Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Off Topic => Topic started by: big fat yorkshire pudding on September 11, 2014, 12:51:36 pm
-
Interesting one...
-
I reckon they'll narrowly vote to stay in.
But now even that's going to cause all sorts of upheaval since the politicians have decided they're basically going to change the UK constitution to accommodate Scotland. Expect Wales and N Ireland to demand more control and the reemergence of regional assemblies in England and then there will be demands to reassess how everything works in Westminster.
And even after all that because the Scottish vote is likely to be close, the independence campaign won't take too much of a knock.
We might discover we've already started down a slow path to an eventual break-up.
-
If all the infrastructure was in place to do it and everything had been thought through and answers in place, I would say it would be a go-er.
It isn't anything like that though. The SNP seem to have a "make it up as you go along" attitude. On that basis, I'm struggling to see how any Scot could possibly vote Yes (other than they are totally fed up with Westminster and the Scottish Parliament and just want a change, any change).
Interesting this morning that more and more businesses are now coming out with statements of either pulling out of Scotland or announcing the likelihood of diverging price tariffs. The business sector has been very quiet for months on this, almost sitting on the fence. Now it looks like its going to be a close vote (based on very limited data from small sample polls) they are starting to pin their colours to the mast.
I was in a meeting with 2 major energy suppliers yesterday and the issue of an independent Scotland was discussed. I hadn't realised just how much of the UK's electricity generation happens on Scottish soil (or waters), and the interconnector between Scotland and England/Wales which is currently unrestricted will have standard international restrictions applied to it should they go it alone. That would have some impact on supply capacity for the rest of the UK, and Scotland could have more juice than it knows what to do with, which could make electricity tariff pricing in Scotland drop through the floor.
-
They're wanting to start the country up with something like £200m aren't they?
I read it'll cost about £180m just to sort out the police force.
-
Would that have an impact on their income though Rob ? If we all stop using 'Scottish' Power and switch to English generators, surely English tarrifs would come down and the Scots would have a drop in income...or is my theory too simple to be correct
-
Since mcindoe no longer plays for rovers Here is too the Jocks
Voting for the Yes vote
If it falls This time it will come back again ,but they would have learnt
From Their mistakes and have a far better sounding footing
-
I think they'll go for it, i.e. the jocks will vote in favour, BUT I think the process will fall apart before it goes through.
-
It's a no brainer. Of course they should vote for independence. Even if they don't this time it will eventually come in as little as 5 years so they may as well go for it now. If they don't they will only be delaying the inevitable. As the old who are in the No camp die out then gradually more and more of the population will be in the Yes camp.
Anyone that is Scotch though should ask themselves this question. Why on earth would you want to be ruled from London by a Tory government when you only have 1 Tory MP in the country? It is completely ridiculous.
Go for it you Scotch. You'll also be doing us all a favour in England by totally scuppering any chance Labour have of winning the general election.
-
If they do vote for it and they have the democratic mandate, then the government in London is going to have to find a way to accommodate them.
I think Salmond was always right to suggest the government are bluffing about not sharing the currency. The banks in England can't afford to see Scotland crippled, they're already in a precarious state. That's why we had to bail out Ireland, to save the banks.
-
We can cope without it financially they will suffer more by not yielding to Westminster on currency.
I think what gets me is basing anything on existing values. Eg they state that they give a lot of contribution to the economy compared to the spend in Scotland. But that doesn't filter in all the centralised costs that stay in England. They'll have those costs after independence and not a huge amount of revenue either.
Don't even start on oil - it's a crazy idea that this will support them forever.
-
Oil?
If they stay in the union, what happens when the oil runs down? We're just going to give them a lot of handouts to make up for their loss?
Not likely, either way when it happens the loss of the oil revenue is a huge blow for Scotland.
-
If its a yes, who is likely to fund Hospitals, Schools, Infrastructure, Police etc in the near future. Salmond says if Ireland can do it, so can Scotland. He seems to forget that "Bail Out" and austerity that followed, along with highest taxes in Europe.
Personally believe it will be 60/40 against at end.
-
It'll be more like 52/48 either way, I imagine.
-
It's a tough choice - I couldn't bring myself to vote for either Cameron or Salmond, both are equally unlikeable in their own unique way!
The "oil" has been well and truly sold to a large percentage of the Scottish population and they really believe that it will make them the Saudi Arabia of Europe. My Dad and I had a heated debate about it as he's swapped positions and is now voting yes solely because of the oil!
-
Are they planning to do a Norway and create a sovereign wealth fund with the oil revenue to help protect the Scottish economy for the future? If they are I haven't seen much reported about it. It all seems to be about using it to improve the Scottish public services.
-
If its a yes, who is likely to fund Hospitals, Schools, Infrastructure, Police etc in the near future. Salmond says if Ireland can do it, so can Scotland. He seems to forget that "Bail Out" and austerity that followed, along with highest taxes in Europe.
Personally believe it will be 60/40 against at end.
How about an Hedge fund
-
I've already voted NO , but it's going to be mighty close . Still looks like a generational thing , my age group 55+ looking to stay in the Union with concerns over pensions , health care etc while the younger generation really want to give it a go .
Situation changing daily , this morning RBS said they would re-locate to London , John Lewis suggesting higher retail prices .
So many questions have not been really answered by both sides....currency , passports , defence to list a few .
Glad I'll be in New York on the 18th !!
-
Back to the "Ireland / Scotland " comparison. Ireland has 6.5 million residents, Scotland 5.25 million, so I would think more tax payers. OK here there is no council tax and rates ( but its on horizon ), so cant see how Scotland can work it.
-
According to Wikipedia, Ireland has 4.58 mil.
-
More people live in Greater London than either country...
-
More people live in Greater London than either country...
I would say that centralisation is a big part of the problem. The SE has grown and remained resolutely Tory, their instinct is to protect the city, protect the rich, invest in London more centralisation and so it goes on. The Scots start voting for only alternative until there are only Labour MPs left. It has little effect so they get sick of the UK start voting to break away altogether and choose the SNP.
-
According to Wikipedia, Ireland has 4.58 mil.
Sorry RD that's correct, I took data from CSO here, didn't realise it was "Inclusive" of NI.
http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/census/documents/north-south-spreadsheets/Census,2011,-,Ireland,and,Northern,Ireland,Press,Release.pdf
Which makes my previous statement a load of Balls. As is usual with me.
-
How on earth can they prevent anyone in armed forces who is scotish from not voting unless they have an address in Scotland
That is fcuking shocking.
You put Your life on the line for thr government and Nation ,because you are based in England or germany or whatever other country you Cant vote.
What what the bloke in the forces thinks When he leaves the army navy or airforce and wants to return back to Scotland ....
Surely they should have a say
-
I think probably a narrow NO this time. But by giving them "Devo-Max" the three main Westminster parties have ensured that there will be another vote within the next ten years and the answer will be YES. They've also given the SNP the kiss of life by doing so as Salmond will claim he's won.
-
I possibly think it will be very damn close but I have a funny feeling they will vote for independence.
What will be interesting is if Cameron resigns over it; the British Prime Minister who saw the breakup of a union that lasted over 3 centuries in a referendum his government accepted, on his terms and lost. Surely a vote of no confidence would follow?
I would hope they vote against but a little part of me is anxious to see how we would all cope if it is a yes result.
-
All the momentum is with Yes. I expect the vote to be 55/45 in favour of Yes. I have had a hefty wager on Yes winning and I'm counting my money already.
It just shows how desperate the No campaign are with Dave using the 'f' word yesterday. If it is a No the young will resent the older more cautious generation who are only bothered about protecting their pensions and benefits.
