Scottish Independence May Be Coming Soon

[Chef Ramsay]

Long Live William Wallace!! Make him proud, Scots.

Support for Scottish independence has risen eight points in a month, according to a new poll.
The No camp are now six points ahead of the Yes campaign, down from 14 points in mid-August and 22 points early last month, excluding undecided voters.

The latest YouGov poll found that, excluding ''don't knows'', 53% of those questioned planned to vote No, while 47% would back Yes.
This compares to 57% for Yes and 43% for No in mid August and 61% for Yes and 39% for No at the beginning of last month.

Blair Jenkins, Chief Executive of Yes Scotland, said: ''This breakthrough poll shows that Yes has the big momentum - it's an all-time high for Yes support in a YouGov survey so far, and an eight-point swing from No to Yes in just three weeks. We only need another three-point swing to achieve a Yes for Scotland on September 18.

More...http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11069121/Scottish-Independence-Yes-camp-closes-the-poll-gap.html

[1713886906]

1713886906

[1713886906]

1713886906

[1713886906]

1713886906

[1713886906]

1713886906

[Daniel91]

It's still 50/50 chances if this will happen or not.
I think that to much emotions is involved here and no so much reasons.
If Scotland will have to apply to join EU and start their own currency, than independence will be no so good choice for them.
It will be really interesting to see what happens

[Balthazar]

It will be good for them in any case. Their head of state won't be so crazy, at least.

Example of stupidity:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CprUnsEvZ7U

[practicaldreamer]

Salmond wants to retain GBP. There is adamant cross party opposition to this in Westminster. Even if an independant Scotland could retain GBP, why would it want to ? They wouldn't have their own central bank and, as the Governor of the Bank of England has already pointed out, monetary union with the rest of the UK wouldn't only mean that Scotland is monetarily dependant - it would also necessitate them having to sacrfice some degree of fiscal independance (ie. raising tax, and so spending). That is, an "Independant" Scotland would be a misnomer under the GBP.

   Personally, if the Yes campaign had stood up and said that an independant Scotland would establish its own currency I would have had to give a "Yes" vote even more serious thought than I have hitherto. But they don't seem to want their own currency - they would prefer to ride off the back of the strength and stability of the rest of the UK as reflected in its currency, the GB Pound.

    But I think a big moment that helped swing it for me was in the debate between Salmond and Darling, when Darling made the point that although he wants whats best for the people of Glasgow, Edinburgh and Aberdeen  he also wants whats best for the people of Manchester and Birmingham and Newcastle.
        Well said that man. Magnanimous, compassionate and seeing the bigger picture.

           Better together for me I'm afraid.

[countryfree]

I'm all in favor of an independent Scotland (independent Ireland, too), but I'm no Scot no my voice doesn't count. It will make Germany even stronger within Europe, but I'm not afraid of that, it has always been like this.

[Arctic]

It's not a 50/50 chance. 

The polls have narrowed significantly but the odds from the bookies are currently 1/4 No vs 11/4 yes.  They have a habit of being right - but anything can happen.

[Lethn]

There is nothing from stopping Scotland becoming a wealthy independent country, it's not landlocked so it has every option of ignoring anything the UK says and trading freely with others. I support Scottish independence and I'm in England! Someone needs to tell the guys in the government over there about Bitcoin.

[bryant.coleman]

It's not a 50/50 chance. 

The polls have narrowed significantly but the odds from the bookies are currently 1/4 No vs 11/4 yes.  They have a habit of being right - but anything can happen.

Yeah.... the NO is still having a healthy lead over YES.. with the latest opinion polls showing something like 53 v 47.

The problem with YES activists is that they can't penetrate to the lowlands, where immigrants from England and those from the EU nations are present in large numbers. Also, the ethnic minorities (although only 3% of the population) remains opposed to any split from the UK. Right now the YES bloc is strong only in the Highlands and the Islands.

Things can change if Highlanders vote in much larger numbers, compared to those in the lowlands. This can happen, as usually the polling rate is higher in the rural regions, when compared to the urban areas. So if we see tartans and kilts in large numbers along the polling stations on 18th September, then there is a chance that the Scots will gain independence.

[Balthazar]

I remember Cameron's speech about scottish independence referendum... He argued that "No" is preferred option and said that union is very beneficial. But he didn't elaborate who is beneficiary.

[Lethn]

If you guys think this is bad then there are people who are actively against us even voting on the EU referendum because they're terrified we'll vote differently to how they want, Labour in particular have made comments about this and it just shows you how much they totally despise the public despite them hiding behind nice words.

[bryant.coleman]

I studied the opinion poll. Here is what I found.

#1. Men want independence, while women are in favor of British rule. (M: 52 vs 48, F: 42 vs 58). Very strong gap among the females.

#2. Younger people want independence, while older ones want to remain British. In all age groups under 60 years, YES dominates. But 60+ voters favor NO extremely heavily, with 31 vs 69 margin. This huge margin overpowers the YES vote from all the other age groups.

