Scottish independence referendum thread

[scottish_flame]

What part do people not understand that England doesn't rule us?

[PIMking]

NM double post

[Byrns]

According to the bookmakers in the UK, the vote looks pretty clearly "No".

http://sports.ladbrokes.com/en-gb/po...um-e213511048#

[d_phaneuf]

Originally Posted by Plett25

Anyone want to make predictions?

58% No
42% Yes

I think we're going to see a lot of voters get cold feet in the polling stations.

I think they 'shy no's' are going to make it a lot closer than the polling shows

think the 58-60 is the right range but higher wouldn't surprise me

[d_phaneuf]

Originally Posted by Byrns

According to the bookmakers in the UK, the vote looks pretty clearly "No".

http://sports.ladbrokes.com/en-gb/po...um-e213511048#

someone is going in large on No

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/n...eferendum.html

betting £900,000 to win £193,333.33.

[To Be Quite Honest]

Originally Posted by scottish_flame

What part do people not understand that England doesn't rule us?

You can't be Scottish. I don't hear the accent when I read your posts.

[Slava]

On Twitter someone said they were so confident of a no vote that they were already paying out. Seems risky, obviously. The polls all seem to show 52-48 for the job side, but I thought that they were showing a lot of momentum on the yes side.

I don't know the ins and outs of this referendum, but I feel like people voting no are less likely to vote. I just say that because it seems like people in favour of separation would be more passionate about that then someone voting for the status quo. I really have nothing to back that up.

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by scottish_flame

What part do people not understand that England doesn't rule us?

Well, they do. e.g. England has the final say on how much is spent on Scotland's health service.

[c.t.ner]

Originally Posted by Slava

On Twitter someone said they were so confident of a no vote that they were already paying out. Seems risky, obviously. The polls all seem to show 52-48 for the job side, but I thought that they were showing a lot of momentum on the yes side.

I don't know the ins and outs of this referendum, but I feel like people voting no are less likely to vote. I just say that because it seems like people in favour of separation would be more passionate about that then someone voting for the status quo. I really have nothing to back that up.

I have only caught up to things this week, but it's going to be interesting. Gut feeling is that the No side wins, barely. 2-3% or so.

But it'll be a combination of couple of things. The quiet "no" voters and EU residents. People who say they support independence publicly due to peer pressure, but at the pools will go will with "no". I also think EU residents will vote no, given that Scotland won't be an EU country for 5-6 years I don't think that contingent (except for a handful of disgruntled Irishmen) will want to risk the uncertainty of living in a non-EU country.

[Daradon]

Have a friend in Scotland who is getting real tired of the 'Braveheart' types who don't even fully understand their own history or the complex economic issues. She says its getting real messy and dumb (both sides) there right now.

Course anyone who lived through the last Quebec referendum or prior understands the climate. 11 hour with a vote this big? Just sheer silliness.

I predict a tiny no victory. As tiny as the Quebec no was. Possibly less than 1 percent.

[Daradon]

Have a friend in Scotland who is getting real tired of the 'Braveheart' types who don't even fully understand their own history or the complex economic issues. She says its getting real messy and dumb (both sides) there right now.

Course anyone who lived through the last Quebec referendum or prior understands the climate. 11 hour with a vote this big? Just sheer silliness.

I predict a tiny no victory. As tiny as the Quebec no was. Possibly less than 1 percent.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Slava

On Twitter someone said they were so confident of a no vote that they were already paying out. Seems risky, obviously. The polls all seem to show 52-48 for the job side, but I thought that they were showing a lot of momentum on the yes side.

I don't know the ins and outs of this referendum, but I feel like people voting no are less likely to vote. I just say that because it seems like people in favour of separation would be more passionate about that then someone voting for the status quo. I really have nothing to back that up.