-
Would that have an impact on their income though Rob ? If we all stop using 'Scottish' Power and switch to English generators, surely English tarrifs would come down and the Scots would have a drop in income...or is my theory too simple to be correct
A lot of the generation in Scotland is wind or hydro sourced. In England we have a plethora of coal (which will begin decommissioning next year as part of the greenhouse gas reductions agreed post-Kyoto), natural gas, biomass and nuclear. To keep the coal fired plant running requires "scrubbers" to remove the sulphur content, which is very expensive - so something the generators arent too keen to do. Cheaper to shut the facility, or convert to biomass (less output) or gas (more expensive). Gas attracts lower subsidies so a lot of power stations which were scheduled for conversion are still burning coal as the generation still makes a shedload of cash. All the nuclear facilities are beyond their planned end of life, although most are now owned by EDF and they do appear to be investing in them to keep them operational. Since EDF took them, their performace has been excellent, with very few breakdowns. The two which have been taken off-line recently were due to faults found through thorough inspection, which is kind of reassuring actually.
If the flow of abundant green electricity from Scotland is restricted, then the balance of the supply/demand process changes for the rest of the UK. Of course, additional generation will pick up the shortfall. Some gas fired power stations were mothballed a few years ago due to the low subsidies on gas so the generators focussed on coal to make more money, so these could come back into service. Wind farms are also popping up all over, but this is still an expensive way to generate electricity. We don't have the climate for large scale solar to pick up the shortfall (ignoring micro-generation, which is still something which most folks should think about), so the options are both limited and expensive.
First quarter of next year will see EMR begin (Electricity Market Reform) which will place certain levies on consumers to fill a pot of cash to invest again in new nuclear facilities, but these wont be on-stream for another 10 years. The Government has told the industry in no uncertain terms that the lights cannot go out, but the cost of running those lights are the key concern right now. EMR looks like adding around £15 per MWh to wholesale electricity prices (currently around £42 per MWh). Guess who will be required to pick that up!
-
So despite the best efforts of the No campaign this week, the polls show things are still neck and neck. The No campaigners have offered Devo Max, got their banker friends to say they will relocate, got their supermarket friends to say prices will rise etc.etc. and the Yes vote has totally held up.
The No campaign have no more bullets left to fire. Expect the Yes campaign to now gradually pull away and win the vote quite comfortably. Trust me. I know what I'm talking about.
http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-09-12/scottish-independence-race-tightens-in-final-days-in-icm-poll
-
Aye, just like Oscar would have his bail revoked eh? :)
-
It's like a national IQ test for Scotland.
The results will be clearly shown in the form of the yes/no%.
If the BBC shows Braveheart the night before, the No vote is doomed. ;)
Seriously though, if they do go ahead and separate, I hope we wash our hands of them entirely, and leave them to it, for better or for worse.
I expect them to vote yes, and I expect the British tax payer to be forced to subsidise Scotland in one way or another, for the forseable future.
-
I agree, I really don't want Scotland to leave because it makes for a stronger UK and that has got to be good on a world stage particularly in a political and economic sense.
However, if they are stupid enough to think they can be self-sufficient financially without the help of London, let them get on with it. On the understanding there will be no subsidy EVER again from the UK.
Scotland will be bankrupt in my opinion within 5 years. They are another economic Greece waiting to happen.
Good luck Scotland, your fate is in your own hands.
-
I hope they go for it and fully expect it to be a disaster for them. Any country that is run by left wingers always ends up failing. They all believe in borrow and spend and sod the long term consequences.
-
A spokesman for Yes Scotland said: "The pound is Scotland's currency every bit as much as the rest of the UK's, and it will remain our currency after independence."
Which parts of 'independence' do Scotland want? Not a new currency. Not a new head of state. Not their own armed forces. Not their own Television Channels.
I am genuinely confused about this notion of independence, because other than in fiscal policy and having their own team at The Olympics, it all seems long on tub-thumping and 'independence-lite' on actually going their own way.
-
They will narrowly vote no, but a shrewd move by Salmond - the no vote will be bought by our gutless politicians for increased devolution and many more powers for the Scottish parliament. Scotland already get more per head from the uk government for health and education, subsidised by the rest of the uk, and they'll be even better off after this vote.
Brilliant on the part of the SNP, they can't lose, independence or more devolution? The only losers are the rest of us who have to pay for it.
Happy days!
:facepalm:
-
The Scotch will vote yes. There are many reasons but one of the most important ones is that they will not want a Tory government after the next election running their affairs. The Scotch aren't daft. They know who will win the next election.
-
Yes are now 8 points ahead. 54% to 46%. What did I tell you.
ttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2754895/Put-Scottish-flag-window-save-union-As-confusion-rages-shock-poll-putting-Yes-vote-EIGHT-points-ahead-PM-makes-desperate-plea.html
-
If you know anything about statistics then you know these polls are worthless. Small sample size and dubious normalisation factors. Let's see what happens next week before you start crowing, troll.
-
The Scotch will vote yes. There are many reasons but one of the most important ones is that they will not want a Tory government after the next election running their affairs. [/i][/b]The Scotch aren't daft. They know who will win the next election.
I'm totally with them on that! :suicide:
-
All you lefties must be panicking. Once you lose the Scotch MP's, Labour will have no chance of forming a government. Love it. I'm so happy. The Tories and UKIP will then be able to implement some extreme right wing policies and get the country sorted. Expect the following to happen.
1) Withdrawal from the EU.
2) Control of immigration.
3) Scroungers sorted out.
4) National debt sorted.
5) NHS privatised.
I can't wait.
-
Summary of independence polls from the excellent (and impartial, although he's a member of the Tory party) Anthony Wells of You Gov.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/8984
With what I assume are all Sunday’s Scottish polls in, where do we stand? Looking across the board at all six companies polling, two of them using two different modes, we actually have a broadly consistent picture. Excluding don’t knows, the Yes shares in the 8 different companies/methods are:
ICM (online) 54%
Panelbase (online) 49%
ICM (phone) 49%
TNS (face to face) 49%
YouGov (online) 48%
Opinium (online) 47%
Survation (online) 47%
Survation (phone) 46%
Guess which one our resident idiot chooses to mention. That's the thing about idiots. They assume everyone else is as irredeemable thick as they are themselves.
-
Here's a little prophecy for you.
Narrow No victory.
Major problems at polling booths when voters (especially first time ones) turn up at the last minute and then can't get their vote in before the closing time.
-
Here's a little prophecy for you.
Narrow No victory.
Major problems at polling booths when voters (especially first time ones) turn up at the last minute and then can't get their vote in before the closing time.
I think I heard that if you're in the queue at closing time (the polling station, not the pub) then you will be allowed to cast your vote.
-
Summary of independence polls from the excellent (and impartial, although he's a member of the Tory party) Anthony Wells of You Gov.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/8984
With what I assume are all Sunday’s Scottish polls in, where do we stand? Looking across the board at all six companies polling, two of them using two different modes, we actually have a broadly consistent picture. Excluding don’t knows, the Yes shares in the 8 different companies/methods are:
ICM (online) 54%
Panelbase (online) 49%
ICM (phone) 49%
TNS (face to face) 49%
YouGov (online) 48%
Opinium (online) 47%
Survation (online) 47%
Survation (phone) 46%
Guess which one our resident idiot chooses to mention. That's the thing about idiots. They assume everyone else is as irredeemable thick as they are themselves.
Using that logic, though, Billy, the three main party leaders and Gordon Brown are idiots for giving out huge "Devo-Max" concessions on the basis of one poll (the YouGov one last week that showed YES in the lead).
Truth is, most are within the margin of error and it really is too close to call. Yes, it is wrong to use one poll, which is probably an outlier, to call it one way or the other, but it really could go either way. My gut feeling is that the YES campaign has now peaked and most of the undecideds will vote NO or abstain.
(And by the way I'm not calling those esteemed men idiots- although I'll make an exception in the case of Cleggy- because I dare say they had access to private polling that pointed in the same direction as that YouGov poll. Although I think "Devo-Max" carries with it the seeds of a future vote on independence.)
