Indyref 10. The Marathon Continues..

[WildThong]

All welcome

I think Spiritedwolf that there are many people out there who feel in their gut that this whole voting situation is deeply wrong in some way and don't want to be steam-rollered into an irrevocable decision. They want to be able to make it with reason as well as passion and conviction.

The Yes campaigners are broadly characterising a No vote as in some way un-Scottish and 'fearty' without asking themselves why many people don't like their movement. However, if you'd polled the Scots as to whether the recent Commonwealth Games should be held in Scotland, I think you'd have received near-unanimity on the matter bar perhaps some limited disagreement on exactly where the venues should be and where the money should be spent.

That is the sort of agreement on which you can build. Not one where the population are at loggerheads.

As was said in a previous thread I think that many people are not ruling out separation at some future date but are thinking Not now and not in this manner.

We need someone very very high profile, left, feminist and progressive to stand up now.

I don't agree. We need to show we are for everyone from George Galloway to Mike Dailly (of Govan Law Centre) to Ruth Davidson to King Creosote to JK Rowling.

Agree, the No campaign hasn't been as successful in reaching out and whipping up frenzy as the Yes. Certainly things seem to be picking up now, although when we do it it's called "bluff and bluster" for some reason.

I could speculate that Aberdeen asset management has a lot of short positions and that a drop of the stock market will benefit his funds?

So a huge section of the global financial community who collectively more than 10 times the value of the scottish economy think its a bad idea. Somehow they are all separately wrong?

The only country that is currently going - go Team Scotland has a record for free political discourse and debate. That and having political rivals publicly fed to dogs.

£17bn has been removed from the UK economy this week simply down to
a) Sillars comments
b) Salmond bullshitting about the currency
c) Salmond bullshitting about the economy
d) Salmond bullshitting about the EU

You see Yes campaign Scotland does has a voice - currently it is a loud and bellowing bullshitter. The more of you that fall for it - the more likely people decide that actually - lets not keep our money in a country that is clearly politically, economically and financially unstable.

This is how the conversation would go in say frankfurt.

Hans: "Hey Ulrich, check out the latest comments from Scotland"
Ulrich "What is our exposure?"
Hans " Got a about 20bill of bonds in Scottish companies"
Ulrich " best offload em - put em somewhere safe"
Hans - clickety click. " Done, sent to the cayman islands"
Ulrich " great - fancy lunch?"

See. They wont give a tuppeny fuck. Just a click and the money is gone.

the no campaign have repeatedly called Salmond on his bullshit. It is tiring having to keep calling the yes voters, sock puppets and ideologues on here on it.

The bright eyes of the convinced revolutionary are not open to reason - they never have been, here, or Bolivia, bader meinhof, the cultural revolution of the 70's in China under Mao or cambodias killing fields. It transcends politics, there will always be those who compel through flawed reason the desire to smash and destroy.

Salmond, Swinney, Sturgeon et all have been caught lying about the costs of indpendence and now they are coming home to roost as a result of the uncertainty the mutters of punishment start.

As a nation we tread close to the precipice. Step back. How many yes voters would wake up and think "Jesus H Tittyfucking christ what was I thinking - why did i not see the shite?" Thing is they need to before it is too late.

cedricsneer

But unfortunately bt is the face of the campaign. We need someone very very high profile, left, feminist and progressive to stand up now.

I think Jo Rowling has been fantastic and she has been active on Twitter this week.

But then I am a huge, huge fan of her writing anyway!

But I think that demographic is the one feeling under represented.

Having said that I king creosote, so he is the best endorsement ever for me.

I dunno about jk. I liked her "no" statement, but she is still very very privileged. As am I, so again, no axe to grind there.

But surely she has seen both sides, having being very poor and now very rich? There can't be many people who can say that.

Odd I'm not looking for speculation though. I'm looking for something more concrete than guesswork. That's an issue I have when questioning something that I'd really like to know more about & then back come the scathing responses making lots of assumptions & speculation about the intelligence of those asking the questions. There's no need for that sort of response, none whatsoever. I didn't ask for your opinion on me or yes voters (given I've not even said I'm a yes voter, I fail to see what relevance there is to just getting some more background on one view/opinion that's out there, standing against the tide).

I keep dipping in and out if this thread because I'm interested & want to talk about this but it's just pointless trying to have a discussion when the tone is repeatedly patronising/dismissive/condescending thrown in with a large dose of perceived intellectual superiority.

I'm done with this. I'll just keep reading elsewhere & make up my mind when I've got the answers I need.

