Scottish Independence - How will you vote? MkII

[Ad Lib]

No, but it's another feather in the Independence hat. I'm firmly anti-nuclear, that includes nuclear power. I don't want to live near any nuclear material, unfortunately I do. The legacy of Chernobyl and Fukushima is evidence enough that accidents do happen. There will be higher cancer rates in that area of Japan as a consequence, there will be some radiation in the food supply. I should need to even bother talking about how dangerous nuclear weapons are.

Being "firmly" against nuclear power because of Chernobyl and Fukushima is like being against boats because of the Titanic or against planes because of Lockerbie. Chernobyl is totally irrelevant because it's a) a reactor that was appallingly built b) subject to very poor safety standards and regulations and c) using the technology in its primitive infancy. Fukushima is irrelevant for our purposes because a) we don't use water cooled reactors b) we don't live on the edge of two tectonic plates c) again, even then, the technology of the Fukushima plant is 40 years out of date. Honestly, it's like worrying that my gaming computer with a quad core i5 won't be able to handle Pong because an Atari crashed once.

[Richie]

I was staunchly against it up until around the last year or so, but have now done a complete 180 on the issue.

I suppose this, in part, was due to spending time working in leafy Surrey every quarter and realising just how detached the SE of England (in particular) is.

I may not be more well-off under independence, but at least my vote will count for something.

A political party, which is nigh-on obsolete Scotland, is currently imposing policy here - a situation I find ridiculous - no matter the party/parties involved.

Scottish people are more equipped to decide on their own future and how their own country operates.

Scotland is more than capable of holding its own as a prosperous, independent country. We aren't suddenly going to become Albania.

The patronising and arrogant protestations from the NO campaigners only serve to harden my view now.

Also, in the event of a no vote, no-one can legitimately complain about the Tory/Westminster influence again.

[I'm Brian]

So to sum up.... what was your point?

I've no real opinion on this whole thing other than being utterly apathetic to both sides petty point scoring. But empty, sentimentalist pish like the above presented as valid reasoning really annoys me.

Perhaps I might suggest you go and research some facts and you might actually change a lot of the bollocks you have written.

[Richie]

Re: Trident... Is it not the case that new countries are prohibited from harbouring nuclear weapons anyway.

[pandarilla]

Being "firmly" against nuclear power because of Chernobyl and Fukushima is like being against boats because of the Titanic or against planes because of Lockerbie. Chernobyl is totally irrelevant because it's a) a reactor that was appallingly built b) subject to very poor safety standards and regulations and c) using the technology in its primitive infancy. Fukushima is irrelevant for our purposes because a) we don't use water cooled reactors b) we don't live on the edge of two tectonic plates c) again, even then, the technology of the Fukushima plant is 40 years out of date. Honestly, it's like worrying that my gaming computer with a quad core i5 won't be able to handle Pong because an Atari crashed once.

Yeah - that's what its like.

[Enigma]

Being "firmly" against nuclear power because of Chernobyl and Fukushima is like being against boats because of the Titanic or against planes because of Lockerbie. Chernobyl is totally irrelevant because it's a) a reactor that was appallingly built b) subject to very poor safety standards and regulations and c) using the technology in its primitive infancy. Fukushima is irrelevant for our purposes because a) we don't use water cooled reactors b) we don't live on the edge of two tectonic plates c) again, even then, the technology of the Fukushima plant is 40 years out of date. Honestly, it's like worrying that my gaming computer with a quad core i5 won't be able to handle Pong because an Atari crashed once.

Yet it's entirely possible there could be a tsunami on the East Coast of Scotland, there was one 8000 years ago due to an underground landslide but, yeah, I concede. I'm just not that hot on the creation of nuclear waste and particles with half lives of millions of years and the consequences should accidents happen.

Regardless the original point was about trident and nuclear weapons, not nuclear power.

Edited November 26, 2013 by Enigma

[Ad Lib]

Yet it's entirely possible there could be a tsunami on the East Coast of Scotland, there was one 8000 years ago due to an underground landslide but, yeah, I concede. I'm just not that hot on the creation of nuclear waste and particles with half lives of millions of years and the consequences should accidents happen.

If there's a tsunami on Dalgety Bay I'm pretty sure the effects on a modern gas-cooled nuclear reactor, probably situated nowhere near Fife, would be the least of our problems.

[Enigma]

If there's a tsunami on Dalgety Bay I'm pretty sure the effects on a modern gas-cooled nuclear reactor, probably situated nowhere near Fife, would be the least of our problems.

