to believe the remaining UK should not make special exceptions for Scottish economic refugees?

[longfingernails]

In the event of Scottish independence, the Scottish economy will be in the toilet. In this event, Britain should not be allowed to become a magnet for Scottish economic migrants.

I wouldn't blame Cameron if the Scots choose independence; the Tory party don't exactly have a strong foothold in those parts. However, I will certainly excoriate him if he gives an inch in any negotiations in the event of independence - especially if he allows large scale unskilled immigration from Scotland into Britain.

An independent Scotland would have almost zero negotiating power and Britain should exploit that to maximise our own advantage.

The conservatives have an immigration policy for outside of the EU that applies only to people of value don't they?

I can't see the difference.

Vino- thankfully the OP has long since left (holidays over?)

I agree that the comments in the OP were vile.

Can I ask you why you are a no supporter? You didnt actually say.

GDP per head is not income
Norway charges to see a GP and all dentists are private
this is a better indicator of why the GDP figures are mis-leading and shows that on a consumption measure, the UK is on a par with Norway and ahead of most of the EU

I was not discussing your home country of choice. I was pointing out that your claim of being neutral was not true

Thank you for informing me of my personal decisions and thinking. Obviously I am incapable of doing this myself, and need to be told what I think.

In actual fact, there is a referendum coming, as we live in a democracy. I have no nationalistic or anti nationalistic problem with being a Scot or not being a Scot that would sway my vote either way. I am of mixed heritage, and would absolutely vote for independence if I thought it likely to produce a country with a standard of living much the same as Holland, Belgium or Germany. Not Norway or Sweden. They don't have that great a standard of living in my view. I've travelled to both quite a lot, and normal life for a Norwegian or Swede seems to involve living in small rented apartments, waiting in endless queues for buses and expensive goods and services. Swedes also seem to drive pretty crappy old cars - I did the trip by bicycle through Sweden to the Nordkapp and got to know the country pretty well. Both countries also run a nice line in discriminating against ethnic Sami.

Theres a difference between what people tell you, and what is reality. And I really fear that in Scotland, that borderline is becoming less and less distinct. An independent Scotland could have the lowest standard of living in Western Europe, despite higher taxes, and the slightly thuggish mainly mediocre class that passes for political activists would still be telling you that it was the best country in the world, with the best systems, and that any poverty was the fault of the English, or simply my wrong perception, as a result of not being patriotic enough.

In summary, I find a lot of what the independence campaign puts out fake, and am not enough of a nationalist to fall for it.

Thank you for informing me of my personal decisions and thinking. Obviously I am incapable of doing this myself, and need to be told what I think

I was merely pointing out that earlier in the thread you had stated that you would leave Scotland in the event of a Yes vote, which belies your claimed neutral position (as does almost every post you make on this thread, which are invariable negative, and denigrating Scots and Scotland).

I hadn't actually noticed a lot of denigrating the Scots, merely some good debate on standards and costs of living in various parts of Europe (both EU and EEA). Obvioulsy, if that doesn't agree with the idealism of the Yes campaign......

And bringing a bit more negativity to the debate, I wonder if those who are so fond of trumpeting S&P's statement that an independent Scotland might possibly get the same (not better, because they rate the UK as AAA) rating as the UK, have a comment to make on S&P's report stating the risks to bank ratings in an independent Scotland and highlighting the difficulties?

I did make myself have a quick look at Wings earlier, but they don't seem to have worked out an angle on this one yet.

uk.reuters.com/article/2014/04/24/uk-scotlandindependence-sp-idUKBREA3N01P20140424

I hadn't actually noticed a lot of denigrating the Scots

Various posters:

what you claim Scotland offers doesn't even compare that well to some third world or former Eastern European states.

like I imagine the former Soviet Union must have been like, with local government officials going around in vans with loudspeakers, telling everyone how productive they were and letters from government posted through your door, repeating the same.

When someone referred to Norway:
Is this not racist? Why Norway? What about all the other countries which have a similar population and left leaning politics but which are not conveniently blond haired, Aryan and reserved?

I was merely pointing out that earlier in the thread you had stated that you would leave Scotland in the event of a Yes vote, which belies your claimed neutral position (as does almost every post you make on this thread, which are invariable negative, and denigrating Scots and Scotland)

Not at all. If it is indeed promising to be an unrivalled Eutopia offering a high standard of living, I shall be quite happy to stay. Who wouldn't?

