Scottish Independence

[Reynard]

I reckon whether we stay or go the size of the state will be shrinking regardless. This doesnt trouble me in the slightest. I welcome it in either case.

[George Parr]

The Yes narrative has to be that real constitutionally limited government is only possible with a codified constitution entrenching civil rights and ensuring much clearer separation of powers. Not creating some constitutional fiction from the C15th-17th that somehow Scotland's constitutional traditions were in any significant sense different from England's.

I think the Yes narrative has to be a bit catchier tbh.

[AUFC90]

I want the rest of the pro-independence side to do as I have done and not to make shit up when it's completely unnecessary. The legislative supremacy of the Westminster Parliament should be part of the argument as to the problem that needs solving. The Yes narrative has to be that real constitutionally limited government is only possible with a codified constitution entrenching civil rights and ensuring much clearer separation of powers. Not creating some constitutional fiction from the C15th-17th that somehow Scotland's constitutional traditions were in any significant sense different from England's.

What important issues does this relate to though ?

[doulikefish]

Reynard asking for figures lol

[Reynard]

Reynard asking for figures lol

Have you decided which figures YOU were asking me for yet?

Or did you just pick up a ball and run although you have no idea what game youre playing or what direction youre heading?

[doulikefish]

Lol

[Reynard]

Its cute you have attempted to suck XBLs cock here, but the reality is that you have absolutely no idea what he was banging on about do you?

[doulikefish]

Lol

[Reynard]

Lol

What figues is it that you want from me? You mumbled something about "pensions". What pension figures is it that you are asking for?

[doulikefish]

You have zero credibility on any political thread

[Reynard]

If you are going to attempt this with me then the best thing you can do is go back and try and understand what you are actually asking for, and why. It will make you look marginally less glaiket.

[doulikefish]

Lol

[Reynard]

You have zero credibility on any political thread

OH? And why is this?

Lets give me a chance to regain my much needed political credibility by you telling me erxacttyl which pension figures you reckon you want from me.

Can you do this? Or are you just latching on to something that someone else has been banging on about for around six months in a tearful strop prior to his ban?

The truth is that you have absolutely no idea what you are asking me for do you?

[doulikefish]

Lol

[wingsoverperthshire]

The Fox in having a nightmare shocker.

Meanwhile yougov shows a 1% gain for YES Scotland.

33% Yes

52% No

15% unsure

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-yes-support-up-1-poll-1-3228439

[Reynard]

The Fox in having a nightmare shocker.

Meanwhile yougov shows a 1% gain for YES Scotland.

33% Yes

52% No

15% unsure

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-yes-support-up-1-poll-1-3228439

lol

[renton]

The Fox in having a nightmare shocker.

Meanwhile yougov shows a 1% gain for YES Scotland.

33% Yes

52% No

15% unsure

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-yes-support-up-1-poll-1-3228439

You gov with the westminster weighting. Like Ipsos Mori, I think that skews their data, and Panelbase is also flawed as well, but I'm more inclined to think that Holyrood voting patterns is closer to the truth than Westminster ones.

[ayrmad]

Do I agree with what? Id love to see the figures that back up your claim first.

Its entirely possible that at times Scotland has net contributed just as its entirely possible at times that it has been a net beneficiary. But as the union is 300 years old can you go right back that far and break it all down or are we starting at an arbitrary point in time that may or may not suit an argument?

There are also costs that wont show up, like the running of the entire government machine which obviously would then fall entirely on five million Scots to fund. Economies of scale suggests that this will be a bit more expensive in a smaller country. In fact, obviously it will be more expensive especially with Scotland having roughly 300,000 who are net tax contributors. Its inevitable that to run things we have got used to now then its going to mean a bigger tax lift for individuals and or higher borrowing which may be getting borrowed at a much higher rate than the UK is borrowing at now. There are not many smaller countries that can borrow money at the rate the UK does.And if we are setting up an oil fund (laughable) then where does the extra money come from to pay for all the stuff we enjoy now? Either the state will have to get smaller (yass) or tax will be higher (f**k off)

We'll not be going back 300 years as we had nowt to do with that, we could use figures over our lifetimes if you want.

Your economies of scale don't really come into IMO, it will be far easier for a small country to run our systems more efficiently, a tanker doesn't have the turning circle of a fishing boat.

[Burma]

Still nothing from Burma as to whether Lord Hope in Axa was correct or incorrect to say that sovereignty remains with the United Kingdom Parliament?

It's almost as though Burma doesn't have a clue what he's talking about.

You have zero credibility here now. You dont understand what Claim of Right means. The clue is in the name.

[H_B]

You have zero credibility here now. You dont understand what Claim of Right means. The clue is in the name.

Answer his question.

And answer mine - do you know more about UK Constitutional Law than Matthew Happold - Yes or No?