-
TRB
The YES campaigned developed a totally unexpected momentum after the second debate. The sudden lurch from NO to YES seems to have been due to Salmond forcing Darling to "admit" (sic) that an independent Scotland could use the pound even without a formal currency union.
That was cretinous. Of COURSE Scotland could use the Pound, just like it could use the Dollar, the Rouble or South Sea Island conch shells if it wanted. There was no "concession" made. Yet Salmond, that most mendacious of all politicians, crowed "There you have it folks. The NO campaign say that you CAN keep the pound."
The point is, of course, that it would be catastrophic for Scotland to keep the pound after independence. Because they would have all the problems that Ireland, Portugal Spain , Italy and Greece had in the Euro. But that's a logical argument. Salmond tapped into an emotional one during and after that debate, and he developed a dangerous momentum that might have seen Scotland ignorantly dashing into an abyss (and quite possibly taking us with them).
The stakes were very high. It's all very well with hindsight saying that the Westminster leaders should have held their nerve. You're saying that with the hindsight of having seen the momentum suddenly stopped (and probably reversed) FOLLOWING the Westminster response. If they hadn't made that response, we could well be looking at an unstoppable YES bandwagon.
-
You won't find any argument from me in your assessment of Salmond, a devotee of the "Big Lie" school of politics if ever there was one. But the NO campaign knew exactly what he was like and have signally failed to neutralise him. Alistair Darling may talk sense most of the time, but his message isn't getting across, most crucially to Labour voters who seem to be the ones who have swung behind the YES campaign.
The mistake was not to make Gordon Brown the figurehead of the Better Together campaign. Now I think he was a poor Chancellor and a worse Prime Minister, but he remains popular with Labour voters in Scotland and that's why he's been wheeled out in the last few weeks. Yes, Brown would have put the backs of the Tories and Lib Dems up, but they were going to back the NO campaign come what may. In any case, Cameron is prepared to be rude about his own party when needs must, as he showed last week!
The only argument for offering "Devo-Max" now is to buy time. Maybe the Westminster leaders have concluded that Scotland is a lost cause and that in five years or so the contingency plans will be in place that make independence a softer landing for the RUK (and maybe Scotland too.) Salmond will present this as a victory for him and the Nats even if they lose the vote on Thursday. George Galloway doesn't get much right, but he was correct when he said that the NO campaign needed to achieve a crushing victory so that Independence was off the table for a generation at least. We can be pretty certain that's not going to happen.
So I'll predict a narrow NO on Thursday, followed by much crowing by Salmond and then bickering over the deal they eventually get offered, which will colour the General Election campaign next year and help the Nats take some seats off Labour. Then a crushing victory for the Nats in the next Scottish elections and a demand for another referendum.
-
TRB
To be honest, I thought the NO campaign had been consummate until the second debate. They had kept a steady 12-15% lead and had played Project Fear perfectly. They had got across the fact that there were terrible uncertainties in Independence. The intelligent person in me would have liked to see a more rational debate, but that's pie in the sky. The fact that there was a massive lurch to YES after a nothing issue in a debate that Salmond was able to twist as some sort of vindication shows how shallow the electorate's understanding is.
As for Darling, it's widely accepted that he took Salmond apart in the first debate (which I didn't see, but which I understand was civil and rational). The second debate was more like a Govan pub brawl and Darling was woeful.
-
The No campaign fired all their bullets last week. They even used the nuclear option of giving the Scotch independence by the back door via Devo Max. Despite all this ICM find the Yes campaign has pulled well clear.
It's obvious the momentum is with them. It stalled last week due to the No campaign indulging in disgraceful scaremongering. The No campaign have nothing else to offer.
Get your money on a Yes vote. The bookies have got that one badly wrong and there is easy money to be made.
-
So you know better than the bookies because they throw their money away so easily - that's why Messrs Hill and Ladbrokes are so skint! F*ck me! I've been in the wrong job for the last 30 years, I should have been a punter cos bookmakers are generous charitable fellows.
:headbang:
-
So you know better than the bookies because they throw their money away so easily - that's why Messrs Hill and Ladbrokes are so skint! F*ck me! I've been in the wrong job for the last 30 years, I should have been a punter cos bookmakers are generous charitable fellows.
:headbang:
As a professional gambler I can tell you that the bookies quite often get it wrong. They set their odds depending on the weight of money not on looking in a crystal ball and predicting the future. There has been so much money on No winning that they are now taking their profits and keeping the No odds skinny. Means nothing in terms of the outcome of the vote. They are hoping that because the odds give the impression that No are certain to win this will put people off backing a Yes vote.
Well it doesn't put me off. I'll be taking them to the cleaners.
-
How many posts will need editing come next Friday morning...?
-
So you know better than the bookies because they throw their money away so easily - that's why Messrs Hill and Ladbrokes are so skint! F*ck me! I've been in the wrong job for the last 30 years, I should have been a punter cos bookmakers are generous charitable fellows.
:headbang:
As a professional gambler I can tell you that the bookies quite often get it wrong. They set their odds depending on the weight of money not on looking in a crystal ball and predicting the future. There has been so much money on No winning that they are now taking their profits and keeping the No odds skinny. Means nothing in terms of the outcome of the vote. They are hoping that because the odds give the impression that No are certain to win this will put people off backing a Yes vote.
Well it doesn't put me off. I'll be taking them to the cleaners.
They don't just set their odds on weight of money. As the grandson of a bookie I know that they have researchers that would shame sky and the BBC (my grandad employed successful BBC researchers, many of whom went into parliament as parliamentary researchers) and don't risk money - they take a highly professional approach and take few risks. The professional gamblers I know are either extremely good at interpreting form and study longer than a PhD student or are in the know. None of them would venture into politics without having done a great deal of research and certainly wouldn't be giving odds against if there was the remotest possibility of a yes vote. If I'm wrong, I'll admit it, but let's wait and see before we start getting all billy big b*ll*cks eh?!
Oh, and none of them would post on a public forum with their views - their opinions are there to make or lose money - it's their job, they certainly don't share them with TLO us!
:cool:
-
Odds checker odds on Scottish referendum
http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/british-politics/scottish-independence/referendum-outcome
All those poor deluded bookies giving cash away at 3/1 and 7/2? If only they knew you were so much smarter than them! Idiots!
:aok:
-
Lincs
Careful. You're talking to someone who won several thousand on a 50/1 shot on the National...
-
Ah yes BST, thanks for the reminder, I nearly made a fool of myself there! Oh well, we all have opinions, let's wait and see - I hope he's not wrong because a professional gambler needs to pay the mortgage as well, and I hate to see homeless gamblers!
:rolleyes:
-
I'll be having the last laugh. I'm going to make thousands. You've been advised.
-
Like you did on the National, eh? :)
-
So if the jocks bugger off are we taking the cross of St Andrew out of the Union Jack?
-
So if the jocks bugger off are we taking the cross of St Andrew out of the Union Jack?
I wouldn't. The Union flag is part of our culture, and I'll be damned if I'll be having people who don't want to be a part of it anymore dictate our national symbol.
Unless we actively want to wash our hands of them completely, that is. I could see an argument for that.
-
Err, if there isn't a union any more then we wont require a Union Flag?
-
Err, if there isn't a union any more then we wont require a Union Flag?
Are Northern Ireland not part of the Union then?...
-
Just thinking- when this is all over can we have a referendum on independence for England? ;)
-
Taking the economics etc out of it (yes I know they have a massive influence) and go to the basic question. If it was me I would vote yes because I would like my country run by a democratically . Scotland doesnt fully have that yet.
-
Personally, if they want to go, let em, but for me it has to be a clean break, no handouts from England like now, they go it alone, and lets see how many come crying when it goes tits up
-
Will it not be very very Odd should the Jocks Get the Yes vote as in november England will play up in Glasgow in a Friendly
That will Add furm to the fire as the NO Jocks might just support England
As a protest
-
Scotland's issues are no different to those of Yorkshire's. Being governed by a London-centric parliament that's really not interested and in the past positively hostile towards the north you'd think people from this part of the world would have more understanding. If Yorkshire was given the chance of being self-governing I'm betting more than a fair share of proud Yorkshire people would be all for it.
