Referendum Date Set

[Kieran_E1]

While I agree with what you're saying e.g. it's the BBC and not the SBC, how do you explain this?



If you believe all the BBC tell you, you'll think the Yes camp aren't answering questions. Except they are, the BBC just don't show it.


Just to add - I don't think there would be much trouble if the vote goes No, I get the feeling there would be more from the No side if it's a Yes. The last few weeks on social media I've seen many No voters calling the other side stupid, retards, idiots, morons, spastics, so again don't believe all you read about the Yes voters kicking off. There was even a story earlier which was on the subject of a Police chief stating the source of aggression had primarily been from No voters, yet within one paragraph the standard southern based media bias engaged and the story was telling you about those nasty Yes voters not being very nice instead.

2 things , 1. he didn't answer the question, he was asked why should we believe you over all these other people. He didn't answer.

2. you having a laugh , you've seen the abuse i've got on facebook from morons who refuse to debate points and have an adult discussion

there have been idiots on both sides ( like the gang who defaced a friend of claires bmw because it has a union jack in the badge ( it was a special edition car and she was a yes voter )

the ****s targeting andy murray are vile.

no one can claim the moral high ground on over enthusiastic supporters

[s200rat]

think we should get sideways14a on the board as sxoc bookie - his 8% split prediction looks right

*** actually scratch that - with only highlands to go its looking at a higher no vote and 10% split. roll on the excuses, the rumours of vote rigging and deflated salmond pics.

[AdamRPS13]

At least 55% of them did the right thing!

[zeppelin101]

Wont it cause a huge tension if its a no vote?

Other way round would have, I think the yes camp are more likely to accept things easier.

Put it this way, in a yes vote there is still a solid chance of more localised power being provided to the Scottish outside of Westminster... which is what they were after right?

However, the no camp who wanted to remain part of the union and maintain the benefits that don't get that.

There was more to lose for the no camp supports than the yes camp in my view.

The only issue now is that regardless of what the leaders have promised down in London, they still have to get the backbenchers onside and a lot of the Conservative backbenchers have said (rightly so, from their point of view) that they don't support further devolution as it means the Scottish will probably be substantially better off per head than the people in their own back yard.

[-ghost-]

Well I hope scotland will be footing the bill. It wasnt even close.

[lhassall]

Conservative backbenchers have said (rightly so, from their point of view) that they don't support further devolution as it means the Scottish will probably be substantially better off per head than the people in their own back yard.

No their point is they don't want Scottish MPs voting on English law. This is a bit of a mess as it could effectively give the Tories permanent control over English law even in Labour win power. I'm sure they'd like it but sounds like Tory dictatorship through the back door.

Giving Scotland more control over tax and spending will actually make them worse off. If they want to fund their own services with their own taxes then they won't be getting subsidy from England. If they want to spend more on the NHS, they'll have to whack up Scottish taxes. Scotland has a higher proportion of public sector jobs, so again they'll have to tax more.

[The Big Yin]

So Scotland just became the laughing stock of the world?
Only country to reject indeoendance.

Disappointed to say the least.

[zeppelin101]

No their point is they don't want Scottish MPs voting on English law. This is a bit of a mess as it could effectively give the Tories permanent control over English law even in Labour win power. I'm sure they'd like it but sounds like Tory dictatorship through the back door.

Giving Scotland more control over tax and spending will actually make them worse off. If they want to fund their own services with their own taxes then they won't be getting subsidy from England. If they want to spend more on the NHS, they'll have to whack up Scottish taxes. Scotland has a higher proportion of public sector jobs, so again they'll have to tax more.

Under a continuation of the Barnett formula, Scotland ends up with more spending per head than the rest of the UK. Wales ends up up to £300M worse off.

The West Lothian question is also a big issue, but there seems to be more of an appetite to actually make a decision on it now if there is going to be further devolution.

Scotland all but ends up independent at this rate but still contributing to the UK economy. Maybe the best of both worlds for all involved? Assuming the voting and funding issue has a satisfactory resolution.

Quebec spurned independence twice in the last few decades Yin, which is probably more comparable to what has happened here.

[Joe1989]

2 things , 1. he didn't answer the question, he was asked why should we believe you over all these other people. He didn't answer.

2. you having a laugh , you've seen the abuse i've got on facebook from morons who refuse to debate points and have an adult discussion

there have been idiots on both sides ( like the gang who defaced a friend of claires bmw because it has a union jack in the badge ( it was a special edition car and she was a yes voter )

the ****s targeting andy murray are vile.

no one can claim the moral high ground on over enthusiastic supporters

I think you'll find he did. He didn't answer is directly but he did point out that there were major business leaders such as Aberdeen asset who the voters could believe. Claiming he didn't answer the question was incorrect.