Sad to say that you do seem to typify this attitude too prevalent in Scotland that it cannot be criticised, and that is unpatriotic to do so.

Furthermore, you are not allowed to express a preference for the government of this country without being insulted or ridiculed. Political intolerance doesn't sound particularly promising, especially when most successful European countries have a thriving right wing and tend to form coalition governments frequently encompassing that. I just do not see how a solid left wing block is going to be particularly successful.

You mistake the tool of comparison used with gentle mockery with denigration.

And if Scotland is going to be such a perfect country, how do you explain its dismal record on devolved matters? There is a level of incompetence in public life that seems to be entrenched. I can only see that thriving on independence.

e.g. the Edinburgh tram network. Still not functioning, and still massively over-budget and riddled with legal claims and counter claims, buck passing and blaming. Most other European capitals are perfectly capable of creating an excellent public transport system in quarter of the time with quarter of the budget.

Or the Edinburgh statutory repairs scandal - passing legislation to allow the local authority to compel repairs on private owned flatted buildings which were massively over-priced for unnecessary work by their favoured contractors, in return for bribes, resulting in people living in small flats being presented with bills of over £100,000 each, with no way of paying them.

Or the squabbling children that compose the parliament, with its secretive passing by committee of ever more controlling legislation on day to day life.

Or all the massively over-priced ppi contracts for new schools and public facilities, awarded to cronies.

I could go on and give many more examples. I know every country has its problems, but some of these are just so incompetent its almost beyond belief.

How do you get round that culture in an independent Scotland?

I actually agree with you on why you might want to do things differently from the UK, which is increasingly lagging behind its European neighbours in standard of living, but Scotland seems to show signs of doing the same, but even worse.

Not at all. If it is indeed promising to be an unrivalled Eutopia offering a high standard of living, I shall be quite happy to stay. Who wouldn't

This is not what you said. You said if Scotland were independent you would leave. It is not really on to pretend to be neutral when you are not and smacks of astroturfing tbh.

Sad to say that you do seem to typify this attitude too prevalent in Scotland that it cannot be criticised, and that is unpatriotic to do so.

There are many things wrong with Scotland. However, it is not unreasonable to expect assertions do be backed up with data, as opposed to expecting people to just believe what you say.

Furthermore, you are not allowed to express a preference for the government of this country without being insulted or ridiculed. Political intolerance doesn't sound particularly promising, especially when most successful European countries have a thriving right wing and tend to form coalition governments frequently encompassing that

Again. Everyone is entitled to their beliefs. On a thread of this sort though it is useful for posters on both sides to back up there assertions wirh facts.

Your posts on this thread have been unremittingly negative, and beautifully written, but have consistently failed to reference any facts to back up your assertions.

I could go on and give many more examples. I know every country has its problems, but some of these are just so incompetent its almost beyond belief.

All of the examples you have given are great examples of total incompetence. However to say the devolved government is a bad thing because of this is ridiculous! Is that what you are saying? That there should be no devolved government and all power should be returned to WM? All countries have their problems, Scotland is worse than some and better than others. But it would be nice to have the ability to try and solve our own problems, rather than relying on WM to a) notice them b) do something constructive about them.

But why can Scotland not be criticised? My Dutch friends criticise Holland all the time and discuss how things can be done better and compare it with other countries. Often they are very negative. Ditto my German friends in Munich. Same with SouthAfricans. Visit there and they will tell you in a very erudite fashion all the things wrong with their country.

But attempt to do the same with Scotland, the same level of normal middle class compare and contrast, constructive criticism that you would get round any dinner table or amongst any group of reasonably aware people, and it suddenly transforms into some terrible thing, requiring ever more figures to back it up and to prove points, tantamount to a slur on its people.

And there is no point in providing figures of the internet. Not simply because independence hasn't occurred yet, but because they can be used or manipulated to prove anything, and it becomes a pointless battle of ever more useless bombardment of figures taken from ever more dubious internet sources.

I think though independence supporters are making a big mistake in denigrating and alienating that portion of the electorate capable of independent thought and it will undoubtedly come back to bite them in the Referendum, which it is painfully obvious will not divorce Scotland from the rest of the UK.

The question then becomes, are the independence campaigners going to pay back the costs to the rest of the electorate for it all, plus the harm done to the economy, by paying a higher rate of tax, like the good socialist they purport to be?

Nobody has said you can't criticise Scotland.

This is a debate.

You make the case for the No side backed up with evidence.