I can't see why Scotland would come "crying" back. Even during it's recent financial strife Ireland went to Europe, not the UK, with the begging bowl and being part of the EU will be part of Scotland's plan too. Yes, the country will be smaller and less significant on the world stage than as part of the UK, but if you talk to the average Yank they refer to the UK as England anyway. Whether we like it or not, the UK, Britain and it's constituent parts are becoming less and less signifcant as the years role on. Those that sit on the sidelines and bang on about how great the past was are likely to get left behind. It'll be interesting to see if Scotland do break away and become members of the EU and then England vote to come out of the EU who would be the most isolated in the decades to come...
-
It may surprise you Rios, UK bailed Ireland out along with EU and SEPERATELY. To the tune of a few billion.
-
Scotland's issues are no different to those of Yorkshire's. Being governed by a London-centric parliament that's really not interested and in the past positively hostile towards the north you'd think people from this part of the world would have more understanding. If Yorkshire was given the chance of being self-governing I'm betting more than a fair share of proud Yorkshire people would be all for it.
I can't see why Scotland would come "crying" back. Even during it's recent financial strife Ireland went to Europe, not the UK, with the begging bowl and being part of the EU will be part of Scotland's plan too. Yes, the country will be smaller and less significant on the world stage than as part of the UK, but if you talk to the average Yank they refer to the UK as England anyway. Whether we like it or not, the UK, Britain and it's constituent parts are becoming less and less signifcant as the years role on. Those that sit on the sidelines and bang on about how great the past was are likely to get left behind. It'll be interesting to see if Scotland do break away and become members of the EU and then England vote to come out of the EU who would be the most isolated in the decades to come...
That's a no brainer. England would power ahead and the countries in the EU will continue to go backwards. Aren't you aware of what has happened to Ireland, Greece, Portugal, Spain, etc in the EU? Why anyone would want this for Scotchland is beyond me.
-
It may surprise you Rios, UK bailed Ireland out along with EU and SEPERATELY. To the tune of a few billion.
I stand corrected. :)
-
Rios
Ireland shares a currency with the rest of the EuroZone. The EZ countries were the ones who dominated in the contributions to the Irish bailout, predominantly because it was their currency that was at risk if Ireland defaulted. We contributed a relatively small amount to the overall sum, predominantly because we do a lot of business with the EZ and it was very much in our interests to see the Euro survive (which it would not have done if Ireland had defaulted).
Scotland as an independent country is a totally different ball game. if we have a currency union with them and their economy goes tits up (as it surely would in 2008, given the inflated size of the banking sector relative to the Scottish economy - RBS, HBOS etc) then there is only one country that would be there to bail them out. Us. The EZ would flick us the rods because Scotland is insignificant to them.
So, if Scotland goes independent, but keeps the pound, we have no control over what they do, but all the responsibility for bailing them out if it goes tits.
Absolutely untenable.
So, if Scotland goes independent and wants a currency union, they only get one if they agree to rigid, binding rules on what they can do with their economy. Rules set by Westminster. A Westminster that now has no Scottish MPs. So, by going "independent", they have less control over their own destiny than they currently do.
THAT is the Big Lie that Salmond has been skirting around for the past couple of years. There is no such thing as "Scottish Independence" unless they have the balls to go the whole hog and have their own currency.
-
The thing is they can't just invent a new Scottish Groat on Friday. Creating a currency takes a bit of time, look how long they had the Euro running in parallel with the existing European currencies.
If Scotland unexpectedly does vote Yes on Thursday they would immediately have to put all these false arguments and scaremongering to one side. To protect the economies of both sides.
RBS, Lloyds, HBOS aren't really as Scottish as they're made out to be, they're British. That needs addressing.
The Scots will have to share the pound, there's nothing else for it. At least to give the Scots time to create a credible currency and central bank of their own and finally claim independence.
The only way though the Scots are going to be in a position to start preparing for full independence and create a new currency is to get a Yes vote now. If that's what they want.
There has always been the suspicion that Salmond actually wants to join the Euro but not right now, it's in such a mess. Joining the Euro would involve giving up Scottish independence to Brussels and that wouldn't be such a powerful message to send the Scottish people. And there are big hurdles to overcome in Europe with that one. The Spanish for instance don't like the precedent it would set.
-
RD
No suspicion about Salmond and the Euro. It was SNP policy up until the mid-00s. Salmond then slowly moved them away from outright desire to join the Euro, to a policy of keeping sterling until conditions were right for them to join the Euro (part of the New Gradualism approach that he so cleverly brought in - move to a radical new position gradually so as not to scare the horses). Then, after the Great Crash and the Euro Crisis, the SNP quietly shelved the "until conditions are right" bit and don;t talk about that now.
This is the same Salmond and the same SNP who, back in 2006/07, were crowing about how Ireland and Iceland were models for how an independent Scotland could run it's economy.
They are mendacious buffoons who make up policy on the hoof. The very worst kind of politicians. They operate on what I've heard called "policy based evidence making". You decide what policy you want, then you find evidence to fit it.
The SNP's stance on the effect of currency union basically is to say that the following people are wrong and are all plotting against them:
George Osborne
Ed Balls
Danny Alexander
Mark Carney
The IFS
Olivier Blanchard (Chief economist at the IMF)
Paul Krugman
Simon Wren-Lewis (Chief macro-economics prof at Oxford Uni)
Apparently all of the above are wrong and are conspiring to pull the wool over the Scots' eyes, whilst Salmond, the Ireland-admirer, the Euro-admirer is correct.
If there wasn't a small chance that 50% of Scots might actually be duped by this bas**rd on Thursday, it'd be hilarious.
-
It may surprise you Rios, UK bailed Ireland out along with EU and SEPERATELY. To the tune of a few billion.
£50 Billion to be exact and the Tax take for the whole of Eire is 22 billion Euro per annum.
-
On a positive note if they do go we can keep the clocks as summertime which will save well over £1 Billion in Power bills as there will be daylight from 4 while 5 In mid winter.
-
Apart from Whiskey going up in price :crying: the other good news would be all that Money that gets pumped up there will get pumped into the North!
-
Polls all point to a no then.
-
Ah but Mick knows best.
-
Here's a prediction.
When the result is a NO win by 5-8% on Friday morning, Mick pops up and tells us that he was having a titter all along, and he lumped on NO.
What a titterer.
-
I'll be making thousands. I'll be on here on Friday morning with the exact figures. I'll be doing lots of tittering.
-
How did you spend your winnings from the National? :silly:
-
Can you post a picture or screen shot of said betting slip then we can see your telling the truth
-
Can you post a picture or screen shot of said betting slip then we can see your telling the truth
Course he won't. He'll edit/delete posts as suits him, the way he did when he supposedly tipped the winner of the National, and the various other times he's been made a cock of.
-
I honestly believe Salmond will be happiest with a narrow No victory.
That way, he gets to screw as much out of Westminster as he possibly can he gets Devomax, which I think is really what he wants and he still has almost 50% of Scots wanting full independence.
They can then spend the next fifteen years pushing for the break from England, which they will hope they to do once the UK is safely inside the EU and they won't have to worry about currencies and shit.
-
RD- I largely agree with you, although I doubt it will take 15 years before there is another referendum. It may be too soon to have one within the next Westminster Parliament (2015-2020) but I'll wager there is another soon after that.
Re the EU, do you mean "inside?" I rather thought that was the position at the moment! Although the EU could be the trigger for another referendum in Scotland. A bit unlikely, I admit, but if the Tories were to win the GE next year AND the EU referendum in 2017 saw a vote for the UK to withdraw it might fuel the Scottish independence campaign- especially if Scotland voted overall to stay in.
