Indyref 6

[StatisticallyChallenged]

Welcome to indyref 6

Spidergirl8 asked close to end of last thread:

What impact would independence have on fiscal policy and economic stability
What impact would the ageing population have on the future
Is the predicted future a positive one, based on fact

If the bite goes no, what has actually been achieved? Does that not just put Scotland on the back foot?

Let's try and give not too biased answers please!

Yes sc. I recognise that list from a previous thread, it was discussed and picked apart but just keeps appearing. It like repeating something often enough until it becomes a fact because it gets picked up and recycled by others people who can't be bothered to do proper research for themselves. Usually on faecesbook.

PrettyPicture with less than a fortnight to go things are only going to get more amped and more emotional. The information is out there and at this point I think it's up to the individual to wade though it and make an informed decision. Asking a committed No voter or a committed Yes voter for reasons to vote as they are will undoubtedly result in being given a lot of biased information. That's the nature of the game.

weatherall A no vote isn't agreeing to anything except to stay in the UK. Or to the feeling of being more british than Scottish.

We don't know what future uk governments will have as policies. And we will have virtually no influence on them if Scotland becomes independent. Don't try to claim we have no influence now - Scotland has 53 mps in Westminster. It is not true to claim we have no influence. Even if the party with the largest number of Scottish constituencies is not in government it will still be part of the opposition or at least have members of the UK parliament.

There's eejits on both sides, pathetic behaviour.

Yes, I'm voting No but I have done a lot of fact digging as have a few others so if there are things you want to know about just ask.

The MN survey is a bit puzzling.

46% believe independence would be good for their family
36% believe independence would be bad for their family

and yet

26% think their family would be better off in an independent Scotland
43% think their family would be worse off in an independent Scotland

that seems a bit inconsistent to me.

and the 61% who believe there will be a CU are going to be disappointed. That can only happen if a majority in the continuing UK agree, and wherever I go in England everyone tells me "over my dead body".

I had a very good answer from statistically about the supermarkets prices after asking what would happen in the event of a yes vote and I believe she is voting no herself, so thankfully there are some sensible people who can give clear cut facts without skewering them to their opinion.

But unfortunately I think you're right squoosh, it'll be easier to get the facts without asking on here

sallyingforth I'd guess that people were interpreting better off as financially better off?

"The Nazi comments are utterly disgusting & I have reported those posts."

I will also report the offensive posts by that particular poster. It's foul to come across such remarks, as it's just brought the positivity of the thread down several notches.

PrettyPictures

Thank you for explaining that in detail. It's sad that you are having trouble getting unbiased information, but at this stage I think that's almost impossible to find - everyone publishing anything now is either producing propaganda or linking to someone else's.

At least you are trying hard to find a decision for yourself, and not sheepishly following one crowd or the other. You deserve respect for that. Good luck!

I wonder how many undecided voters are considering spoiling their ballot paper?

"It is because going into an unknown world such people perceive that because they already have little, they have less to lose and more to gain from the drastic changes that will happen."

I have already covered this base on one of the earlier threads.

Weatherall - Voting yes is saying no to:
being subsidised by England
the low charge incurred on Scotland's proportionate share of UK debt
So the truth is you won't be able to afford free tuition fees and free care and free prescriptions.
A yes vote will mean austerity like you've never seen

Clearly you believe that because you believe Scotland is being "subsidised" by England - it isn't so none of what you wrote is actually true.

Did any of you notice my post earlier?

Is the announcement of more powers a breach of the pre-referendum purdah?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29098887

The referendum "purdah period" prevents government from announcing new legislation. It began on the 21st of August

RELEVANT PERIOD (PURDAH)
Section 125 of PPERA sets out the restrictions which apply to Ministers, and public bodies,during the 28 day period preceding referendums. This 28 day period – known as the „relevant period? or, informally, as the „purdah period? – is treated in a way similar to the 28 day period prior to elections, when Ministers and public bodies refrain from publishing material which could
have a bearing on the election.

www.scottish.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefingsAndFactsheets/SB_13-57.pdf page 16

I agree that the choice is not between independence and the status quo. There are no guarantees of stability (economic or social) on the Union side and, indeed, there are a number of alarming routes we could be taken down by Westminster in the relatively near future.