#3. People born in Scotland are split almost 50-50. But voters born in England are heavily in favor of NO (31 vs 69). EU voters (Poles.etc) are favoring NO with 40 vs 60 margin.

[Sithara007]

#3. People born in Scotland are split almost 50-50. But voters born in England are heavily in favor of NO (31 vs 69). EU voters (Poles.etc) are favoring NO with 40 vs 60 margin.

Why should anyone from England vote Yes?

[practicaldreamer]

Independent Scotland could not join EU without central bank

[bryant.coleman]

BTW... what will happen to the British army if Scotland gains independence on September 18th? Although Scots are just 8% of the total population, a large part of the soldiers, as well as many of the army regiments are based in Scotland. Will they take British citizenship and move to England, or will they simply join the newly formed Scottish Armed Forces?

[Balthazar]

BTW... what will happen to the British army if Scotland gains independence on September 18th? Although Scots are just 8% of the total population, a large part of the soldiers, as well as many of the army regiments are based in Scotland. Will they take British citizenship and move to England, or will they simply join the newly formed Scottish Armed Forces?

Are you reffering to Crimea example?

[Arctic]

Independent Scotland could not join EU without central bank

correct - they'd have to adopt the euro although Alex won't admit that

[countryfree]

Independent Scotland could not join EU without central bank

Nobody should worry about that. There will be a political solution, but the choice between the pound or the euro is a tough one. Who to trust, Westminster or Brussels (actually, Frankfurt)?

[Arctic]

Nobody should worry about that. There will be a political solution, but the choice between the pound or the euro is a tough one. Who to trust, Westminster or Brussels (actually, Frankfurt)?

there's probably a few folk in Ireland and Greece that could give you an opinion on that  

[murraypaul]

It will be good for them in any case. Their head of state won't be so crazy, at least.

If Scotland became independent, they would keep the same head of state.

[Lethn]

#3. People born in Scotland are split almost 50-50. But voters born in England are heavily in favor of NO (31 vs 69). EU voters (Poles.etc) are favoring NO with 40 vs 60 margin.

Why should anyone from England vote Yes?

Because if you vote yes then you are against empire building and the annexation of independent countries.

[bryant.coleman]

15 days to go. The gap has narrowed so much that now everything will depend upon the turnout. If women, pensioners, urban voters.etc turn out in large numbers, then Scotland will remain a part of the United Kingdom. On the other hand, if large number of youngsters, men, highlanders.etc vote in the referendum, then the Union will lose.

[countryfree]

There will be a political solution, but the choice between the pound or the euro is a tough one. Who to trust, Westminster or Brussels (actually, Frankfurt)?

there's probably a few folk in Ireland and Greece that could give you an opinion on that  

It's not that easy, because we should expect Brussels to be quite neutral towards Scotland. It would be just another country joining the European Union. On the other hand, history has taught us that the Brits haven't always been nice with Scots. Westminster may try to do something nasty just to get Scotland in trouble. Like they say in the army, you hope for the best but you get ready for the worst.

[practicaldreamer]

the choice between the pound or the euro is a tough one. Who to trust, Westminster or Brussels (actually, Frankfurt)?

It won't matter - either option will mean that Scotland is not, in fact, independant.

How about the Scottish Pound, issued by the Central Bank of Scotland, and the cost/price of which is set via interest rates dictated by the very same bank. If the strength of the Scottish economy is all that the Yes campaign would have us believe, and the oil reserves forecasts are all correct etc, then Scotlands credit rating will be AAA and all will be well and good.

OK, there will be transaction fees when transacting between currencies (maybe the blockchain might be able to help out here - the technology is there Alex) - but it must be a price worth paying to achieve REAL independance surely ?

[johny08]

United Kingdom deserve to fall apart, because of their destructive and contraproductive influence on the EU.

Poor British people 

[Bonam]

I predict that Scotland remains effectively a part of the UK, regardless of the outcome of this vote.

[elite3000]

if scottish people want more power at the local level, thats fine but i think
 them leaving would leave both countries poorer

[bryant.coleman]

United Kingdom deserve to fall apart, because of their destructive and contraproductive influence on the EU.

An independent Scotland will be a part of the European Union. So any break-up will have minimal impact on the EU. But if they adopt Euro as the currency instead of the Pound Sterling, then it can significantly weaken the UKP. Also, the British Armed Forces will lose almost one-third of its regiments, including some of the elite forces.

[Balthazar]

They don't need unbacked Europonzi toilet paper, it's better to create own currency... They have enough natural resources to ensure that this currency will be stable.

[murraypaul]

United Kingdom deserve to fall apart, because of their destructive and contraproductive influence on the EU.

An independent Scotland will be a part of the European Union.

