The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Original post by King Kebab
It really isn't to be fair.


I strongly beg to differ.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 5901
Original post by SciFiRory
good for the Scots, means they are free of the Tory ******* in Westminster, I envy them that chance!

ffs TSR sort out your swear filter, so many times I have to edit the censoring in.


So they should vote for independence because of a government in Westminster that will be voted out in a few years.... I have seen some terrible arguments for independence but I think yours is the worst


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Aj12
So they should vote for independence because of a government in Westminster that will be voted out in a few years.... I have seen some terrible arguments for independence but I think yours is the worst


Posted from TSR Mobile


We don't want labour either. Labour and Conservative are almost the same party these days imo. Why do you think SNP got a majority? It isn't because everyone in scotland wants independence.
Reply 5903
Original post by VladThe1mpaler
We don't want labour either. Labour and Conservative are almost the same party these days imo. Why do you think SNP got a majority? It isn't because everyone in scotland wants independence.


Before MatureStudent gets in...

...forgive me if I'm wrong, but the majority of votes weren't for the SNP in 2011 were they?

For every three votes the SNP had the Tories got one didn't they? If you say Labour are the same then Labour and Tory polled more votes than the SNP...

No?
Update on the polls:

Sunday Times: Panelbase Scottish Poll
Yes: 37% (down 1%)
NO: 49% (up 2%)
Original post by Midlander
I strongly beg to differ.


Posted from TSR Mobile


Do you have evidence that it is about Scottish people versus English people?
Original post by Aj12
So they should vote for independence because of a government in Westminster that will be voted out in a few years.... I have seen some terrible arguments for independence but I think yours is the worst


Posted from TSR Mobile


I do agree with this to a certain extent

I'd like to see a positive campaign for independence on why it is going to be good for Scotland rather than a negative campaign based on being free from the UK
Original post by King Kebab
I do agree with this to a certain extent

I'd like to see a positive campaign for independence on why it is going to be good for Scotland rather than a negative campaign based on being free from the UK


Labour are Tories in red ties these days. We just want to dissolve the union of Parliaments, in other words, say goodbye to Westminster, for good.
Original post by Teaddict
Update on the polls:

Sunday Times: Panelbase Scottish Poll
Yes: 37% (down 1%)
NO: 49% (up 2%)


Misrepresentation here. Yes and No gap is closing with swing towards Yes, and No votes falling.
Original post by Choo.choo
Labour are Tories in red ties these days. We just want to dissolve the union of Parliaments, in other words, say goodbye to Westminster, for good.


What has this got to do with my point of positive campaigning?
Reply 5910
Original post by SciFiRory
good for the Scots, means they are free of the Tory ******* in Westminster, I envy them that chance!

ffs TSR sort out your swear filter, so many times I have to edit the censoring in.


Thereby making a Tory majority south of the boarder easier...

Depends where in the country you are. If Liverpool got its independence then they are likely to be 'free' too.
Reply 5911
Original post by flugelr
If a nation can't fully control it's own foreign policy, then how can it be called independent? Look at any country with devolution and you'll see that Foreign Policy, Defence and a couple of other things are always reserved to national level.

Given that the EU is planning closer integration it seems that Yes Scotland are suggesting we swap being a devolved state within the UK, to being a devolved state within the EU.


As we will be signing up to NATO, we will be required to allow nuclear weapons onto Scottish soil and into Scottish territorial waters.


Just out of interest, can you think of a single government in the EU who haven't cut welfare budgets since the financial crash of 2008?

Even the Swedish - who the SNP so idolise - have cut back on welfare under Anders Borg.

Every country in the developed world has been cutting back on spending in recent years, to say that we should leave the UK because of spending cuts is at best totally misguided.



If you want more freedom to set taxes and control welfare, but you aren't bothered about Foreign Policy and external affairs then surely you are arguing for more devolution, not independence?


The whole point is that you don't use them. They are so terrifying that no nuclear power dares open war with another nuclear power.

I must admit I really dislike nuclear weapons and I'm hopeful that we will get rid of them within 30-50 years, but right now I can't see a better option on the table.


That isn't true. Salmond will continue to run the SNP and will probably stannd for re-election in 2016.

Furthermore, as the head of the Scottish Government it would be Salmond leading negotiations in the event of a 'Yes' vote. Therefore, Salmond's vision for Scotland - as set out in the White Paper - will be what he is negotiating to achieve. If you disagree with the White Paper then you will disagree with the Scotland Salmond negotiates.


That is how taxation works. If everyone put in £1 and got £1 back then what would be the point? Scotland as a whole might put in £1 and only get 80p back, but that is because 20p is spent on an underdeveloped part of the UK.

In Scotland at the moment Aberdeen puts in significantly more than it get back from the Scottish Government. Perhaps you think all the oil money should go to Aberdeen?