Anyways i think the numbers of voters have made there point. We want change. Time will tell weather these changes will be any benefit to Scotland.

As i said on facebook:

For the first time in my life I've been sitting up all night watching politics come in even though I've got work in the morning.

Although it looks like Scotland is about to become the 2nd country to reject its independence ( or at the least delay it ) I am incredibly proud to have been part of the campaign defiantly shows there is clearly an appetite for change which I do not think can be dodged by Westminster and I respect the decision of my fellow Scots.

I still have my concerns about how Westminster is going to react financially but I guess that remains to be seen.

Finally I would like thank everyone who's debated with me on Facebook and in a face to face format. All exchanges were civil even if we massively disagreed. It goes to show how well everyone conducted them selves.

Thank you.

[Asht_200]

Now I think we should start a campaign for Alex Salmond to be "Star in a reasonably priced car" Just so JC can say "LOSER" in the way he does it so well

[def]

the right decision but close enough to say things have to change.

[lhassall]

Under a continuation of the Barnett formula, Scotland ends up with more spending per head than the rest of the UK. Wales ends up up to £300M worse off.

The West Lothian question is also a big issue, but there seems to be more of an appetite to actually make a decision on it now if there is going to be further devolution.

But a lot of Tory MPs want the Barnett formula torn up as well. I think Northern Ireland actually gets the most spent on it per head, slightly above Scotland.

A close No result and throwing the UK constitution up in the air feels like the worst possible result. Scotland ends up worse off and it could make a Tory government biased towards England more likely. Yes voters who just wanted to stick it to the Tories have truly shafted themselves.

Does anyone really think devolving millions of pounds of spending to their local councils will result in better decisions and less corruption?

[sideways14a]

The regional voting breakdown puts Dumfries and Galloway at the highest % no vote... so why has Willy Hills not payed out to me yet.

Must be ran by disgruntled Yes plebs.

[sideways14a]

Bah another screen shows Orkney higher.

Pissed off.

[zeppelin101]

A close No result and throwing the UK constitution up in the air feels like the worst possible result. Scotland ends up worse off and it could make a Tory government biased towards England more likely. Yes voters who just wanted to stick it to the Tories have truly shafted themselves.

Does anyone really think devolving millions of pounds of spending to their local councils will result in better decisions and less corruption?

What's a better solution? If you have singular control over a country from afar then clearly that doesn't sit well with everyone but tighter control over smaller regions potentially leads to a widening of the poverty gap for some areas and a massive increase in available spending for others.

I don't see how independence would have solved anything, it would have cost all involved an arm and a leg in the short term both economies would have been weakened by it in the longer term.

I think in real terms this doesn't change much for your average man on the street, but does throw the spotlight even more on what regional governments do next.

[R3K1355]

Does anyone really think devolving millions of pounds of spending to their local councils will result in better decisions and less corruption?

This man, he knows the score.

Corruption (or forms of it) are still pretty rife today IMO.

[R3K1355]

Bah another screen shows Orkney higher.

Pissed off.

You should have been spread betting on the FTSE mate, I chickened out but clearly I should have stuck to my guns and gone in at £100 a pip.

[s200rat]

You should have been spread betting on the FTSE mate,

I accidently benefited here so should thank salmond for depressing the markets the past couple of weeks! Everything i bought is +ve on the news this morning

[Asht_200]

What's a better solution? If you have singular control over a country from afar then clearly that doesn't sit well with everyone but tighter control over smaller regions potentially leads to a widening of the poverty gap for some areas and a massive increase in available spending for others.

I don't see how independence would have solved anything, it would have cost all involved an arm and a leg in the short term both economies would have been weakened by it in the longer term.

I think in real terms this doesn't change much for your average man on the street, but does throw the spotlight even more on what regional governments do next.

The whole independence thing was flawed.

Salmond wanted a currency Union - which would have still meant Westminster dictating fiscal policy. He claimed he had no power to lower tax. He would have got that, but would have had to lower spend as well.

This always smelt of Salmond and Sturgeon wanting more power for the sake of power

Give them an inch they want a yard, give them a yard they want a mile. Give a n***** a rope he wants to be a cowboy, Gus

[-ghost-]

You should have been spread betting on the FTSE mate, I chickened out but clearly I should have stuck to my guns and gone in at £100 a pip.

I accidently benefited here so should thank salmond for depressing the markets the past couple of weeks! Everything i bought is +ve on the news this morning

My misses was cracking the bubbly out this morning. Shes had the best week and a bit of her life.