Really? You have a statement from the EU to that effect?
The Yes Scotland group say that they will negotiate their entry into the EU between the vote and actual independence, and that they expect to be accepted. They might be wrong.
They would also have to join on 'standard' terms, without the various opt-outs that the UK has.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/scottish-independence-eu-bid-extremely-difficult-says-jose-manuel-barroso-9131925.html

It would be "extremely difficult, if not impossible" for an independent Scotland to get the necessary approval from the member states for it to join the European Union (EU), the president of the European Commission has said.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11071043/Independent-Scotland-could-not-keep-pound-and-join-EU.html

Scotland must choose between independence and keeping the pound if it wants to be part of the European Union, one of the bloc's top officials has warned.
In a blow to the Yes campaign, Olli Rehn, vice president of the European Parliament and former commissioner for economic and monetary affairs, said keeping the pound without consent from Westminster "would simply not be possible" because EU membership requires countries to have access to an independent central bank.
[...]
"As to the question whether 'sterlingisation' were compatible with EU membership, the answer is that this would simply not be possible since that would obviously imply a situation where the candidate country concerned would not have a monetary authority of its own and thus no necessary instruments of the EMU," he wrote.

[cryptofan5]

So they will vote No, I guess.

[countryfree]

United Kingdom deserve to fall apart, because of their destructive and contraproductive influence on the EU.

An independent Scotland will be a part of the European Union.

Really? You have a statement from the EU to that effect?
The Yes Scotland group say that they will negotiate their entry into the EU between the vote and actual independence, and that they expect to be accepted. They might be wrong.
They would also have to join on 'standard' terms, without the various opt-outs that the UK has.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/scottish-independence-eu-bid-extremely-difficult-says-jose-manuel-barroso-9131925.html

It would be "extremely difficult, if not impossible" for an independent Scotland to get the necessary approval from the member states for it to join the European Union (EU), the president of the European Commission has said.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11071043/Independent-Scotland-could-not-keep-pound-and-join-EU.html

Scotland must choose between independence and keeping the pound if it wants to be part of the European Union, one of the bloc's top officials has warned.
In a blow to the Yes campaign, Olli Rehn, vice president of the European Parliament and former commissioner for economic and monetary affairs, said keeping the pound without consent from Westminster "would simply not be possible" because EU membership requires countries to have access to an independent central bank.
[...]
"As to the question whether 'sterlingisation' were compatible with EU membership, the answer is that this would simply not be possible since that would obviously imply a situation where the candidate country concerned would not have a monetary authority of its own and thus no necessary instruments of the EMU," he wrote.

Political problems ask for political solutions, and there will be plenty. An independent Scotland could not join the EU right away and that is normal. This is a process which takes time, and it's a well-known fact that to prevent Catalonia from standing up, Spain will do all it can to block Scotland from joining but there are other options.

Look at Norway or Switzerland. Those two are not in the EU, but they enjoy trade agreements with it. That's because besides the EU, there are the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) and the European Economic Area (EEA) which Scotland could join fast.

the choice between the pound or the euro is a tough one. Who to trust, Westminster or Brussels (actually, Frankfurt)?

How about the Scottish Pound, issued by the Central Bank of Scotland, and the cost/price of which is set via interest rates dictated by the very same bank. If the strength of the Scottish economy is all that the Yes campaign would have us believe, and the oil reserves forecasts are all correct etc, then Scotlands credit rating will be AAA and all will be well and good.

I'm not sure the world needs another currency, nor that Scotland would benefit from having its own. The one thing I know for sure is that it would not be easy to create one. And it would years, or more probably decades, before they could get an AAA rating. Like a new company starting business, bankers need time to trust it.

[profitofthegods]

15 days to go. The gap has narrowed so much that now everything will depend upon the turnout. If women, pensioners, urban voters.etc turn out in large numbers, then Scotland will remain a part of the United Kingdom. On the other hand, if large number of youngsters, men, highlanders.etc vote in the referendum, then the Union will lose.

I think this is right - I think Scotland may become independent despite a majority of people not wanting it just because motivating people to get out and vote for the status quo is harder than motivating people to get out and vote for something new and exciting. Having said that, older people are normally more likely to vote, so if they are more in favour of staying in the UK that may cancel out that effect or even have a bigger impact.

[bryant.coleman]

I think this is right - I think Scotland may become independent despite a majority of people not wanting it just because motivating people to get out and vote for the status quo is harder than motivating people to get out and vote for something new and exciting. Having said that, older people are normally more likely to vote, so if they are more in favour of staying in the UK that may cancel out that effect or even have a bigger impact.

The older people are more likely to vote. But at least in this election, the elderly age group lacks enthusiasm are are in general indifferent to the whole process. That said, a lot will depend upon the mobilization efforts. Considering the fact that almost 70% of the elderly are expected to vote NO, I think the Better Together camp will organize special mobilization for them.

[Balthazar]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIQ8VVn8AJA

Craig Murray, former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, tells us why he is YES and reveals some horrendous truths about the UK/Westminster establishment.