Scottish votes have had a effect in every single general election ever. After all, Scottish voters have elected MPs who take up seats in the HoC regardless of which party forms the government.

Those MPs go on to vote, scrutinise the Government, serve as Ministers and serve on Select Committees.


Scotland did not vote for anyone. MPs are voted in on a constituency basis, not on a Scotland-wides basis.


This is not about bloody Alex Salmond. If we do not want him, we will not reelect him - IT'S THAT SIMPLE. We live in a democracy, he can run again if he likes. Whether he gets reelected is up to US. So that statement was invalid.

Yes and the 20p for each point should be spent on underdeveloped parts of SCOTLAND but instead it gets spent on keeping London.

I understand how MPs are elected - the majority of scottish constituencies vote Labour in terms of general elections - therefore it can be generalised to the whole of scotland.

Salmond can do whatever he likes, we voted him in. He is left wing, we are left wing. The point is we reelect soon after the referendum. He cannot introduce anything if we do not reelect him. Therefore, the power is OURS not Salmond's.
Original post by Choo.choo
Misrepresentation here. Yes and No gap is closing with swing towards Yes, and No votes falling.


You really should think before you post. There is no misrepresentation. The last time the ST conducted a poll it gave Yes 38%, No 47%. Clearly, the results have changed as described, with an increase in the gap.

If you look at the same poll a year ago (Yes, 34%, No 47%) you can see the gap has narrowed.

However, the truth is that, within the margin of error of these polls (generally 3%) there is very little discernible change, and the Yes campaign has quite a lot of ground to make up.
Original post by Choo.choo
Misrepresentation here. Yes and No gap is closing with swing towards Yes, and No votes falling.


It is not misrepresenting anything.
Reply 5914
Original post by iJDB
Yes and the 20p for each point should be spent on underdeveloped parts of SCOTLAND but instead it gets spent on keeping London.


Scotland has the block grant, if free tuition fees and precriptions are prioritised by the Scottish govt over bulldosing and rebuilding ect then its hardly London's fault... London decided to pay higher council tax to buy an Olympic Games, Glasgow countil tax stayed frozen.
Original post by iJDB
This is not about bloody Alex Salmond. If we do not want him, we will not reelect him - IT'S THAT SIMPLE. We live in a democracy, he can run again if he likes. Whether he gets reelected is up to US. So that statement was invalid.

Yes and the 20p for each point should be spent on underdeveloped parts of SCOTLAND but instead it gets spent on keeping London.

I understand how MPs are elected - the majority of scottish constituencies vote Labour in terms of general elections - therefore it can be generalised to the whole of scotland.

Salmond can do whatever he likes, we voted him in. He is left wing, we are left wing. The point is we reelect soon after the referendum. He cannot introduce anything if we do not reelect him. Therefore, the power is OURS not Salmond's.


Salmond is a populist if anything.
Reply 5916
We work to keep London safe! The whole focus is on LONDON.
Original post by iJDB
This is not about bloody Alex Salmond. If we do not want him, we will not reelect him - IT'S THAT SIMPLE. We live in a democracy, he can run again if he likes. Whether he gets reelected is up to US. So that statement was invalid.

The point is that the negotiations over independence will happen before we have a chance to re-elect him. So yes, it very much is about Alex Salmond as he will be the person who largely determines what an independent Scotland will look like.

Original post by iJDB
Yes and the 20p for each point should be spent on underdeveloped parts of SCOTLAND but instead it gets spent on keeping London.

As an Aberdonian, I fail to see why money generated in Aberdeenshire is better spent in Glasgow than in London. Either way Aberdeen looses money.

You originally argued that Scotland puts more money in than it gets out. If we become independent that situation will not change. The same areas of Scotland which currently generate the most money (Edinburgh, Aberdeen etc) will still loose out.

Original post by iJDB
I understand how MPs are elected - the majority of scottish constituencies vote Labour in terms of general elections - therefore it can be generalised to the whole of scotland.

No, it cannot because that would assume Scotland is a hegemonic state, when it really isn't. You just need to look at a map of the election results to see that Labour voters are concentrated into a relatively small part of Scotland:


Original post by iJDB
Salmond can do whatever he likes, we voted him in.

More people voted against him than for him. Therefore, by your own logic, he shouldn't be FM?

Original post by iJDB
He is left wing

Really? He is the only left winger I know who wants to cut tax rates for big business.
Reply 5918
Original post by iJDB
We work to keep London safe! The whole focus is on LONDON.


Ignored my point? Wise move.
Original post by Teaddict
Update on the polls:

Sunday Times: Panelbase Scottish Poll
Yes: 37% (down 1%)
NO: 49% (up 2%)


Any comments from our friends in the yes camp as to why its gone down again?

Latest

Trending

Trending