I do believe the currency issue was the biggest problem for the Yes camp. It created too much uncertainly and allowed the No camp to spread panic over the issue.
Based on the fact the snp would be running an independent Scotland then I'd expect them to reveal their estimates and plans up front. So , your saying we should just take a leap in the dark based on no information ... Aye ok.
Totally agree. If we were guaranteed the pound with the same value then it would probably have been yes ...
Of course we should it's CALLED INDEPENDENCE what part of that do you not understand. You or anybody else can have no idea who would govern an Independent Scotland because we would have a new set of parties. We also cannot KNOW what the policies would be until they are offered and Scotland votes. You are voting for the right for Scotland to make these decisions, just like a grown up.
So ... No one would have an idea of the costs behind setting up an independent Scotland and how that might effect spending in an independent Scotland and were to vote to make our own decisions that might mean being financially ****ed or financially well off ? Just take a leap of faith ?
The question should have been an av vote on Full independence Or Devo max But as St says , Scotland will be independent within 10 to 15 years so time to move on from September 2014. We'll get full fiscal autonomy then next step will be independence ... A more natural progression than a leap in the dark.
No pud the figures are there in You GOV if you care to check. Scotland would have more finance available as an Independent nation than it has as part of the UK. That fact is buried by the right wing media of course but you can check all this for yourself. The question of how they are spent is and will be unknown until Scotland is Independent and deciding. I can tell though that it cannot be as bad as the 1.4 TRILLION debt the UK has saddle itself with and then voted AGAIN for the party that raised that two fold.
Agreed. There is not enough clarity behind Scotlands finances. Every calculation politicians seem to use exlcudes one thing, or something else (cut and paste to your political leaning) and we're expected to make an calculated judgement on it. We're subsidised by the rUK - Then prove it through complete accounts, not ones that exclude oil revenue (or anything else) We're good enough to go it alone at current standards - Then prove it through complete accounts, ones that don't exclude higher per head spending (or anything else) I reckon we probably can go alone and still keep up a decent standard of living. I mainly base this on the fact that many other countries our size do though. Nothing any of these **** nuggets have ever said gives clarity. Only perspective, mainly theirs.
What for keeping it, scraping it or libdemmin' it? Personally I'm of the belief that if you place the ****ing subs in England, Wales or NI. Give it time to sink in (geddit) with the local population and then see how happy they are about it then. Well, maybe not NI. You'd end up giving the IRA nuclear ambitions.