[Sindelar1938]

Good on the Scots if that's what they really want
The irony is that the Union of 1707 happened because of economic stagnation and uncertainty, not unlike today

[Nemo1024]

It's still 50/50 chances if this will happen or not.
I think that to much emotions is involved here and no so much reasons.
If Scotland will have to apply to join EU and start their own currency, than independence will be no so good choice for them.
It will be really interesting to see what happens

Why would they need to do so?
Norway refused to join EU twice and is using it's own krone. Norway and Scotland have much in common both when it comes to fjords and gas/oil reserves. Neither need EU. EFTA, at most, would suffice.

[bryant.coleman]

Norway refused to join EU twice and is using it's own krone. Norway and Scotland have much in common both when it comes to fjords and gas/oil reserves. Neither need EU. EFTA, at most, would suffice.

In case of the Scots voting for independence, I don't think that the UK will cede control of the North Sea oil and gas fields. Almost all of these fields are currently being operated by British firms and the loss of these can result in complete economic ruin for England. The marine boundary between England and Scotland is not clearly defined. So I believe that in case of an independent Scotland, the UK will use force and seize all the major fields.

[Balthazar]

Norway refused to join EU twice and is using it's own krone. Norway and Scotland have much in common both when it comes to fjords and gas/oil reserves. Neither need EU. EFTA, at most, would suffice.

In case of the Scots voting for independence, I don't think that the UK will cede control of the North Sea oil and gas fields. Almost all of these fields are currently being operated by British firms and the loss of these can result in complete economic ruin for England. The marine boundary between England and Scotland is not clearly defined. So I believe that in case of an independent Scotland, the UK will use force and seize all the major fields.

That would be a problem because a major part of fleet is located in scottish waters.

[countryfree]

Norway refused to join EU twice and is using it's own krone. Norway and Scotland have much in common both when it comes to fjords and gas/oil reserves. Neither need EU. EFTA, at most, would suffice.

In case of the Scots voting for independence, I don't think that the UK will cede control of the North Sea oil and gas fields. Almost all of these fields are currently being operated by British firms and the loss of these can result in complete economic ruin for England. The marine boundary between England and Scotland is not clearly defined. So I believe that in case of an independent Scotland, the UK will use force and seize all the major fields.

It would be political suicide. We're in the XXI° century. The Brits can't use force against the Scots anymore. It's a political issue asking for a political solution, and there's no force needed as the fields, if in Scottish waters, generate an income which goes straight into British pockets. It's the Scots who may have to use force to get that income to fall into their hands, and that will take years.

[bryant.coleman]

It's a political issue asking for a political solution, and there's no force needed as the fields, if in Scottish waters, generate an income which goes straight into British pockets. It's the Scots who may have to use force to get that income to fall into their hands, and that will take years.

IF Scotland becomes an independent country, and IF these fields still fall within the Scottish borders, then the royalty payments will go to Scotland. Any exception to this is not going to happen. Can you imagine a situation in which England asking for royalty payments from fields in Norway, which are being operated by British firms?

[Bogleg]

It's a political issue asking for a political solution, and there's no force needed as the fields, if in Scottish waters, generate an income which goes straight into British pockets. It's the Scots who may have to use force to get that income to fall into their hands, and that will take years.

IF Scotland becomes an independent country, and IF these fields still fall within the Scottish borders, then the royalty payments will go to Scotland. Any exception to this is not going to happen. Can you imagine a situation in which England asking for royalty payments from fields in Norway, which are being operated by British firms?

Reason why Scottish Independence will not happen. UK will never let go of such lucrative source of income without a fight.

[Balthazar]

Prepare for carousel voting

[profitofthegods]

Prepare for carousel voting

What is carousel voting?

[Balthazar]

Prepare for carousel voting

What is carousel voting?

It's simple.

1) Get a ballot from the previous voter;
2) Mark the "right" answer;
3) Get your ballot at the polling station;
4) Cast your vote using ballot, which was given to you by previous voter;
5) Leave the polling station with your ballot and then give it to next voter;
6) Next voter repeats the same steps with your ballot and so on.

Actually it was a joke and I don't think that any kind of such activity is possible in case of indepencence referendum, because share of loyal voters will be too high. But it's possible in case of elections when there is a competition between two major candidates with similar political orientation.

[countryfree]

It's a political issue asking for a political solution, and there's no force needed as the fields, if in Scottish waters, generate an income which goes straight into British pockets. It's the Scots who may have to use force to get that income to fall into their hands, and that will take years.

IF Scotland becomes an independent country, and IF these fields still fall within the Scottish borders, then the royalty payments will go to Scotland. Any exception to this is not going to happen. Can you imagine a situation in which England asking for royalty payments from fields in Norway, which are being operated by British firms?

