Independence - how would you vote?

[xbl]

Ahem.

I am honestly beginning to think H_B's tactic on this thread is to, as soon as something pro-independence comes along, derail the thread into something so mind-numbingly boring that people stop reading.

Top 10 Unionist myths debunked - actually quite a good wee video

Looks like they've given up trying to ban it then!

[YOGI IS GOD]

Ahem.Looks like they've given up trying to ban it then!

Heard something about that - who tried to ban it?

[xbl]

Heard something about that - who tried to ban it?

As soon as it got posted last night, Better Together had it taken down from youtube. They put it back up, but it got taken down from at least one other place. It seems they are pursuing their claims (or at least were as of this morning). So the Unionists are trying to gag it.

[YOGI IS GOD]

As soon as it got posted last night, Better Together had it taken down from youtube. They put it back up, but it got taken down from at least one other place. It seems they are pursuing their claims (or at least were as of this morning). So the Unionists are trying to gag it.

Didn't know political groups were able to ban videos from Youtube, strange one. The only thing that really lets the video down is point number 4 where they say that as Scottish GDP in 2008 was £145bn and the cost of the RBS bail-out was £66bn Scotland would have "comfortably" dealt with the recession. Scotland will struggle to pay off the debts from the bailout after Independence, doesn't make sense to gloss over that fact.

[xbl]

Didn't know political groups were able to ban videos from Youtube, strange one. The only thing that really lets the video down is point number 4 where they say that as Scottish GDP in 2008 was £145bn and the cost of the RBS bail-out was £66bn Scotland would have "comfortably" dealt with the recession. Scotland will struggle to pay off the debts from the bailout after Independence, doesn't make sense to gloss over that fact.

We discussed no.4 earlier on, which led to HB's current batch of goalpost shifting. The facts are that we wouldn't have had to bail the bank out ourselves. All precedent, and indeed the actions of countries during the crisis, showed that bailouts took place based on where the banking operations took place, not based on where the bank was headquartered. This is why (for example) banks like RBS were bailed out with American money too. As 90% of RBS is outside Scotland, then it wouldn't have had to pay for 100%. But as I said earlier, this wouldn't really be catchy in a simple video.

Better Together are/were claiming copyright on the basis that the video uses Better Together campaign material, unedited. You would think they would WANT to see their video spread, but not. They are also claiming it is to "protect" the people in the video, despite the fact they are already in their videos!

[H_B]

I'm not sure where they are getting the 66 bn figure from either.

[H_B]

As 90% of RBS is outside Scotland, then it wouldn't have had to pay for 100%.

Scotland would have had to underwrite 100% of the costs of RBS' recapitalisation. If it chose to save RBS as a going concern that is.

RBS required immediate recapitalisation. That would not have been provided by the rUK government for a non rUK incorporated entity.

[xbl]

I am honestly beginning to think H_B's tactic on this thread is to, as soon as something pro-independence comes along, derail the thread into something so mind-numbingly boring that people stop reading.

I keep quoting it, because its a very perceptive post.

[BarryHills]

RBS's assets in 2008, at the time of the bailout were £2.2 tn. Equal to the then GDP of the UK and Spain combined.

John Hourican :-

"We all had an on-the-beaches attitude at the time,” said Hourican, who until Goodwin called him back had been working in Amsterdam unpicking RBS’s joint acquisition of ABN AMRO in what then was the biggest bank takeover in history. “The problems we were discovering were large and continuous. Every day, we would see the value of the assets we were sitting on move significantly – and usually down. A lot of the stuff on the balance sheet was becoming rapidly illiquid and very difficult to value.”

What started were many months of shrinking the books, a task which soon fell on Peter Nielsen, the former head of rates who was quickly placed in charge of the markets business, which generated the lion’s share of GBM revenues. “In those early days, every single day was spent trying to get the books down, making sure the books were smaller at the close of business than they had been at the beginning of the day,” he said. “It was a very difficult period. A lot of the systems we relied on had helped bring down the bank. It was like flying in the dark with no instruments.”

http://www.ifre.com/the-fall-and-(partial)-rise-of-rbs/21052458.article

More than three years after the bailout, a huge amount of work had been done. The balance sheet has shrunk massively – and with it, the bank’s reliance on wholesale funding markets. From the £2.2trn at the end of 2008, the bank approaches the end of this year with about £1.5trn in assets. In the GBM division, assets have more than halved and will be cut further. Capital ratios have also improved massively – from 4% prior to the bailout to 10% now.

----------------

If you think any other entity would have been interested in taking on the utter shambles of RBS, you are insane.

There would have been interest in the "good" bits of the bank, as was the case following the Barings collapse. RBS would not have continued to trade without UK government intervention.

Well that's me convinced!

[H_B]

If anyone is interested in why RBS failed, this is the document to read :-

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/static/FsaWeb/Shared/Documents/pubs/other/rbs-part1.pdf

It shows why RBS were in a peculiarly problematic position relative to their peers.