-
RB
I was just meaning Scottish 'independence' would be more easily won at a time when they had managed to save the Euro currency and the UK had adopted it first. Although then it still wouldn't really be Scottish independence then either but they'd sell it as that.
If such a state of affairs ever comes to pass. Personally I think the Euro still looks to be on a slow but inevitable road to failure.
-
Personally I'd have thought there was more chance of a Tory victory in 2015 and a vote to leave the EU than there is of the UK joining the euro. Even the most vocal advocates of signing up to it are silent now.
Then again, I think there is more chance of Rovers winning 6-0 on Saturday and Theo scoring a hat-trick than there is of the UK joining the euro!
-
I agree RB
I'm just looking at the way club Med is sinking into deflation and dragging the entire Eurozone with it and the ECBs response to it. How long before the realisation dawns that such disparate economies can't live together?
No UK government is going to want to adopt the Euro while the EU economy still shows no real sign of stability.
I won't be surprised if the decision to join up fully isn't simply taken out of our hands because there won't be an EU in the form we recognise it today.
-
RD
These economies CAN live together in the EZ. The economics of how it should work are really quite straightforward. First you need a central bank that adopts policy for the entire zone, rather than succumb to the frankly childish and irrational German fear of anything remotely resembling inflation. Then you need a system of fiscal transfers from fiscally strong to weak regions. It's that simple.
Of course it's the POLITICS that stops it happening. Specifically, the German attitude. They have benefitted hugely from a Euro which has given them an artificially depressed currency, and they refuse to countenance standing their side of the deal.
The bizarre thing about us in the UK is that we already have the requisite structure in place for a highly successful currency union. And now Salmond wants to rip that up and follow the political example of Europe. Quite mad.
-
"Germans fear inflation even more than life-threatening diseases like cancer."
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/world-war-i-sowed-seeds-of-german-hyperinflation-in-1923-a-952143.html
-
RD
These economies CAN live together in the EZ. The economics of how it should work are really quite straightforward. First you need a central bank that adopts policy for the entire zone, rather than succumb to the frankly childish and irrational German fear of anything remotely resembling inflation. Then you need a system of fiscal transfers from fiscally strong to weak regions. It's that simple.
Of course it's the POLITICS that stops it happening. Specifically, the German attitude. They have benefitted hugely from a Euro which has given them an artificially depressed currency, and they refuse to countenance standing their side of the deal.
The bizarre thing about us in the UK is that we already have the requisite structure in place for a highly successful currency union. And now Salmond wants to rip that up and follow the political example of Europe. Quite mad.
What a load of old cock. If only life were that simple. All the countries in the EZ are culturally different. They all have different priorities. It's obvious to anyone with half a brain that they are all never going to agree on a way forward for the Euro as they all want something different from it.
The main reason why your ill thought out solution won't work is because it is totally unfair that fiscally prudent countries should have to support fiscally imprudent countries. No way the fiscally prudent countries' electorates would stand for that and quite right too.
You really spout some drivel but this time I think even you have surpassed yourself in your naivety.
-
Can you post a picture or screen shot of said betting slip then we can see your telling the truth
Modesty had prevented me from doing so as I didn't want to make you all jealous but you have impugned my honour so I will post the evidence you require. Now I would be grateful if you could issue an abject apology and in future take me at my word. Thanking you in anticipation of your cooperation.
-
Can you post a picture or screen shot of said betting slip then we can see your telling the truth
Modesty had prevented me from doing so as I didn't want to make you all jealous but you have impugned my honour so I will post the evidence you require. Now I would be grateful if you could issue an abject apology and in future take me at my word. Thanking you in anticipation of your cooperation.
Would you like to take a screen shot from the current bets tab, rather than the bet slip tab, all you're showing there is a bet before it's been placed, the current bets tab would show you've actually placed the bet
-
RD
These economies CAN live together in the EZ. The economics of how it should work are really quite straightforward. First you need a central bank that adopts policy for the entire zone, rather than succumb to the frankly childish and irrational German fear of anything remotely resembling inflation. Then you need a system of fiscal transfers from fiscally strong to weak regions. It's that simple.
Of course it's the POLITICS that stops it happening. Specifically, the German attitude. They have benefitted hugely from a Euro which has given them an artificially depressed currency, and they refuse to countenance standing their side of the deal.
The bizarre thing about us in the UK is that we already have the requisite structure in place for a highly successful currency union. And now Salmond wants to rip that up and follow the political example of Europe. Quite mad.
The state of the UK today shows how hard it is to make a currency union and single market work. After three hundred years there's still resentments on both sides and compared to the EU the Scots and English are two peas in a pod, what with sharing a small island and language and largely the same culture and the history of running an empire together.
It's not only the Germans who have problems with making the required sacrifices, it's the Finns and the Dutch and all the others in the North.
If now the Italians and Greeks and Portuguese were able to devalue, they might stand a chance of rebuilding. They could begin to attract the tourists back to their beaches, monuments and galleries. They could begin to hold on to their youth who are currently packing their bags and heading for London and Munich.
-
RD
These economies CAN live together in the EZ. The economics of how it should work are really quite straightforward. First you need a central bank that adopts policy for the entire zone, rather than succumb to the frankly childish and irrational German fear of anything remotely resembling inflation. Then you need a system of fiscal transfers from fiscally strong to weak regions. It's that simple.
Of course it's the POLITICS that stops it happening. Specifically, the German attitude. They have benefitted hugely from a Euro which has given them an artificially depressed currency, and they refuse to countenance standing their side of the deal.
The bizarre thing about us in the UK is that we already have the requisite structure in place for a highly successful currency union. And now Salmond wants to rip that up and follow the political example of Europe. Quite mad.
The state of the UK today shows how hard it is to make a currency union and single market work. After three hundred years there's still resentments on both sides and compared to the EU the Scots and English are two peas in a pod, what with sharing a small island and language and largely the same culture and the history of running an empire together.
It's not only the Germans who have problems with making the required sacrifices, it's the Finns and the Dutch and all the others in the North.
If now the Italians and Greeks and Portuguese were able to devalue, they might stand a chance of rebuilding. They could begin to attract the tourists back to their beaches, monuments and galleries. They could begin to hold on to their youth who are currently packing their bags and heading for London and Munich.
Exactly.
-
Can you post a picture or screen shot of said betting slip then we can see your telling the truth
Modesty had prevented me from doing so as I didn't want to make you all jealous but you have impugned my honour so I will post the evidence you require. Now I would be grateful if you could issue an abject apology and in future take me at my word. Thanking you in anticipation of your cooperation.
Would you like to take a screen shot from the current bets tab, rather than the bet slip tab, all you're showing there is a bet before it's been placed, the current bets tab would show you've actually placed the bet
That's a no then?
-
Can you post a picture or screen shot of said betting slip then we can see your telling the truth
Modesty had prevented me from doing so as I didn't want to make you all jealous but you have impugned my honour so I will post the evidence you require. Now I would be grateful if you could issue an abject apology and in future take me at my word. Thanking you in anticipation of your cooperation.
Would you like to take a screen shot from the current bets tab, rather than the bet slip tab, all you're showing there is a bet before it's been placed, the current bets tab would show you've actually placed the bet
He must think people are stupid.
-
Bonny Donny?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11104004/Why-an-historical-anomaly-means-Bonny-Donny-could-leave-the-UK-too.html
If Doncaster is still a part of Scotland, why aren't we all voting today?
-
I post a copy of my betslip as requested and still people aren't satisfied! I can't get my breath. I'll be posting another copy of a betslip tomorrow showing the massive profit I've made.
-
Why are we arguing over the currency? Kevin Bridges has already revealed it will be called the "smackaroonie"
1:50 in....
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z2BKrh43rhI
-
I post a copy of my betslip as requested and still people aren't satisfied! I can't get my breath. I'll be posting another copy of a betslip tomorrow showing the massive profit I've made.
Because showing the bet slip doesn't show the bet's been placed...
