Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

to ask where indyref Part 5 is?

999 replies

grovel · 04/09/2014 14:49

Well?

OP posts:
deeedeee · 06/09/2014 00:28

To be honest statistically I find your attitude offensive, that half the country is wrong to want independance because you might lose your job! ( I know I know, amongst other things!! Although it does seem to be the main one)

Ps- still working on your back story. You're hot though

StatisticallyChallenged · 06/09/2014 00:32

Will you get it through your head that is NOT The only reason I am voting no. It is far from the only reason I object. I fundamentally do not believe in tearing Britain apart. You think you know me, know what motivates me. You don't have a clue. Not the foggiest.

You claim I don't understand poverty. I grew up in a shit poor house - no working adults, single parent, alcoholism, disability, poor estate, rubbish schools, estates filled with drugs, crime and hopelessness. Then a trip through homelessness and fighting my way up from there. I fought like hell to get out of that. Poverty meant I couldn't take up the amazing uni place I was offered and had to stay local so I could work full time in shitty call centre jobs to make ends meet.

Most of my family still live in those estates. Most of them have barely worked in their lives and believe that the life they have is how it should be. It's normalised to them. Poverty of aspiration. I've lost someone very, very close to me to a disease largely linked with poverty.

What the hell do you think I DON'T UNDERSTAND! I get poverty. I do not believe that independence will fix it. That is all. I want it fixed - I don't agree with your solution.

sconequeen · 06/09/2014 00:35

You assume that anyone who doesn't agree with you that independence will deliver a socialist panacea doesn't understand or doesn't care.

Sorry, I'm not meaning to be offensive (honestly). And I'm not a socialist, quite the opposite in many ways. My point is that Scotland as an independent country could make the choices and prioritise its resources to achieve a fairer society. I believe that the figures do stack up, and that we can unlease a potential which could achieve a great deal. Alternatively, we can settle for the same old, same old UK set-up where the important decisions are made for us, with increasingly alarming results be it socially, economically, in foreign affairs, in health or in the environment.

sconequeen · 06/09/2014 00:39

That has already been fully discussed and agreed scone. "Higher principles" aren't owned by those voting yes, although some folk on here seem to think so. The points that aren't agreed are how an independent Scotland will actually pay for these principles.

The thing is, I think you should accept the principles first, and then make them work. As Richard Branson said (see I'm really not a socialist): "If you are offered an amazing opportunity but don't know how to make it work, grab it anyway - and then learn how to do it".

Roseformeplease · 06/09/2014 02:00

Caveat - it is late, I have travelled a long way to Englandshire for a party, and there has been wine.

However, the Yes voters often quote Ireland as a successful nation that is no longer part of the Union. However, this successful nation charges 50 Euros to see a GP. Future for Scotland if Salmond wins?

squoosh · 06/09/2014 03:29

PS: I apologise - I shouldn't have referred to "naice Edinburgh houses" although I know some of you are living in these. The "I'm all right, Jack" mentality is obviously not confined to genteel Edinburgh streets.

Ouch! Barbed.

Is there really any reason to reduce yourself to such bitchiness?

deeedeee · 06/09/2014 06:31

Stat, I'm sorry you're upset, this whole thing is very emotional. I did say I know you are voting no for that amongst other reasons.

So how will staying in the uk tackle povert? Is it simply because it's not
a risk to the economy to stay in the uk? Or do you see this centre politics of the last 20 years changing?

Look, I've never said that my only reason for voting yes was to tackle poverty. It's not. I think that would be a very niave idealistic statement. Not that I disagree with idealism and I wouldn't berate anyone for saying it. But it's about more for me.

It's a long time since thread one when we all said our reasons for voting yes. And now every debate we 're having is like fighting a several headed beast, just when you think you're arguing with one head another pops up with a slightly different set of priorities and aspirations, but attached to the same body.