Torness isn't that far from Fife is it?

[Ad Lib]

Torness isn't that far from Fife is it?

It's a fair distance. And let's get some perspective here. The Tsunami you're talking about was responsible for the elimination of a landmass almost as big as the modern day Great Britain. Basing the country's energy plan for, even, the next 300 years on the basis of a freak event that last happened more than 8000 years ago that would wipe out most of the British Isles is probably being more than just a little bit irrational. If you built even a Fukushima-type plant somewhere like Torness it would probably find itself submerged permanently by a natural disaster of that kind of scale. Whether the sea was a little bit radioactive would be the least of our problems when most of Scottish civilisation retreats to the Cairngorms!

[invergowrie arab]

It's a fair distance. And let's get some perspective here. The Tsunami you're talking about was responsible for the elimination of a landmass almost as big as the modern day Great Britain. Basing the country's energy plan for, even, the next 300 years on the basis of a freak event that last happened more than 8000 years ago that would wipe out most of the British Isles is probably being more than just a little bit irrational. If you built even a Fukushima-type plant somewhere like Torness it would probably find itself submerged permanently by a natural disaster of that kind of scale. Whether the sea was a little bit radioactive would be the least of our problems when most of Scottish civilisation retreats to the Cairngorms!

When is Lisbon due to go off again? I have seen the tide marks under shore terrace from the Dundee tsunami.

[ayrmad]

I'm not entirely sure of the relevance of that, but, er, roundabout the age you'd expect someone with teenage children to be.

That very much depends where they live.

[ayrmad]

One of the nice bits in Ayr. South of the river, naturally.

Fine, so they aren't old enough to be on the scrapheap, have you actually discussed this issue and your leanings with them?

[Baxter Parp]

 

I don't think the work they're doing at the moment would be required in an independent Scotland, nor do they think that.

What it is or shenanigans. Stop being coy.

[Broccoli Dog]

I'm pretty sure your father/mother/whoever will be just fine should the unthinkable happen. It'll take a couple of years to relocate the East Kilbride offices, and they'll be guaranteed a tidy redundancy.

Plus I'm sure Scotland will require bureaucrats of our own, and probably even an international development branch.

[greyman]

No from me. I think that there's too many questions that haven't been fully answered. I find irony in the fact they are going to improve education, yet the SNP/Labour council are projecting to cut millions from their education budget in the coming years. Education standards are bad enough. My son could potentially go to a school where he is in a 25% minority of Scottish kids (50% Eastern European & 25% West African) currently. That is only likely to get worse with the cut of the education budget as there will not be enough assistants in the school. Edinburghshire schools are over crowded as they are. That's only part of the reason however.

[Baxter Parp]

 

It largely relates to providing support to staff based in the developing countries which the UK maintains a presence in (outwith embassies and stuff).

I can't think of a good reason for Scotland not to need his services or something very like it.

[Baxter Parp]

No from me. I think that there's too many questions that haven't been fully answered. I find irony in the fact they are going to improve education, yet the SNP/Labour council are projecting to cut millions from their education budget in the coming years. Education standards are bad enough. My son could potentially go to a school where he is in a 25% minority of Scottish kids (50% Eastern European & 25% West African) currently. That is only likely to get worse with the cut of the education budget as there will not be enough assistants in the school. Edinburghshire schools are over crowded as they are. That's only part of the reason however.

I think you'll find that all those things have happened in the union, not out of it.

[DAFC]

If we vote no then we will see a backlash from Westminster and I think we will be quite rightly treated badly.

Its all englands fault. Ok then go it alone. No we're too scared.

Pathetic.

I have faith in my country and its people.

Yes.

[greyman]

I think you'll find that all those things have happened in the union, not out of it.

Agreed, but who are the council in charge? The SNP/Labour council have made these decisions not Westminster. They have made a massive c u next Tuesday of things with the trams and are offsetting the losses. I may be wrong, but there are a lot of people see this the same way.

[ForzaDundee]

No from me. I think that there's too many questions that haven't been fully answered. I find irony in the fact they are going to improve education, yet the SNP/Labour council are projecting to cut millions from their education budget in the coming years. Education standards are bad enough. My son could potentially go to a school where he is in a 25% minority of Scottish kids (50% Eastern European & 25% West African) currently. That is only likely to get worse with the cut of the education budget as there will not be enough assistants in the school. Edinburghshire schools are over crowded as they are. That's only part of the reason however.

We could spend more money on schools if it wasn't being wasted on waging foreign wars and nuclear weapons. Just a thought.