That's not my point. What I mean as that many people are making a mistake believing the referendum in two weeks will turn Scotland into an independent country straight away. No. Even with 60% of votes, this will be a very lengthy process. The Clair oilfield, to name one, is 75 km west of Shetland, definitely in Scottish territorial waters. It's operated by BP, but like most oil fields, it has several partners (Shell, Chevron...). Right now, there is a contract between those companies and the UK, so the oil companies pay a share of their income to the UK. There's assuredly something in the contract which allows the oil companies to sell their rights to others oil companies, but I don't think there's a provision to transfer ownership of the fields from to the UK to another party. If something has to change, the oil companies will ask for a complete review of the deal to protect their interests. Don't underestimate the difficulty, they will bring an army of lawyers. There's no doubt Scotland will win the case, but England may want to slow things down, and the process may last five years. Without force, just to make everything legal.

[bryant.coleman]

Surprise... surprise... surprise...



The big question is whether they can sustain the momentum for another two weeks or not.

My advice to the YES camp: discourage English immigrants and the ethnic minorities from casting their vote. Also, make sure that the teenagers and those in their 20s cast their vote. (Polling is usually lower in these groups). Organize special mobilization in the Highlands.

My advice to the NO camp: Encourage elderly voters to cast their vote. Organize special mobilization for the ethnic minorities and the elderly. Also, make sure that the English immigrants are allowed to vote.

[bryant.coleman]

Here are the results from the latest opinion polls:

http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/09/07/scotland-yes-blitzkrieg-wipes-out-no-lead/

Main findings:

#1. Amazingly, 60% of the younger voters (<40 yrs.) want to vote YES.
#2. By two-to-one, Scots say Better Together has been negative
#3. 47% of the women plan to vote YES, the highest figure so far.
#4. Elderly voters are supporting NO by a huge margin (62% vs 38%)
#5. The gender gap has narrowed, but not disappeared

[profitofthegods]

Here are the results from the latest opinion polls:

http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/09/07/scotland-yes-blitzkrieg-wipes-out-no-lead/

Main findings:

#1. Amazingly, 60% of the younger voters (<40 yrs.) want to vote YES.
#2. By two-to-one, Scots say Better Together has been negative
#3. 47% of the women plan to vote YES, the highest figure so far.
#4. Elderly voters are supporting NO by a huge margin (62% vs 38%)
#5. The gender gap has narrowed, but not disappeared

Its innevitable that the Better Together campaign will be negative. You are asking people if they want to change something, and the Better Together campaign is about saying No to that change. No is a negative answer - in fact it is 'the negative'. That doesn't imply its negative in the values sense of being bad.

[bigtimespaghetti]

If that's what they vote (for a set of slightly different masters) then let them have it. Unless they adopt free-er markets (unlikely in the short term) they're   screwed. Though I suppose they can capitalize in the medium term on oilfields (I'm not too clued up on it).

On the plus side it could significantly reduce Labour's strength in the south... While I don't vote myself and the progressive policies merge into pretty much the same, the rhetoric from Labour is economically ignorant. So I guess the least crappy guys (Con men) are better for the country.

Now if UKIP is more than a barking dog, things could get depressingly interesting for a while.

[bigtimespaghetti]

Here are the results from the latest opinion polls:

http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/09/07/scotland-yes-blitzkrieg-wipes-out-no-lead/

Main findings:

#1. Amazingly, 60% of the younger voters (<40 yrs.) want to vote YES.
#2. By two-to-one, Scots say Better Together has been negative
#3. 47% of the women plan to vote YES, the highest figure so far.
#4. Elderly voters are supporting NO by a huge margin (62% vs 38%)
#5. The gender gap has narrowed, but not disappeared

Its innevitable that the Better Together campaign will be negative. You are asking people if they want to change something, and the Better Together campaign is about saying No to that change. No is a negative answer - in fact it is 'the negative'. That doesn't imply its negative in the values sense of being bad.

I think the percentages are hilarious:

Younger voters (prideful and economically ignorant) voting yes. And the elderly worrying about their pensions! 

[bryant.coleman]

Younger voters (prideful and economically ignorant) voting yes. And the elderly worrying about their pensions! 

I don't think that all of the younger voters are economically ignorant. Maybe some of the 16-year olds and 17-year olds might be ignorant. But the same won't be true for those who are in their 30s. These people are from the "Braveheart" generation. That is, the generation which is the most influenced by that movie. For them, independence is more valuable than anything else. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEOOZDbMrgE

[bigtimespaghetti]

Younger voters (prideful and economically ignorant) voting yes. And the elderly worrying about their pensions! 

I don't think that all of the younger voters are economically ignorant. Maybe some of the 16-year olds and 17-year olds might be ignorant. But the same won't be true for those who are in their 30s. These people are from the "Braveheart" generation. That is, the generation which is the most influenced by that movie. For them, independence is more valuable than anything else. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEOOZDbMrgE

You may be right, I don't have a very high opinion of the average voter though (I mean voting to begin with is an act of futility) .. I wish them the best of luck with it.

[Balthazar]

Prepare for carousel voting

What is carousel voting?

It's simple.