Not that we'd have reason to doubt your gambling prowess, eh? after all, you did tip the National winner... :rolleyes:
-
Bonny Donny?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11104004/Why-an-historical-anomaly-means-Bonny-Donny-could-leave-the-UK-too.html
If Doncaster is still a part of Scotland, why aren't we all voting today?
According to a 900-year-old historical quirk, the small Yorkshire town of Doncaster, 175 miles south of the border, is technically part of Scotland.
Small? Bigger than most Scottish cities, I'd say.
I suppose we could join the SPL and give Celtic some competition.
-
I suppose its my fault in saying bet slip but good luck
-
I suppose its my fault in saying bet slip but good luck
Thank you for your kind wishes but I don't need any luck. It's an abject apology I'm after. Trust me, I'll be making a right killing tomorrow.
-
I think you're a liar. Prove with a slip showing the bet placed and I'll apologise.
-
I think you're a liar. Prove with a slip showing the bet placed and I'll apologise.
I also think you're a lier, and I require the same proof for the same apology, if that proof is not forthcoming today, I expect an abject apology from you Mick
-
Look, I've provided the evidence requested. I can understand why people are getting upset as it doesn't seem right that someone can make that kind of money just by being an expert on politics and gambling. I didn't want to brag about my winnings but I was severely provoked. Any reasonable person can see that. It's up to you whether you believe me or not, but I think I've proved beyond doubt on this forum that I am a thoroughly honest, decent person. It surprises me that people keep asking me for proof on everything I post (especially BST).
I've also never had an abject apology off anyone in the past even though I have thoroughly deserved many. I don't think by providing further evidence I'll get one anyway so you'll just have to be happy with the evidence I've already provided and take me at my word. That said, I will provide further evidence tomorrow of the substantial killing I've made as previously promised.
Now I'd be grateful if everyone could just calm down and just accept that some of us have huge knackers when it comes to gambling and deserve the rewards that flow from it.
-
Erm you haven't provided the proof I requested at all...
-
It's up to you whether you believe me or not
Well everyone WOULD believe you if you actually showed the bet as placed rather than a bet ready to be placed... there's absolutely no evidence that you've even placed it that you've provided.
-
Bonny Donny?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11104004/Why-an-historical-anomaly-means-Bonny-Donny-could-leave-the-UK-too.html
If Doncaster is still a part of Scotland, why aren't we all voting today?
According to a 900-year-old historical quirk, the small Yorkshire town of Doncaster, 175 miles south of the border, is technically part of Scotland.
Small? Bigger than most Scottish cities, I'd say.
I suppose we could join the SPL and give Celtic some competition.
Champions League, yes please.
-
Not wanting to get involved in this but IC the 'evidence' you have provided doesn't prove you have placed the bet at all.
All it proves is you have taken a look at the odds.
-
RD
I fundamentally disagree that the state of the UK shows how hard it is to make a currency union work within the context of a fiscally integrated framework.
Scotland has a rather successful economy, even without the oil. What this shows is that disparate parts of a currency union can perform well as long as there are fiscal transfers. Certainly there are frictions brought on by the need to have a single monetary policy, but these can be ameliorated by fiscal transfers between different parts of the union. THIS is the bit that Salmond has been actively avoiding. What the EZ crisis has shown categorically is that, with a unified monetary policy being highly undesirable for countries with diverging economic performances, there is an unarguable requirement for fiscal flows, to cool the overheating parts and boost the under-performing parts of the currency union.
America gets it. They have a relatively efficient method of ensuring fiscal flows between states that are asymmetrically hit by economic problems. So, states such as Nebraska and Florida, which took a huge hit from the sub-prime carnage, have been subsidised by central funds (i.e. taxes from more successful states) and as a result, have ridden out the recession far better than Spain or Ireland. In the case of Spain and Ireland, the Euro core has said, "Tough shit lads. We're having a monetary policy that keeps German inflation low and you can deal with it by having a Great Depression."
As America shows, it does NOT have to be like that. But the idea of German money flowing to fiscally underpin Ireland will simply not wash with the German public. It is perfectly sound economics, but it is politically unacceptable.
And THAT is what Salmond doesn't want to discuss. The consequence of a currency union with rUK is that fiscal transfers must take place. So, if Scotland roars ahead, it will have to fiscally subsidise rUK. Which would be unacceptable to those who vote YES. Or if Scotland suffers, it will have to be fiscally subsidised by rUK. Which is politically acceptable within a United Kingdom. But they can f**k right off if they unilaterally secede from that union.
-
I think we'll wake up tomorrow to a Scotland that has voted for independence. A majority of the electorate are simply not interested in the cold, hard facts anymore. Turned off by Thatcher and the current government (and a million other things that they blame Westminster for), I think Cameron's in for a wee bloody nose in the morning.
I think A LOT of undecideds will be voting 'Yes' and some of the poorest folks in Scotlandshire (who haven't really been polled) will swing it. And then there's those that woke up this morning and thought "Sod it. I'm not going to vote 'No', we can do better on our own." I even think that the result won't be as close as some have predicted.
I will be very surprised if a majority of Scots vote to stay part of the union.
-
Notwithstanding the obvious counter-arguments of this, but IF this is a reflection of the mood in Scotland then independence is coming: http://trendsmap.com/v2/Lf62/w
-
Lipsy
That trend map means nowt. The SNP have been very active in trying to hijack social media to present a stronger YES front than actually exists. They are so brazen and obvious in doing it, they've even got a name - the CyberNats.
The vote will be comfortably for NO. 5% gap minimum, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was closer to 10%.
-
I know that a) SNP have been complete arses and b) the demographic using Twitter are younger and more likely to use social media to make noise (and vote for independence) - I did say that I was aware of the arguments against holding this up as "proof" and I did use a big 'IF'. I just find it interesting.
I'm standing by what I say, mind. In fact, I would go as far as to say it'll 5%+ for independence. Felt this way for months.
I shan't be pretending to have spent £1000s on a bet and showing a phoney "proof" screengrab, mind. I'll be more than happy to be wrong in the morning. Sadly, I just believe that people in Scotland don't care about the facts and are happy to be rid of what they have now and hope it'll work out - for many, it cannot get any worse than it already is.
-
Well if they vote no I want a referendum on whether we want them in the UK
-
Frankly, if they have been so taken in by that f**ktard Salmond then I tend to agree with you. At least make them sit a competency test of some sort.
-
This: (Warning: It contains muchos swears.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQy_bfjy9l4
-
RD
I fundamentally disagree that the state of the UK shows how hard it is to make a currency union work within the context of a fiscally integrated framework.
Scotland has a rather successful economy, even without the oil. What this shows is that disparate parts of a currency union can perform well as long as there are fiscal transfers. Certainly there are frictions brought on by the need to have a single monetary policy, but these can be ameliorated by fiscal transfers between different parts of the union. THIS is the bit that Salmond has been actively avoiding. What the EZ crisis has shown categorically is that, with a unified monetary policy being highly undesirable for countries with diverging economic performances, there is an unarguable requirement for fiscal flows, to cool the overheating parts and boost the under-performing parts of the currency union.
America gets it. They have a relatively efficient method of ensuring fiscal flows between states that are asymmetrically hit by economic problems. So, states such as Nebraska and Florida, which took a huge hit from the sub-prime carnage, have been subsidised by central funds (i.e. taxes from more successful states) and as a result, have ridden out the recession far better than Spain or Ireland. In the case of Spain and Ireland, the Euro core has said, "Tough shit lads. We're having a monetary policy that keeps German inflation low and you can deal with it by having a Great Depression."
As America shows, it does NOT have to be like that. But the idea of German money flowing to fiscally underpin Ireland will simply not wash with the German public. It is perfectly sound economics, but it is politically unacceptable.