[YOGI IS GOD]

We discussed no.4 earlier on, which led to HB's current batch of goalpost shifting. The facts are that we wouldn't have had to bail the bank out ourselves. All precedent, and indeed the actions of countries during the crisis, showed that bailouts took place based on where the banking operations took place, not based on where the bank was headquartered. This is why (for example) banks like RBS were bailed out with American money too. As 90% of RBS is outside Scotland, then it wouldn't have had to pay for 100%. But as I said earlier, this wouldn't really be catchy in a simple video.

Better Together are/were claiming copyright on the basis that the video uses Better Together campaign material, unedited. You would think they would WANT to see their video spread, but not. They are also claiming it is to "protect" the people in the video, despite the fact they are already in their videos!

Cheers - that makes a bit more sense. There's been a need for more of these sort of videos and infographics that people can share on Twitter & Facebook - Better Together release about 3 a day.

[xbl]

Cheers - that makes a bit more sense. There's been a need for more of these sort of videos and infographics that people can share on Twitter & Facebook - Better Together release about 3 a day.

Yeah, they've started to put more out recently with the GERS and military figures, but I agree they need more.

[chicmac]

Video is professional looking and well made the voice over is very good. Agree about the section on banks being a very poor and not reflecting reality - would have been better left out if it was not to be covered properly - the format, however, did not allow for complex explanations.

Also I guess it was made pre Chaves's death, also disagreed with the theme of normalising the vitriol levelled at Alex Salmond, fair enough to point out that this does happen elsewhere but all the examples given were themselves quite exceptional. And then they acknowledged the effectiveness of Salmond's demonisation by saying Vote Yes if you want rid of Salmond. A bit inconsistent.

The comment about Darling being a bit weird was tacky and counterproductive and again resorts to the kind of unionist gutter politics they highlighted earlier. It was also unnecessarry, people can judge for himself whether he or similarly committed Scottish Brits are a bit weird. I know many do regard them in that way, but I tend to make allowances for programming.

They also missed out key myths like 'Oil is about to run out'. The startling revision downwards of Osborne's OBR own oil revenue estimates which are way out of kilter with industry expectation, an expectation, incidentally, which is backed by hard cash to the tune of £100 billion in new North Sea investments and estimates from the UK Goverment's own department of Energy and Climate Change's projected oil price of between $120 and $130 dollars a barrel over the next 5 years. And how much airtime have the potential projects off the West of Scotland had, with some estimates reckoning it could have 3-4 times the oil of the North Sea?

There are others that should have been in there.

My final score:

Presentation 9

Content 5.5

[Mr.Bojangles]

It's interesting that the BBC quotes the Scottish Government figures (with a hyperlink to the PDF) on oil revenues and then allows Mr. Moore away with "There is a gulf between those independent OBR figures and the hugely optimistic numbers published by the Scottish government last week."

When you actually read the 'optimistic' paper, they show the OBR figures on page 5 and call them assumptions. The paper shows a variety of scenarios based on different assumptions on what could happen to the oil price and updating the amount of production estimated (which the OBR figures don't reflect at the minute).

[xbl]

Take note people. Independence supporters, disagreeing with a pro independence video, reviewing it, and disagreeing with each other. If you want one defining thing that separates the No camp and the Yes camp, this is it.

[archie guevara]

Take note people. Independence supporters, disagreeing with a pro independence video, reviewing it, and disagreeing with each other. If you want one defining thing that separates the No camp and the Yes camp, this is it.

Whereas the No campaign are united on one thing and apart on everything else, except errr... Trident, workfare, benefits reform, the dismantling of the English NHS, English prison reform, the end of jury trials in England, illegal wars in the Middle East and so on.

[BarryHills]

Date to be announced tomorrow.

[xbl]

Whereas the No campaign are united on one thing and apart on everything else, except errr... Trident, workfare, benefits reform, the dismantling of the English NHS, English prison reform, the end of jury trials in England, illegal wars in the Middle East and so on.

What I was referring to though, was the way that independence supporters will disagree with each other, whilst the Unionists will NOT criticise others. For example, I may sometimes disagree with your posts (hypothetically), and people disagree with mine, and so we say so. Take that video. We don't slavishly praise it, but we praise and criticise as appropriate.

Compare this to the Unionists. Even the most ludicrous posts are left without comment. Apparently Unionists never disagree. It is fundamental intellectual dishonesty.

[Mr Hahn]

What I was referring to though, was the way that independence supporters will disagree with each other, whilst the Unionists will NOT criticise others. For example, I may sometimes disagree with your posts (hypothetically), and people disagree with mine, and so we say so. Take that video. We don't slavishly praise it, but we praise and criticise as appropriate.

Compare this to the Unionists. Even the most ludicrous posts are left without comment. Apparently Unionists never disagree. It is fundamental intellectual dishonesty.

I think they see disagreement as a sign of weakness where the yes camp see it for what it is, a productive way to move forward.

[welshbairn]

Posting this because because someone's trying to ban it apparently. I do not vouch for it's contents.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JDrqamBHqLg&feature=youtube_gdata_player