1) Get a ballot from the previous voter;
2) Mark the "right" answer;
3) Get your ballot at the polling station;
4) Cast your vote using ballot, which was given to you by previous voter;
5) Leave the polling station with your ballot and then give it to next voter;
6) Next voter repeats the same steps with your ballot and so on.

Actually it was a joke and I don't think that any kind of such activity is possible in case of indepencence referendum, because share of loyal voters will be too high. But it's possible in case of elections when there is a competition between two major candidates with similar political orientation.

Hm, it seems that I was wrong.

http://rt.com/uk/183672-scottish-independence-votes-ebay/

[chipug]

If the result is Yes, it wouldn't be a move to keep GBP as it is but to have our own currency. This currency would just be called the Scottish Pound and start off at same rate as GBP.

The No side want to use this a scaremongering tactic, which may have worked to some extent with many people not realising or forgetting that many places in England won't accept Scottish notes as it is. It wouldn't be much of a big deal to have a Scottish pound.  There are so many fake pound coins in circulation, they will be making a new one in any case.

 

   But I think a big moment that helped swing it for me was in the debate between Salmond and Darling, when Darling made the point that although he wants whats best for the people of Glasgow, Edinburgh and Aberdeen  he also wants whats best for the people of Manchester and Birmingham and Newcastle.
        Well said that man. Magnanimous, compassionate and seeing the bigger picture.

           Better together for me I'm afraid.

It was this debate that cemented my Yes vote. Darling wouldn't even look at Salmond and spent a lot of his time mudslinging rather than getting down to numbers. Pushing the "fear of what could happen to our children" without actually backing that up successfully.

What's best for the people of Manchester and Birmingham and Newcastle is not what's best for us all of the time. We have tried having our own parliament and we still get important issues outvoted by Westminster. They don't take into account what's best for the people of Scotland when making decisions for England so I don't feel that's a good enough statement to vote no on.

Vote Aye for me.

I remember Cameron's speech about scottish independence referendum... He argued that "No" is preferred option and said that union is very beneficial. But he didn't elaborate who is beneficiary.

Himself and England, specifically London.

It will be good for them in any case. Their head of state won't be so crazy, at least.

If Scotland became independent, they would keep the same head of state.

This is the Yes proposal but it would be voted on in independence.

[murraypaul]

If the result is Yes, it wouldn't be a move to keep GBP as it is but to have our own currency. This currency would just be called the Scottish Pound and start off at same rate as GBP.

That is not the position of the Yes Scotland campaign:
http://yesscotland.net/news/common-sense-currency

[chipug]

If the result is Yes, it wouldn't be a move to keep GBP as it is but to have our own currency. This currency would just be called the Scottish Pound and start off at same rate as GBP.

That is not the position of the Yes Scotland campaign:
http://yesscotland.net/news/common-sense-currency

I should've said "might/could" instead of "would."  AFAIK these are options and nothing has been set in stone? Mark Carney saying any move to keep the pound would need to be negotiated on independence being obtained but that he would implement whatever came out of negotiations.

[countryfree]

What about debt? If Scotland gets independence, it will get its share of UK's debt in British pounds. If it has its own currency, would the debtors accept it as payment?

Those things are not easy, and solutions will take years to implement.

[murraypaul]

It will be good for them in any case. Their head of state won't be so crazy, at least.

If Scotland became independent, they would keep the same head of state.

This is the Yes proposal but it would be voted on in independence.

There are no plans for any special vote for that.
Scotland could elect a republican government at a Scottish general election, who could then move to change the head of state.

The Scottish Government’s proposal is that the Queen remains Head of State in Scotland, in the same way as she is currently Head of State in independent nations such as Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
This would be the position for as long as the people of Scotland wished our country to remain a monarchy.
In future Scottish elections voters can elect a party or parties that wish Scotland to become a republic, just as today we could elect politicians to Westminster who want the UK to become a republic.

[Arctic]

What about debt? If Scotland gets independence, it will get its share of UK's debt in British pounds. If it has its own currency, would the debtors accept it as payment?

A yes voter will be along shortly to tell you that if they don't get to share the "asset" of the pound then they won't need to take on any of the "liabilities" = debt either and they will walk away from it.

They'll say this because that is what Alex Salmond always says.

It's completely false of course, there's no way they'd reach that agreement with rUK post a Yes vote. But confirmation bias gets in the way.

[hdbuck]

So if they become independent, is england going to bomb the shit outta them as Ukraine is doing in crimea?

[Balthazar]

So if they become independent, is england going to bomb the shit outta them as Ukraine is doing in crimea?

I don't think that London would need any kind of bombing to resolve this issues by force, because there are enough troops on scottish territory.

Looks like you're confused a little. It's a Donetsk Republic who have seen a kind of ultimate solution through humanitarian bombings shortly after referendum. Nobody bombed Crimea because it would be a suicide for the Ukraine.  

[Paya]

I am not familiar with rules for the Scottish referendum. Do they need 50% + 1 "yes" of all registered voters, or they're counting only those who actually cast their vote?

