK or the rUK as well. You see you are so used to political hype and media hype that you expect an answer to a question that there is just not an honest answer to. You or I or anyone else have no idea what will happen after the next election in the UK because we don't know who will be elected. My answer is basically start waking up to the real world and stop believing hype.
Or look at this way, in the 300 years of the Union Glasgow ends up with more than its fair share of poverty so lets stick with the Union!!!!!!!!!!! There are no guarantees following Independence just as there are none if Scotland remains ruled from Westminster. The question is, as it has always been: Should Scotland be an Independent country? Simple really, do you think decisions for Scotland are best made in Edinburgh or Westminster. The answer is obvious.
Politics is the art of prevarification on "honest" answers. But I am not asking for answers from politicians. I am asking for answers from economists etc who I expect to have conducted various models based on the various scenarios (no link to GBP, sign up to the Euro etc) . The stuff of schoolboy basic macro-economics. But that is because I am a scientist/engineer by education/trade. I can read REAL FACTS and FIGURES, do methodology, question source data/assumptions, and draw conclusions on the claims. That is my day job. And politics is nowhere to be seen on the list of considerations I employ.
Yes change is needed, but whether it's this particular change that is needed remains to be seen, it's rather presumptuous to assume that this change will necessarily make things better. Better the devil you know than the devil you don't - Scotland's not in perfect condition currently, but it could be a lot worse. It's clear that post-referendum, even if the 'No thanks' wins, the Scottish Parliament will claw back a heap more power from Westminster. Perhaps that is the only change that is needed...
Then you need to realise that it is no earthly good asking such questions when it is politicians who are deciding the issue.
"Then you need to realise that it is no earthly good asking such questions when it is politicians who are deciding the issue." Fortunately, the ELECTORATE of Scotland are deciding the issue, not politicians. Their decisions will be influenced by those who best present or prevaricate the truth. And on this matter, you need to realise that the Yes campaign does not predominately operate on the former, nor the No campaign on the latter.
We are talking about the EU and currency these issues will not be decided by the electorate they will be decided by politicians. The right of the Scottish electorate to decide WHO will be discussing these issues is what YES is all about.
And we wish to know WHAT the "politicians" are deciding to do if the vote is yes. Regardless of whether we agree, we can expect to at least know the WHAT. Claims like "it's a non-issue" immediately smell of prevarification.
Indeed we do need to know what the politicians are deciding. So far we have a 600 page manifesto from the SNP and NOTHING from Labour, Conservatives or Liberals. I really don't think you get this at all RDBD
YES is not a political party. YES includes people from all parties in Scotland, ALL! Tory, Lilberal, Labour, Greens,SNP, Socialists, plus many who are not of any party. The establishment have managed to confuse this issue so that people will ask the wrong questions. The referrendum decides the right of the Scottish people to chose their own governments.
"I really don't think you get this at all" Oh I do, despite your seemingly increasing need to believe the contrary. In maths terms, the "burden of proof" is on the Yes campaign. So on that front, feel free to give me a link to an online copy of the 600 page manifesto ...
http://spoxy5.insipio.com/generator/sc/www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2013/11/9348/0 This is the SNP manifesto not the YES campaign. What a condescending attitude! I'm sure you don't mean it. The burden of proof is with both sides, perhaps this is where Better Together have gone wrong. If you 'get it' why do you not understand the difference between YES and the SNP?
So where's the Yes campaign's manifesto then, Spurf? Does it even have one, beyond that one issue? It doesn't seem to have many answers to what will happen in the event that it's successful. The No campaign would simply retain the status quo. Voting for something different is fine. Not knowing what it is that you're voting for is just weird.
Presumably you would vote yes on the understanding that the precise shape would be decided in elections after. The vote is about whether you are governed by London or Edinburgh. Depending who wins the UK elections will decide things like taxation, spending, health provision in England, why would Scotland have answers to these questions before the referendum.
"Presumably you would vote yes on the understanding that the precise shape would be decided in elections after." That would an act of faith, or dogma. The reality should be that the Yes campaign advocates have done a lot of serious study on all the various aspects of independence happening. The SNP manifesto would then cite/reference those things (as justification/rationale for the manifesto item) . As it stands, the frontman of a pro-independence political party (Salmond - SNP) is also the frontman for the Yes campaign. Yep, obvious distinction there to the layman.
RDBD has basically summed things up, but the possibilities don't even seem to be known. The EU and currency questions are utterly unanswered and they're just the tip of the iceberg. It seems to me that the options are basically Vote No and keep things pretty similar to how they are now or Vote Yes and... well, we're not really sure, but it'll be great! The ultimate in hollow promises, as they're not even offering anything, except for unicorns and rainbows.