AnnieGetYourTazer14 · 06/09/2014 06:55

SconeQueen "I don't think an independent Scotland would have the same delusions of defence grandeur"
Yes it does - it's all there! (see link below) That has been one of my arguments which has been studiously ignored by the likes of IrnBru who thinks that the failure to protect Glasgow airport justifies not needing intelligence in an independent Scotland. Blatantly ignored my comment about the fact that for every attack that succeeds there are many that the public never know about that are prevented.
Sallying - sorry, neutrality is not on the independence agenda as they want membership of NATO. One of the reasons given is to do with geographical strategic importance. If it's of such strategic importance then of course you will need suitable defence.
Yours replies are based on rhetoric, not considered opinion or, with respect, understanding of defence and security. It's just appalling that intelligent adults are happy to accept such spurious arguments, dismiss informed opinion and think that Independence will somehow create a magical forcefield around Scotland.
The defence question is not to scaremonger, it is a great example of how the official website of the Scottish Government is lying to the people of Scotland.
www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2013/11/9348/10

grandtheftmanual · 06/09/2014 07:02

Why does it take independence to tackle poverty? surely the Scottish government could have had it sorted by now. What about independence will make such a difference? It's generally recognised that just chucking money at the problem doesn't work so how will the problem be fixed after independence?

JimMurphysHump · 06/09/2014 07:09

archive.today/oi5Qd
Why has this article disappeared from the Scotsman website?

deeedeee · 06/09/2014 07:10

Annie, I think what you are encountering is people who aren't voting yes because they believe the white paper, vote SNP and trust the status quo. I agree with you, much of the white paper is crap.

But if you vote NO because you disagree with the SNP then you aren't looking very far into the future. There is too much engagement invested in the yes vote, too many people wanting to be heard, for the white paper to be the final say. It's only a manifesto, it's not happened yet. The reality will be different .

weatherall · 06/09/2014 07:10

Morning all?

How on earth can we sort poverty without control of the minimum wage, benefits and taxation?

We will always have inequality and poverty as long as WM is in charge as their system is set up to fight for the desires of comfortable middle England.

grandtheftmanual · 06/09/2014 07:15

but as I said, poverty is not sorted by throwing money at the issue, so tax raising etc will have little impact. what is the Scottish govt doing about it now, and what will be done differently after independence?

deeedeee · 06/09/2014 07:20

Independance won't solve everything, poverty among it. And I'm not so daft as to lay out for you what will happen if Scotland becomes independant. You are no more interested in my flights of fancy into the future than I am interested in other's predictions of failure.

But haven't you noticed yet what is happening? Could happen? People are waking up and talking about these things! For the first time in my life there is a national debate happening around what this country could be. There are voices getting louder that will have a better chance of being heard in a smaller country with a different voting system and a differently voting electorate.

AnnieGetYourTazer14 · 06/09/2014 07:29

deeedeee I appreciate your response. In an election that is determining history and affecting millions, not just Scotland, then credibility of a manifesto should be of paramount importance. At the very least have figures that add up and can stand the test of informed scrutiny. I find that fact that the White Paper is full of holes to be an insult to those who can vote.

deeedeee · 06/09/2014 07:33

Fair enough Annie, I can respect that. And you've inspired me to go and read it again. :-)

grandtheftmanual · 06/09/2014 07:34

deeedeee, you've said you agree that much of the white paper is crap, but we are still expected to vote for an independent Scotland with no clear idea of what that means In fact no idea at all.

You wouldn't buy a house without a survey - hell people won't even go for a night away or to a restaurant without checking out reviews. yet we're expected to accept that an independent Scotland will be well, just better.

JMH - perhaps they removed the article because they were astonished at the rudeness of people making no attempt to engage with someone who may have a different opinion than theirs. Grin

deeedeee · 06/09/2014 07:50

Is that the impasse then? The split between no and yes? Not money, not class, not nationality? But whether you want to see something written down explicitly on paper before you get it?

I don't think I've ever seen the future ever completely predicted before I made a decision. I'm probably the wrong person to argue this with as I'm not prone to checking reviews and I didn't buy my house because of the survey. I'm also not representative of the whole yes campaign and hopefully someone will be along soon to argue facts and figures with you!

As I've said before, there are arguments both ways, ways to present information, opinions that agree with that. But it's all campaign talk! It's the future, none of us know!

But what I can see that is real is the political awakening and the chance for it to engage and change the awful disenfranchised society we've had for the last 40 years. I've seen Scotland trying to go in a different direction and not managing it for years. I want to give her the chance.