And THAT is what Salmond doesn't want to discuss. The consequence of a currency union with rUK is that fiscal transfers must take place. So, if Scotland roars ahead, it will have to fiscally subsidise rUK. Which would be unacceptable to those who vote YES. Or if Scotland suffers, it will have to be fiscally subsidised by rUK. Which is politically acceptable within a United Kingdom. But they can f*** right off if they unilaterally secede from that union.
What a load of cobblers. You haven't got the faintest idea about economics.
-
Those of you that doubt the validity of my betslip need to answer the question how on Earth have I managed to get odds of 20/1? I'll tell you how. Its because I placed the bet ages ago when everyone thought that 'No' would win comfortably because they were so far ahead in the polls. Why would I keep a screenshot of the betting slip months ago? Go figure.
-
Those of you that doubt the validity of my betslip need to answer the question how on Earth have I managed to get odds of 20/1? I'll tell you how. Its because I placed the bet ages ago when everyone thought that 'No' would win comfortably because they were so far ahead in the polls. Why would I keep a screenshot of the betting slip months ago? Go figure.
Is it because you have taken a shot of a betting exchange where you can choose the odds you would like?
Since you haven't submitted the bet, no one could have accepted it. Even if you did submit it nobody is going to take it, since they aren't competitive odds.
You could take another shot of the same screen showing odds at 50/1 if you like.
-
This is the best takedown of the economic arguments in favour of independence for Acotland that I have read. Simple, concise, accurate on every point.
http://blogs.piie.com/realtime/?p=4503
-
f**k me, is this idiot STILL prattling on about this bet? It's like having the village idiot round for dinner and then having him refuse to leave.
-
That's quite a frightening/sobering read. Sadly, it appears that the 'Yes' voters would still vote for independence even if it could proved beforehand that their sexual organs would drop off/heal over if they did so.
-
Those of you that doubt the validity of my betslip need to answer the question how on Earth have I managed to get odds of 20/1? I'll tell you how. Its because I placed the bet ages ago when everyone thought that 'No' would win comfortably because they were so far ahead in the polls. Why would I keep a screenshot of the betting slip months ago? Go figure.
In that case you won't mind showing a screenshot of where the bet has been confirmed will you? :)
-
YouGov's exit poll would suggest a No victory 54-46.
We'll soon(ish) see.
-
The last Yougov poll can be totally ignored. Yes will win. Yougov's poll was an online poll. The poorest members of society don't have internet access. The poorest members are far more likely to vote yes as they have nothing to lose and everything to gain. The poorest members who normally don't vote are voting this time.
All in all that means a yes vote after which I will be considerably richer.
-
What a choice. Nick Robinson on BBC1 or this bell end on here. It's like a choice between a kick in the left bollock or a kick in the right one.
-
I'll be glad when the no majority (albeit a narrow one 52:48) is announced and this thread ends! It's getting like watching a car crash, can't look, can't stop looking! But now it's boring and we only have 6 hours or so to wait. Off to bed now and look forward to this ending miserably for one of our regulars - although there'll no doubt be another wind up thread immediately the result is announced!
:headbang:
-
The last Yougov poll can be totally ignored. Yes will win. Yougov's poll was an online poll. The poorest members of society don't have internet access. The poorest members are far more likely to vote yes as they have nothing to lose and everything to gain. The poorest members who normally don't vote are voting this time.
All in all that means a yes vote after which I will be considerably richer.
But you can't be richer because of it if you didn't place the bet. :)
-
Good news for the yes campaign. Voter turnout is very high, pushing 90%. The poor have turned out in their droves and will ensure a yes vote. Get in.
-
This is the best takedown of the economic arguments in favour of independence for Acotland that I have read. Simple, concise, accurate on every point.
http://blogs.piie.com/realtime/?p=4503
Make your mind up. Previously you were all for Mr Stigliz. Now you are totally against. Why am I not surprised. You always find the evidence to back up your infantile claims even if this means a complete about turn on your previous views.
Luckily I am here to hold you to account.
-
Mick.
Yet another avenue that we've wandered down before.
Go and find where I was "all for Mr Stiglitz"
At your leisure.
In fact no. Just f**k off and shut up, you utter pillock.
-
Looking good for his bet so far!
-
If only he'd actually placed it eh? :)
-
By God Mick you've made a cock of yourself haven't you. :)
Time to make a new account? Ah well, at least you didn't put that bet on in the end, eh? :)
-
Well, I backed the wrong horse. Glad the result was to maintain independence, though you wonder how long it'll last. Interesting times ahead...
-
By God Mick you've made a cock of yourself haven't you. :)
Time to make a new account? Ah well, at least you didn't put that bet on in the end, eh? :)
Expect Mick to crawl back under his rock and ignore this thread now :)
-
All the momentum is with Yes. I expect the vote to be 55/45 in favour of Yes. I have had a hefty wager on Yes winning and I'm counting my money already.
It just shows how desperate the No campaign are with Dave using the 'f' word yesterday. If it is a No the young will resent the older more cautious generation who are only bothered about protecting their pensions and benefits.
You didnt do very well did you. i said 60/40 for no. ok was 55/45, but closer than your wager loss .
-
All the momentum is with Yes. I expect the vote to be 55/45 in favour of Yes. I have had a hefty wager on Yes winning and I'm counting my money already.
It just shows how desperate the No campaign are with Dave using the 'f' word yesterday. If it is a No the young will resent the older more cautious generation who are only bothered about protecting their pensions and benefits.
Have you got your wheelbarrow ready to collect your winnings on your hefty wager, or were you pissing up out backs again and we all fell for it? PMSL...what a tool!
-
By God Mick you've made a cock of yourself haven't you. :)
Time to make a new account? Ah well, at least you didn't put that bet on in the end, eh? :)
Expect Mick to crawl back under his rock and ignore this thread now :)
There'll be no crawling under a rock by me thank you very much. First of all I'd like to magnanimously congratulate the 'No' campaign on scaring predominantly the older generation into voting 'No'. Well done, you twisted the truth and have won a thoroughly undeserved victory.
Well done to all of you that correctly predicted the outcome. It's the first time I can ever remember being wrong about anything, but there is a first time for everything. I have learned from this experience and this has hardened my resolve so as to make sure it never happens again.
Now, as to my hefty wager. The reason I am a professional gambler and all of you are mug punters is as follows. I backed a 'Yes' vote at 20/1. Recently I decided that instead of risking losing £10k in the event of a 'No' vote I would make a substantial profit whatever the result. So I decided to lay my bet off at 3/1. By doing this I guaranteed myself a profit of £41,309.82. Here is the proof.
It would be a bit too complicated for all of you for me to explain the complex mathematics involved in working out my winnings, but for those of you that want to have a go you need to realise that I was working on paying the betting exchange 3% commission.
OK, I could have made £200,00 if there had been a 'Yes' vote if I hadn't laid the bet off. The downside is that I could also have lost £10,000 if there had been a 'No' vote. I decided that a guaranteed profit of £41,309.82 regardless of how the vote turned out was the way forward. This is the mentality of a professional gambler and it is what keeps me in my luxurious lifestyle.
Hopefully you mug punters have learned a valuable lesson from this experience. I must point out that the betting slip shows a stake of £2896.73. The lay stake was £52896.73. The '5' doesn't show on the betting slip as the box wasn't big enough to fit all the numbers in.
-
That still isn't proof that you actually placed that bet... How stupid do you honestly think we are?
-
Thought for the day?
08:25: Faisal Islam, Sky News Political Editor Faisal Islam, Sky News Political Editor tweets: ...So did one stray opinion poll in the Sunday papers change via panic and GBrown, course of the United Kingdom constitutional settlement...
Hmm.....
-
Again Mick, that screen shot proves nothing, click on the history tab, as those two bets will now be settled, there you will be able to screen shot both your bets and the outcome of both, you keep on telling us you're an honest person Mick, prove it!
-
TRB
No, but that's the myth that some will peddle.
It wasn't "one stray poll". It was a clear, consistent and large move towards YES after Salmond spun the pound issue after Debate Two.