[hdbuck]

So if they become independent, is england going to bomb the shit outta them as Ukraine is doing in crimea?

I don't think that London will need any kind of humanitarian bombings because there are enough troops on scottish territory.

Looks like you're a little confused. It's a Donetsk Republic who have seen a kind of ultimate solution through humanitarian bombings, shortly after referendum. Nobody bombed Crimea because it would be a suicide for the Ukraine. 

Yea, i was oversimplifying because of the funny parallel.
And "humanitarian bombing", ahahaha. nice one. ^^

However,are you implying that they actually have to be independent to cease fire as it happened in crimea?! go vote dombassers..

[Balthazar]

OK, another offtopic message

go vote dombassers..

They already tried this way and got the bombs & shellings instead of answer. New ceasefire agreement includes a local elections in these regions, but it seems that none of the parties is going to follow this agreement. They have too many mutual trust issues.

However,are you implying that they actually have to be independent to cease fire as it happened in crimea?!

With exception for Sevastopol's incident there was no fighting in the Crimea.   Because RoC and LPR/DPR situations are very different.

• First, it already was an autonomous republic with own judicial, legislative and executive power. It had a legitimate parliament and direct control over police forces.
• Second, a significant part of population here is presented with military personnel, retired officers and their families. They have the skills of warfare, usage of military equipment, etc. In contrast to the Donbass, the military professions are dominant here.
• Third, there were ~10k of russian troops stationed according to treaties. According to these treaties, they were obliged to maintain the security measures in case of emergency situation.

That's the reason why Ukraine never tried, and would never try to do anything there.

P.S. It's interesting that in case of UK - Scotland situation is a kind of opposite. Despite the fact that referendum was allowed by the central government, there are military bases on the Scotland territory. These bases could be used for suppression because there is no 3rd party to stop them.

[murraypaul]

P.S. It's interesting that in case of UK - Scotland situation is a kind of opposite. Despite the fact that referendum was allowed by the central government, there are military bases on the Scotland territory. These bases could be used for suppression because there is no 3rd party to stop them.

It is a rather bizarre suggestion that the UK would use military force to prevent Scotland becoming independent, having just held a referendum on that subject. If Scotland votes for independence, it will become independent. I don't think even the most fervent Yes supporters think anything like that would happen.
The same is true for Northern Ireland. It has been the stated position of the UK government for decades that if a majority of Northern Ireland residents voted for parties supporting independence, the government would work with them to achieve that.

[Balthazar]

It is a rather bizarre suggestion that the UK would use military force to prevent Scotland becoming independent, having just held a referendum on that subject. If Scotland votes for independence, it will become independent.

I don't see anything strange or controversial in this suggestion. Look to the Germany or Japan for examples. They won't use force directly, but simple presence of these bases there gives them some additional influence on the government. No matter good or bad. However, I think that it's not our business.

[murraypaul]

It is a rather bizarre suggestion that the UK would use military force to prevent Scotland becoming independent, having just held a referendum on that subject. If Scotland votes for independence, it will become independent.

I don't see anything strange or controversial in this suggestion. Look to the Germany or Japan for examples. They won't use force directly, but simple presence of these bases there gives them some additional influence on the government. No matter good or bad. However, I think that it's not our business.

If Scotland became independent, those bases would (eventually) be transferred to the new Scottish government.
The logistics are likely to take a while to sort out, given that Trident is based there, and the UK want it and Scotland doesn't.
There is no suggestion that the UK would maintain a permanent military presence, as the US has done, Scotland wouldn't want that, and the UK certainly wouldn't want to pay for it.

[bryant.coleman]

I have a feeling that if Scotland secedes from the UK, then it might trigger a chain reaction. Northern Ireland will be the first one to follow Scotland, as Catholics are nearing a majority there (also, most of the protestants are of Scottish origin). The Isle of Man and the Channel Islands might also witness strong nationalist movement. Wales is quite unlikely to secede, as ethnic Welsh are a minority there.

[Balthazar]

http://rt.com/uk/187624-england-scotland-independence-rally/

15000 migrants are proud to be british for $1/day

[Sindelar1938]

The latest polls show the naysayers sneaking it at the death
Have no beef in this, but hope for the scots that whatever they decide works out or them

[bryant.coleman]

The latest opinion poll (by Yougov) puts YES in the lead with 51% (against 49% for NO). And with less than 100 hours to go for the polls, I have a feeling that this will go to the wire. The winning margin (for which ever side it might be) will be less than 1%. Reminds me of the Quebec (Canada) referendum, where NO beat YES by less than 1% of the votes....

[Lethn]

If they vote yes guys, I'm seriously considering driving over to Scotland and talking to the SNP to see if they'd be willing to adopt an entirely new currency, does anyone else in the UK have some free time that they'd be able to go as well? We could also see if we can't get Max Keiser over there too because it looks like he's back in London now, I could offer people lifts if you're on the route.