ChelsyHandy · 06/09/2014 08:10

Deeedeee So how will staying in the uk tackle povert? Is it simply because it's not a risk to the economy to stay in the uk? Or do you see this centre politics of the last 20 years changing?

You will find that countries like The Netherlands and Sweden very much tag welfare benefits onto a record of previous employment. Unemployment is stigmatised, and people are encouraged to work. In other words, a link between what they pay in and what they get out is encouraged, even in high tax, socialist regimes like Sweden. That's the only way it works. Obviously its realised that there is a certain percentage who cannot be expected to work, but the money available is protected.

Socialist Sweden is also opting for a private-public model of health provision. Ireland charges for visiting a GP, and has seen massive property devaluation.

Other parts of the world don't have welfare benefits at all. You do realise that to someone in one of these parts of the world, not that they would have the benefit of sitting on mumsnet, that your comments about poverty and the welfare state sounds like the comments of the rich misunderstanding real and genuine poverty?

The high tax, socialist Scandinavian countries also operate on the basis of very Scandinavian behaviour. Corruption is low, people tend to behave in a law abiding way and work together as a cohesive nation, overall your typical Scandinavian behaves in a very Scandinavian way which isn't really a feature of Scottish society, which loves the pub culture for example. You could be critical and say that the Scandinavian countries are boring, homogenised and almost like the people have been brainwashed. I don't think high taxes and non-Scandinavian style behaviour is likely to work. Its the worst of both worlds.

You are in danger of pissing off the hard working, high achieving people Scotland needs by berating them for doing so, and constantly pushing the interests of the poor. Being critical, I would say there are more than a few employed in "helping" the poor in public roles who have a vested interest in the industry of the poor. I don't think its deliberate, but I often think the way they see the poor and exaggerate their plight (in this rich country), it can act as a barrier to escaping poverty. I know for instance that, growing up in a mixed area, I was subjected to quite limiting comments by teachers and careers advisors at school, despite high grades, for some unfathomable reason that they just thought it wasn't right that someone shouldn't have ambition and push themselves.

ChelsyHandy · 06/09/2014 08:16

deeedeee your article mentioned Rory Stewart, and some posters asked the question who in an independent Scotland would you trust as a politician, with a useful background?

Rory Stewart is definitely one such man. Could I suggest to people that they google him and find out how much he has done in his life, and where, compared to the average it has to be sad rather mediocre Scottish political animal.

Rory Stewart, a well educated and still young man, with his experiences in Iran, has seen and work in real poverty. Sadly, I doubt he and decent people like him will ever get the chances he needs to fully utilise his skills and experience, because Scottish politics is almost completely dominated by people whose ambition exceeds their ability, and who, despite throwing massive amounts of money at it for decades, have only succeeded in maintaining a culture of poverty in many parts of Scotland.

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 06/09/2014 08:24

He certainly seems to have his heart in the right place, and have some principles. He resides in England, and is an English MP,but if wanted to live in an Indy Scotland, which not?

grandtheftmanual · 06/09/2014 08:27

Yes Deeedeee, but if the survey had said the house was structurally unsound and full of dry rot I doubt you'd have gone ahead.

We could take a leap of faith - that would be the brave thing to do. Or conversely a really stupid thing to do. It's a lot to ask of millions of people - I guess it's a bit like Churchill promising nothing but blood, sweat, toil and tears - I'm guessing there will be a lot of that in any event.

The problem with seeing it as a political awakening is reflected in the article JMH linked to. I mentioned yesterday that there is a bigoted underbelly within the yes vote who will not really become politically engaged - they just want to stick it up someone or something. I was accused of being prejudiced. It's OK if Yes campaigners want to point out that the No campaign is supported by the orange order et al, but if I point out that there are some unsavoury sectors of the Yes camp also, I'm prejudiced.

ItsAllGoingToBeFine · 06/09/2014 08:29

But its not a huge leap of faith. Scotland is a rich country.

StatisticallyChallenged · 06/09/2014 08:30

Morning All

grandtheftmanual · 06/09/2014 08:31

Chelsy I've met Rory Stewart - he does seem like a decent cove. Slightly eccentric, which is a good thing as far as I'm concerned, with a world of experience and a genuine liking of and interest in people. Pity he's a Tory eh!