Being governed from Westminster is fundamentally undemocratic in my opinion. Westminster is characterised by elitism, centralism, manipulation, massaging of the truth, and jingoism. There is a growing divide between rich and poor, and increasing social division. I don't want any of that.

However, what it boils down to for me is that I stand on my own two feet in my personal life and I want the country I live in to do the same. The fundamental question for me is: why should Scotland not be able to govern itself like any other country? Are we too wee, too stupid...? I think the economics stack up. I think we have as much ability as anyone else to run our own affairs. I see examples of similar small countries abroad who are doing fine and who would not give up their independence. I have lived in another small European country which showed me just how practical and advantageous being in charge of your own affairs is. I believe that the government of an independent Scotland would be closer to its electorate and more representative of the people who live in Scotland.

That is my honest, very well-considered opinion. I appreciate that the No side have other opinions, some of which are also well-considered. It doesn't make any of us bad people.

I am going to be out on the doorsteps over the next 11 days as part of a huge grass roots campaign of motivated, responsible and well-informed people explaining our views and engaging with people who haven't yet decided how to vote. So far, the response has been incredibly positive.

Regardless of the outcome on 18th September, it looks like democracy in Scotland has already moved up a notch or two with lots more people discussing the matters which affect us all. Maybe if we can't agree on other things, we can all agree that that is a positive development.

I'd guess that people were interpreting better off as financially better off?
That's how I read it too, although it's perhaps unfortunate that the question wasn't clearer. So people think their family will be worse off financially but it will be better in other ways. If true that means money is not their prime issue. Interesting!

I still at the 61% believing in CU.
When the party conferences start just after the referendum they will see the delegates standing up and demanding that the UK doesn't bind itself to a foreign country's economy. That might have changed a few minds, but it will be too late.

Is the announcement of more powers a breach of the pre-referendum purdah?

No, I don't think so. The Guardian explained it as a promise to set up a conference immediately after a No vote for extra powers. I think it is just vague enough to pass.

I just saw your post there, deeedeee, have just read some more of the thread now.

This new announcement will, no doubt, have little to no effect. I think not allowing DevoMax has seriously backfired now independence is becoming a very real possibility.

A lot of people have been saying it's too little too late, and to be honest it smacks of desperation. Why would people be persuaded to vote No on a promise of more powers, when we can govern ourselves - guaranteed?

I think that's actually a really important point deedee

Many postal voters have already cast their votes, so it is really far too late for Westminster to make a last minute U-turn in support of devo max, or a quasi-federal system or....wait - they're not actually specifying anything, just an undemocratic 'consultation' to which the three WM parties will 'invite' representatives from the SNP - the majority party in HR.

Yes, it's quite clear that it breeches these regulations.

What I mean is, I don't think those already voting Yes won't be persuaded to change their minds, and undecided voters will probably recognise it as a last-ditch attempt to stop the Yes vote going through.

I wonder if more people would be willing to trust them more if they had given us these powers a long time ago, rather than using them as a bargaining chip.

Why would people be persuaded to vote No on a promise of more powers, when we can govern ourselves - guaranteed?

Because you can't govern yourselves effectively under the SNP's currency plans. They want to hand control back to Westminster through a currency union, or just risk sterlingisation. Devolution options offer a midway point which may sway voters who see the risks of those policies.

Tinkerball
It's arguable who subsidises who at the moment - that depends which statistics you believe, There are equally valid figures both ways.

It's what happens after the split when your interest rates go up because you have defaulted on your loans, are using a currency you don't control, have no LOLR, and have a smaller tax income due to the lost employment.

That's when you no longer have the money to pay for all the goodies.

I never saw the MN survey.

Yes, it's quite clear that it breeches (sic) these regulations.

It's not a new offer, just a suggestion of how they might react to a No vote. And I agree it will make little difference.

Oh actually, deee, purdah only applies to the Scottish government, not Westminster. Herald

The 28-day rule applies to any part of the Scottish administration, the Scottish Parliament Corporate Body and any Scottish public authority but does not cover the UK Government or authorities.

I never saw the MN survey.

Neither did I! Was it emailed out?