Tubbs Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 Neither of them? Exactly - but only one of them is asking you to trust them to be right on the biggest change in the country for 300 years all in the name of hope (for the best). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 Exactly - but only one of them is asking you to trust them to be right on the biggest change in the country for 300 years all in the name of hope (for the best). I think it's safe to say that Yes overestimate how much oil is left whilst No underestimate it. I think that's a fair comment right? However, to say that it is volatile or running out is outright lies. Ironically, Labour's Devolution Commission produced this, showing that Scotland is the 3rd richest part of the UK, behind London and SE England, WITHOUT a drop of oil being included in Scotland's economic output. Oil is just a bonus. Just a pity that so many No voters see it as such a burden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blaven Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 Exactly - but only one of them is asking you to trust them to be right on the biggest change in the country for 300 years all in the name of hope (for the best). And the other told you it would have run out 10 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tubbs Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 And the other told you it would have run out 10 years ago. I missed that one being part of the UK's outlook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tubbs Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 I think it's safe to say that Yes overestimate how much oil is left whilst No underestimate it. Exactly - what else is the yes side over or under estimating to suit their agenda ? The commercial reality of shipbuilding? the ease of entering the EU ? the CU being a reality? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 Exactly - what else is the yes side over or under estimating to suit their agenda ? The commercial reality of shipbuilding? the ease of entering the EU ? the CU being a reality? You truly are utterly brainwashed. Shipbuilding is fucked in this country regardless of who's in charge. Didn't you see there was a yard closed this week, in the UNITED kingdom? The EU isn't even up for debate any more. Anyone who doesn't think we'll get in with consummate ease is a troll. Or daft. The CU similarly WILL happen. And there's still Trident, HS1 and 2, cross London rail network, austeritry, massive rich poor divide, kids and families in poverty, foodbanks etc etc etc. You really, REALLY need to remove the blinkers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeTillEhDeh Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 I think it's safe to say that Yes overestimate how much oil is left whilst No underestimate it. I think that's a fair comment right? However, to say that it is volatile or running out is outright lies. Ironically, Labour's Devolution Commission produced this, showing that Scotland is the 3rd richest part of the UK, behind London and SE England, WITHOUT a drop of oil being included in Scotland's economic output. Oil is just a bonus. Just a pity that so many No voters see it as such a burden. Some No supporters confuse dropping NS production levels with oil running out. Not the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speckled tangerine Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 What huge new oil field is this? All I've heard about today is a shipyard closing and Aussie PM calling Scottish nationalists "not the friends of justice or freedom". Ahh. I see now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blaven Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 What huge new oil field is this? All I've heard about today is a shipyard closing and Aussie PM calling Scottish nationalists "not the friends of justice or freedom". Ahh. I see now. Yeah. Scottish nationalists = ISIL of the North. Panic is setting in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 Exactly - what else is the yes side over or under estimating to suit their agenda ? The commercial reality of shipbuilding? the ease of entering the EU ? the CU being a reality? What is the commercial reality of shipbuilding? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedgecutter Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 What is the commercial reality of shipbuilding? If you look at Rosyth for example, if 3000 folk lose their jobs then you're looking at the state paying the best part of million pound per month more on jobseekers allowance alone (before taking the lost income tax and knock on effects to surrounding businesses into account). My brother who's a fabricator was recently released by BAE at Rosyth (albeit sacked in an ongoing dispute) and has had to move to Newcastle to get a similar job after searching for a few months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speckled tangerine Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 If you look at Rosyth for example, if 3000 folk lose their jobs then you're looking at the state paying the best part of million pound per month more on jobseekers allowance (before taking the lost income tax and knock on effects to surrounding businesses into account). My brother who's a fabricator was recently released by BAE at Rosyth (albeit sacked in an ongoing dispute) and has had to move to Newcastle to get a similar job after searching for a few months. Why can't Rosyth and other Scottish yards tout for international business. Relying on one exclusive client is fucking suicide. Further to another post on the ship building thread (and a cursory Google search) it shows Romania building ships for the Dutch navy. Irish naval vessels built in Devon by Babcock. And a billion dollar Australian deal being built in Vietnam. Tony Abbott couldn't give a f**k they're communists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 If you look at Rosyth for example, if 3000 folk lose their jobs then you're looking at the state paying the best part of million pound per month more on jobseekers allowance alone (before taking the lost income tax and knock on effects to surrounding businesses into account). My brother who's a fabricator was recently released by BAE at Rosyth (albeit sacked in an ongoing dispute) and has had to move to Newcastle to get a similar job after searching for a few months. Why would 3000 people lose their jobs? Your brother having to move to newcastle is not an advert for the union. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardyBamboo Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 Why would 3000 people lose their jobs? Your brother having to move to newcastle is not an advert for the union. He is making exactly the opposite argument to the one you think he is making. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedgecutter Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 That's fair enough but the problem is that you can never know when what has been published represent "true fact" or whether its just propaganda from one side or the other. When you get the figures directly from the field operator's website, that's going to be the most accurate figure. All figures are best guess volumetrics / projections of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crùbag Posted August 16, 2014 Share Posted August 16, 2014 Scotland's volatile burden grows greater.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blaven Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 Is our oil burden not big enough as it is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hey! Ho! Jambo! Posted August 17, 2014 Author Share Posted August 17, 2014 Is our oil burden not big enough as it is?ImageUploadedByPie & Bovril1408266744.544342.jpg Best leave it to Westminster. They know what they're doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedgecutter Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 Jeez, not this West Coast oil boom pish yet again. Covered this in detail on here before and to summarise: Might be the odd pocket of oil around our Isles but unlikely to be commercial, certainly not enough to cause a boom collectively and local regions are unlikely to see much benefit out of it just as Caithness & Sutherland don't with the Beatrice / Jacky / Lybster fields just offshore there. Rockall on the other hand however is the exception. Potentially a lot of oil there but the deep water currently makes it an expensive nightmare logistically. The "only 20 exploration wells have been drilled off the west coast despite 3000 in the North Sea" bit specifically bugs me somewhat. 3000 have been drilled there because it's a deep basin which continually made finds when it kicked off and contains one of the world's best quality oil source rocks which was previously known about for years before hand because you can see its continuation onshore England (basically how BP found Wytch Farm in Dorset quite easily way back in the early 70's). You don't drill anywhere near that number of multimillion pound wells in a shallow basin where the onshore geology only hits at limited crappy source rocks / reservoir and nearly all wells to date have shown zero potential. Also as I see from that article, you do not go "oh, the Sea of the Hebrides never gave us much, let's not bother with Rockall". The two basins have two very different geological histories and you go at them separately. Otherwise it would be like not bothering with the North Sea because nothing was found drilling the West Orkney Basin. Basically, don't trust any MP who's been told this stuff fifth hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thumper Posted August 17, 2014 Share Posted August 17, 2014 Basically, don't trust any MP who's been told this stuff fifth hand. Right, but you'd hope that one of the major regional newspapers for Scotland's primary oil region wouldn't run front-page spreads on easily-refuted bullshit. And the Sunday Post is rabidly unionist, which makes it odd they'd be running it the month before the referendum without thorough fact-checking as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.