Aberdeen Asset Management were fined £7.2 million for mismanaging client funds.

m.moneymarketing.co.uk/1076730.article?mobilesite=enabled

But in a way that's her point, she's not going to be negatively affected by a yes vote, but the people in the position she used to be (single mums on benefits) will be and she cares about that so much.She's also concerned about the NHS and the effect on medical research (she's a huge supporter of MS charities)

Anyway... huge Harry Potter fan here anyway, so it was the best endorsement for me.

As recently as September 2013. So sorry I'll prefer to listen to the Governor of the Bank of England and Deutsche Bank.

From Aberdeen Asset Management's website:

As a pure asset manager, without the distractions of other
financial services activities, we are able to concentrate
all our resources on our core business. We believe this
is key to our performance. Assets are only managed for
third parties, not our own balance sheet, which helps
reduce conflicts of interest.

My guess is that they don't qualify for support from the BoE in extremis. So they don't need a rUK registration to have a lender of last resort. This may be piffle. Maybe one of the FS posters could comment?

Tension - my commentary isnt aimed at you - however Aberdeen asset management is being opaque about their reasons.

Those companies who have nailed colours to the mast have done so with very clear public statements.

I then go on to rant. As alas I have done on the 9 previous threads.

Grovel - has called the issue. They are not like a normal bank so their exposure is not affected.

However, they would seek to maximise the returns from the cross border arbitrage opportunities.

Further, while there is crisis there is opportunity for those not constrained.

In short - he can probably make a buck out of it.

The other FS are compelled by our regulatory regime to look after their customers money.

At this stage it's going to make no difference which high profile businesses, celebrities, journalists etc make statements either supporting no from a personal view, or giving facts about the consequences of yes - it's all going to boringly be called "scaremongouring" or not having passion or belief or something. If neither facts nor strong belief in the benefit of the UK has helped until now, I sadly can't see it having an impact in the last week.

Agree brontolo.

More disgraceful attempts to hijack Mandela.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11092232/Pro-independence-posters-organising-short-walk-to-freedom-marches-trigger-backlash.html

Peter Hain, who had real experience of fighting apartheid has been scathing about this.

brontolo - I think it might.

If some people wake up and think - fuck - this is real, not a protest, not a shout, not a demand but real. With very real consequences around me. With real jobs, and real investment they may say - well hold on.

The SNP and the yes campaign are shifting the narrative from their weak ground - the economy - why? because things are getting very big and very real.

i never once imagined i would be agreeing with the permatanned wonder about anything ;-)

Salmond is an ace manipulator, hugely divisive and on a personal mission regardless of the consequences for the Scottish people. David Cameron, his government and other governments right back to Thatcher are incompetent.This is a toxic mix in the current circumstances.

It bothers me that the decision can be decided, if the polls are correct, by less than 50,000 people and that those 50,000 could consist of large numbers of foreign students and temporary residents who arguably have less to lose that nationalised Scots if everything goes pear shaped.

In the meantime close relatives of mine who were born and brought up in Scotland, own a property there and intend to return have no vote. So unfair!
In this context it bugs me to hear YES supporters arguing on the TV that they are voting for a 'fairer' society.

I guess I worry about what high profile statements are made and whether there is a chance they'll do more harm than good. If yes voters believe the calls of them being out of desperation or coercion, rather than simply being passionate, long-held beliefs or restating of facts, is there a chance they could backfire?

But let's hope you're right and that if enough articulate, clear messaging comes from a variety of people and places within "no", then the accumulative effect will be enough for even a few yes voters to take notice.

Don't have time to join this thread today but....

"The bright eyes of the convinced revolutionary are not open to reason - they never have been, here, or Bolivia, bader meinhof, the cultural revolution of the 70's in China under Mao or cambodias killing fields."

Can we ratchet this rhetoric down? Someone, quite rightly, objected when...someone (can't remember who) wheeled out the famous Mandela quotation, "May your choices reflect your hopes not your fears". Now, I think it's possible to make reference to a very famous quotation without making a direct comparison to the political context within which it was made. You could look at the implied trade off between democratic representation and financial stability, for example, and quote Benjamin Franklin without comparing the present referendum to the American Declaration of Independence. Nevertheless, the poster who quoted Mandela was shot down in flames over the inferred comparison between Scotland in 2014 and apartheid-era South Africa. And (in so far as a comparison was presented) that was quite right. With that in mind I think we can do without lurid and inflammatory comparisons with Bolivia and Cambodia.

I'm also very shocked to see how loosely and freely people are drawing comparisons between this democratic referendum and Northern Ireland. It is massively disrespectful to all those who lived through conflict in Northern Ireland and the Republic. It comes across as both massively inflammatory and also astoundingly ignorant.

Let me tell you a story.........Once Upon A Time There Was a Beautiful Country called Yugoslavia..........