The closeness of the polls in a weird way becomes an advantage for the No's as it spurs their less idealistic voters, a lot of yes voters will also have second thoughts, it is, after all, an absolute leap into the unknown holding the hand of possibly the most inept and unprepared leader I've ever seen.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Re: head offices. While it is possible that things remain unchanged, I think you may be overconfident. One needs only to look at the decline of Montreal's corporate climate as major companies that bailed on Montreal and moved to Calgary, Toronto and Vancouver starting in the aftermath of Quebec's 1995 referendum. While Scotland could be smarter than Quebec and opt against adopting business-hostile practices, the general uncertainty is likely to have some impact.



There is some amusing idiocy on the EU's behalf contained in that statement. A nation must spend time, money and effort to build up a currency, just so they can gain the ability to abandon it for the Euro?

Yes, that's exactly it, once your in the euro they have to look after you, like Greece, and they got burned bad on that one.
A country that can't afford a stable currency and defined level of debt to GDP is a high risk.
This is much the same as a medical insurer expecting you to prove you don't need health insurance before they will sign you up.
Also the reserves needed to back a currency become part of the euros reserves in the event of joining, the actual pieces of paper are irrelevant really, it's the 10 or 20% the currency held in gold dollars etc that make the paper worth something.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Bagor

Well, they do. e.g. England has the final say on how much is spent on Scotland's health service.

The British Parliament has final say not England.

[killer_carlson]

So according to a CBC interview with a Scottish reporter here is some Up to the minute info

A) vote difference according to polls is about 70,000 votes
B) each side focusing on getting vote out
C) hoping for voter turnout in excess of 80%
D) polls close about 3:00 Alberta time
E) results expected about 7:00 or so Alberta time tomorrow

[Bagor]

Originally Posted by GGG

The British Parliament has final say not England.

Semantics. I'm aware of that. And they are based in ....

Scotland is under the rule of a British Conservative government who has the final say in many of their matters despite voting in one Conservative MP to their 59 seats. Same as Wales and Northern Ireland.

So, in a way. The English decide who governs Scotland.

[icarus]

It is not a British Conservative government, it is a British Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government of which there are 1 Scottish Conservative MP and 11 Scottish Liberal Democrat MPs.

I agree that, in a way, the English decide who governs Scotland as there are a more seats in the House of Commons from England than from Scotland. You could say something similar for any representative parliamentary democracy. For instance, you could say that in Canada non-prairie provinces decide who governs the prairie provinces. Or non-Atlantic provinces decide who governs the Atlantic provinces. Or Anglophone Canada decides who governs Francophone Canada.

[Ducay]

Originally Posted by icarus

Or Anglophone Canada decides who governs Francophone Canada.

Shhhhhh, lets try and keep that on the down low this time. Last generation they caught wind of it and wasted a bunch of time and money voting to keep status quo.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Bagor

Semantics. I'm aware of that. And they are based in ....

Scotland is under the rule of a British Conservative government who has the final say in many of their matters despite voting in one Conservative MP to their 59 seats. Same as Wales and Northern Ireland.

So, in a way. The English decide who governs Scotland.

Greater London is the closest politically to Scotland.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/o...ut-not-london/

In fact greater london is more similar politically to Scotland than it is to the rest of England and Wales. They only elected 28/74 conservative MP's. And the more urban you get in greater london the more the Labour Party takes control.

So you might say that London is being ruled by the rest of England. And if so I think that London needs to separate from the rest of England.

And if you notice that the current British Government is a Colilition between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. Scotland also elected 11 liberal democrats of roughly 60 seats who sit in government. So they really sit in a similar situation to greater london.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by GGG

Greater London is the closest politically to Scotland.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/o...ut-not-london/

In fact greater london is more similar politically to Scotland than it is to the rest of England and Wales. They only elected 28/74 conservative MP's. And the more urban you get in greater london the more the Labour Party takes control.

So you might say that London is being ruled by the rest of England. And if so I think that London needs to separate from the rest of England.

And if you notice that the current British Government is a Colilition between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. Scotland also elected 11 liberal democrats of roughly 60 seats who sit in government. So they really sit in a similar situation to greater london.

So basically Britain is just like Alberta, where the rural areas get a disproportionately high valuation despite little population.