I make the case for the Yes side backed up with evidence.

Instead what is happening is I make a case for Yes. You reply with a long (beautifully written) rambling reply that doesn't really address what I said, doesn't contain any facts but is incredibly negative. You would make a great politician

It is really hard to have a constructive debate when the other side tries to shut down the argument is this way.

Oh right. Well, sorry about that. You win. The Netherlands is a massive welfare state, the whole of Scandinavia is perfect and everyone wants to live there and Scotland is paradise on earth.

But not the Referendum. The contest on being annoying and alienating those you will want to pay your high taxes.

You're simply failing to engage with a large proportion of the electorate.

I can't imagine that many people would want to live in a country where they're told what to think and what to write and what to say.

And there is no point in providing figures of the internet. Not simply because independence hasn't occurred yet, but because they can be used or manipulated to prove anything, and it becomes a pointless battle of ever more useless bombardment of figures taken from ever more dubious internet sources.

Are you seriously saying that:

a) Sources like OECD/World bank are unreliable
b) That neither side should try and back up their arguments with any sort of data? That the referendum should be decided on gut feelings and emotion?

I think though independence supporters are making a big mistake in denigrating and alienating that portion of the electorate capable of independent thought and it will undoubtedly come back to bite them in the Referendum, which it is painfully obvious will not divorce Scotland from the rest of the UK.

So Yes supporters are not capable of independent thought?

The question then becomes, are the independence campaigners going to pay back the costs to the rest of the electorate for it all, plus the harm done to the economy, by paying a higher rate of tax, like the good socialist they purport to be?

eh?

Oh right. Well, sorry about that. You win. The Netherlands is a massive welfare state, the whole of Scandinavia is perfect and everyone wants to live there and Scotland is paradise on earth.

Nowhere is perfect. What is wrong with wanting to make things better?

You're simply failing to engage with a large proportion of the electorate.

I agree. Voter apathy is always a massive problem and is getting worse. However, it is quite exciting to see how many more people are getting engaged in politics because of the referendum - I believe that a pretty high turnout is expected?

I can't imagine that many people would want to live in a country where they're told what to think and what to write and what to say

Eh?

But ItsAllGoingToBeFine that's what nationalists do. You go on and on and on, often on the internet or like Nicola Sturgeon, alienating and putting off the people who actually go out and earn the money to pay the taxes.

I don't find the Referendum exciting at all. I find the Referendum quite sad actually - because its created divisions where there were none, created economic uncertainty and made us all have to listen to eons of this crap that passes for debate.

I feel a lot happier about working together for a common goal in a phlegmatic manner, rather than this tieing together of nationalism and socialism. any yes please don't repeat the line that the SNP might not get in and the government can be anything I've heard it about two million times before

Does anyone know what the plans are for the Stock Exchange if independence came about?

ie presumably there would be Scottish registered companies, a new Scottish version of the Registrar of Companies and financial watchdogs, but where would Scottish registered companies be quoted?

Surely most large companies or companies that want to expand want to be quoted on the London Stock Exchange?

How will they raise finance if they cannot float on the LSE or the AIM?

Does anyone know what the plans are for the Stock Exchange if independence came about?

According to the Scottish Government:

53. Would companies based in an independent Scotland still be able to float on the London stock exchange?

Yes. Businesses and individuals in an independent Scotland will retain access to capital markets in the UK and globally. For example, around 2,500 companies from over 70 jurisdictions are listed on the London Stock Exchange.

You don't need to be a UK registered company to list on the LSE or AIM, so I see no issue.
The fact the banks will all move thier headquarters and profitable tax base to rUK will be.

Scotland will not vote for independence. Because the rest of the UK has not been given a vote on this, which it should have been.

Scotland will not vote for independence. Because the rest of the UK has not been given a vote on this, which it should have been

That will probably be for the next referendum, which is already being talked about in Scotland.

By that time, everyone will be totally damned sick of the thing.

My guess is that Salmond pretty much knew he would lose this Referendum but wanted a third option of staying in the UK for the time being but with higher taxes for Scotland. He's not got that, so he's making the best of a bad job now so as not to lose face.

I don't think a no vote is a done deal yet, Melonade. I know I won't relax until we hear the final outcome.

I scan this quite obsessively. Their latest figures are 39% yes, 42% and 19% undecided.

Having said that, Strathy held a mock poll today and No won again- 55% to 45%. I've not heard of any university with a yes majority, which I find quite encouraging.