As ever, journalists who never have to make an important decision in their lives, take the opportunity to snipe at leisure at politicians who have to make momentous decisions under pressure, in real time.
-
TRB
No, but that's the myth that some will peddle.
It wasn't "one stray poll". It was a clear, consistent and large move towards YES after Salmond spun the pound issue after Debate Two.
As ever, journalists who never have to make an important decision in their lives, take the opportunity to snipe at leisure at politicians who have to make momentous decisions under pressure, in real time.
I agree, it is a simplistic view, hence the "Hmm...". However, it shows why (initially) Cameron was unwilling to offer "Devo-Max" as an option on the ballot paper because of the problems it will potentially cause with the rest of the Union.
Drafting a Bill that everyone can agree on will be fiendishly difficult and I have a feeling will be impossible in what remains of this Parliament. It has the potential to be a major issue both inside and outside Scotland at the next General Election and will take up much time for the next UK Government. I also believe it will eventually used by the Nats to leverage another referendum.
-
By God Mick you've made a cock of yourself haven't you. :)
Time to make a new account? Ah well, at least you didn't put that bet on in the end, eh? :)
Expect Mick to crawl back under his rock and ignore this thread now :)
There'll be no crawling under a rock by me thank you very much. First of all I'd like to magnanimously congratulate the 'No' campaign on scaring predominantly the older generation into voting 'No'. Well done, you twisted the truth and have won a thoroughly undeserved victory.
Well done to all of you that correctly predicted the outcome. It's the first time I can ever remember being wrong about anything, but there is a first time for everything. I have learned from this experience and this has hardened my resolve so as to make sure it never happens again.
Now, as to my hefty wager. The reason I am a professional gambler and all of you are mug punters is as follows. I backed a 'Yes' vote at 20/1. Recently I decided that instead of risking losing £10k in the event of a 'No' vote I would make a substantial profit whatever the result. So I decided to lay my bet off at 3/1. By doing this I guaranteed myself a profit of £41,309.82. Here is the proof.
It would be a bit too complicated for all of you for me to explain the complex mathematics involved in working out my winnings, but for those of you that want to have a go you need to realise that I was working on paying the betting exchange 3% commission.
OK, I could have made £200,00 if there had been a 'Yes' vote if I hadn't laid the bet off. The downside is that I could also have lost £10,000 if there had been a 'No' vote. I decided that a guaranteed profit of £41,309.82 regardless of how the vote turned out was the way forward. This is the mentality of a professional gambler and it is what keeps me in my luxurious lifestyle.
Hopefully you mug punters have learned a valuable lesson from this experience. I must point out that the betting slip shows a stake of £2896.73. The lay stake was £52896.73. The '5' doesn't show on the betting slip as the box wasn't big enough to fit all the numbers in.
Wow, a bet slip. I'll do a screenshot of every horse to win in the first race this aft for a hundred grand to win then I can pass as a pro gambler too! Screenshot your history you prick. Show us the winnings.
-
I think he's gone back to the safety of his rock :)
-
IM proud of intelligence Scots coming out in force to dismiss the bigots.
were all one and Scotland and its people have gone up in my estimation. I did think they'd go for it! I know the thick a a brick yorkies would!!
momentous day in our history
-
IM proud of intelligence Scots coming out in force to dismiss the bigots.
were all one and Scotland and its people have gone up in my estimation. I did think they'd go for it! I know the thick a a brick yorkies would!!
momentous day in our history
I can understand your joy, however it is misguided. The Tories will win the next election and you will be ruled from Westminster once again by a party you despise. Good luck with that.
As for your comment 'thick as a brick yorkies' I can understand why you have made this comment. It is because you have spent too much time reading this forum and this has skewed your judgement. Unfortunately all the lefties on here do give a poor representation of the intelligence level amongst yorkies. I do my best to redress the balance and will continue to do so.
-
This made (MADE, get it) me smile, even if it is a PR gimmick.
-
IM proud of intelligence Scots coming out in force to dismiss the bigots.
were all one and Scotland and its people have gone up in my estimation. I did think they'd go for it! I know the thick a a brick yorkies would!!
momentous day in our history
I can understand your joy, however it is misguided. The Tories will win the next election and you will be ruled from Westminster once again by a party you despise. Good luck with that.
As for your comment 'thick as a brick yorkies' I can understand why you have made this comment. It is because you have spent too much time reading this forum and this has skewed your judgement. Unfortunately all the lefties on here do give a poor representation of the intelligence level amongst yorkies. I do my best to redress the balance and will continue to do so.
Ready to prove that bet yet Mick?
-
By God Mick you've made a cock of yourself haven't you. :)
Time to make a new account? Ah well, at least you didn't put that bet on in the end, eh? :)
Expect Mick to crawl back under his rock and ignore this thread now :)
There'll be no crawling under a rock by me thank you very much. First of all I'd like to magnanimously congratulate the 'No' campaign on scaring predominantly the older generation into voting 'No'. Well done, you twisted the truth and have won a thoroughly undeserved victory.
Well done to all of you that correctly predicted the outcome. It's the first time I can ever remember being wrong about anything, but there is a first time for everything. I have learned from this experience and this has hardened my resolve so as to make sure it never happens again.
Now, as to my hefty wager. The reason I am a professional gambler and all of you are mug punters is as follows. I backed a 'Yes' vote at 20/1. Recently I decided that instead of risking losing £10k in the event of a 'No' vote I would make a substantial profit whatever the result. So I decided to lay my bet off at 3/1. By doing this I guaranteed myself a profit of £41,309.82. Here is the proof.
It would be a bit too complicated for all of you for me to explain the complex mathematics involved in working out my winnings, but for those of you that want to have a go you need to realise that I was working on paying the betting exchange 3% commission.
OK, I could have made £200,00 if there had been a 'Yes' vote if I hadn't laid the bet off. The downside is that I could also have lost £10,000 if there had been a 'No' vote. I decided that a guaranteed profit of £41,309.82 regardless of how the vote turned out was the way forward. This is the mentality of a professional gambler and it is what keeps me in my luxurious lifestyle.
Hopefully you mug punters have learned a valuable lesson from this experience. I must point out that the betting slip shows a stake of £2896.73. The lay stake was £52896.73. The '5' doesn't show on the betting slip as the box wasn't big enough to fit all the numbers in.
FFS! You really do think we're all stupid! Strange you never mentioned laying the bet off before, and that slip is even worse than the last bet you never put on! This is the last time I respond to any of your messages, the best thing to do with a WUM is not to respond, hopefully you'll go away and post on the L**ds forum instead! - you will not get me taking the bait any more! Get a f*ck*ng real life instead of a virtual one! You are Jeremy beadle and I claim my £5! Knob!
:byebye:
-
As usual, I'm a bit late wiv da down wiv da happs stuff.
But this is just f***ing genius.
https://mobile.twitter.com/AngrySalmond?tw_i=513004727412752385&original_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.stv.tv%2Fscotland-decides%2Fanalysis%2F292772-indyref-daily-stephen-daisley-on-independence-referendum-campaign%2F&tw_p=tweetembed
-
As usual, I'm a bit late wiv da down wiv da happs stuff.
But this is just f***ing genius.
https://mobile.twitter.com/AngrySalmond?tw_i=513004727412752385&original_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.stv.tv%2Fscotland-decides%2Fanalysis%2F292772-indyref-daily-stephen-daisley-on-independence-referendum-campaign%2F&tw_p=tweetembed
I beg to differ. I didn't titter once.
-
Are you on twitter Billy?
-
Me Gaz? Nah. I have used it once - I had to set up an account to register a meteor that I saw, on a meteor-tracking website.
Too busy for Twitter as well as this place and my other on-line guilty pleasures.
-
Can't beat twitter. It's what you make it. Alex Salmond actually tweeted a reply to angry salmond if I remember rightly. Can't ever see some of the westminster arseholes doing that.