[bryant.coleman]

If they vote yes guys, I'm seriously considering driving over to Scotland and talking to the SNP to see if they'd be willing to adopt an entirely new currency, does anyone else in the UK have some free time that they'd be able to go as well?

I don't think they will adopt any currency other than the UKP or the Euro. Since they are going to join the European Union, I think they will prefer the Euro. Also, the British won't be too keen to allow them to use the UK Pound either. There is some discussion going there about the creation of Scottish Pound, but I don't think that will be a viable idea.

[Lethn]

If they vote yes guys, I'm seriously considering driving over to Scotland and talking to the SNP to see if they'd be willing to adopt an entirely new currency, does anyone else in the UK have some free time that they'd be able to go as well?

I don't think they will adopt any currency other than the UKP or the Euro. Since they are going to join the European Union, I think they will prefer the Euro. Also, the British won't be too keen to allow them to use the UK Pound either. There is some discussion going there about the creation of Scottish Pound, but I don't think that will be a viable idea.

It will be if they do it efficiently that's why they need to talk to people who'd know about that sort of thing.

[DhaniBoy]

freedom is the birthright of all nations in the world, taken with the struggle for independence, sometimes many lives must be sacrificed for a freedom, colonialism no longer in accordance with the principles and rights of the nation, even this is not in accordance with the rights of a human person, scottish entitled to independence, as well as with the independence of Palestine is part of the human right to be fought by all of us. hopefully we can fight for the rights of our independence, our nation, and other nations in the world ... 

[Chef Ramsay]

British PM heads to Scotland hoping to boost 'No' vote

Edinburgh (AFP) - British Prime Minister David Cameron on Monday makes his last visit to Scotland ahead of this week's independence referendum, hoping to boost the "No" vote, with polls predicting a very tight race.

Meanwhile, Queen Elizabeth II reportedly made her first comment on the referendum.

British media said the 88-year-old monarch told an onlooker after attending church near her Balmoral estate in the Scottish Highlands on Sunday: "Well, I hope people will think very carefully about the future."

More...http://news.yahoo.com/rivals-bid-votes-knife-edge-scotland-referendum-114656453.html;_ylt=AwrSyCWeDxdU.yYAoL3QtDMD

I'm definitely rooting for the Scots to pull this off.

[hdbuck]

[Balthazar]

That's correct because Homo Sapiens is animal too.

[Balthazar]

Some families in the continental ukraine are considering their relatives in the crimea as traitors. They've also removed them from social network accounts, email contacts, phone books etc. I thought that only ukrainians are capable to think this way, but it seems that idiots are the same everywhere

http://metro.co.uk/2014/09/13/dad-cuts-all-ties-with-daughter-and-deletes-her-from-facebook-because-she-is-voting-for-scottish-independence-4867494/

[Balthazar]

Whatever happens on thursday’s vote, one thing is certain, this photo will haunt you for the rest of your life:

https://twitter.com/ThePoke/status/511084494195933185/photo/1

 

[bryant.coleman]

Some families in the continental ukraine are considering their relatives in the crimea as traitors. They've also removed them from social network accounts, email contacts, phone books etc. I thought that only ukrainians are capable to think this way, but it seems that idiots are the same everywhere

http://metro.co.uk/2014/09/13/dad-cuts-all-ties-with-daughter-and-deletes-her-from-facebook-because-she-is-voting-for-scottish-independence-4867494/

Unfortunately, the generation gap is quite evident in this referendum. The elderly people are like 30% for YES vs 70% for NO, while the youngest age group is something like 65% for YES vs 35% for NO. It was a master stroke from the SNP to grant voting rights to those children in the 16-17 year age group. If they were excluded from the polls, then NO would have held a comfortable lead even now.

[Balthazar]

http://rt.com/uk/188196-scotland-independence-social-media/

​Social Media and #Indyref: What impact will Social Media have on Scotland vote?

[Chef Ramsay]

On a matter as time sensitive as this, the old folks should not vote at all. Let the younger generations have their say in what kind of world they will live in for the rest of their lives. The older generation is directly responsible for what ails much of society today. Yes, I'm playing generation politics here which is unfair and discriminatory but I don't care.

[bryant.coleman]

On a matter as time sensitive as this, the old folks should not vote at all. Let the younger generations have their say in what kind of world they will live in for the rest of their lives. The older generation is directly responsible for what ails much of society today. Yes, I'm playing generation politics here which is unfair and discriminatory but I don't care.

Although I agree with you, in normal cases the voter turnout among the elderly is much higher than that among the younger voters. The elderly do eke out time to go to a polling booth and cast their vote, while most of the youngsters will be busy updating their Facebook status and playing Xbox. Although the enthusiasm is quite high among the Scottish youngsters right now, I don't think their turnout will match that of the oldies.

[Balthazar]

It would be better to add one or two simple logical and arithmetic tasks into the ballot. It would allow us to examine the dependences between (%, turnout) and iq .

[hdbuck]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7qXYaepKPA#t=32

[BetMoose]

Anyone want to place some bets on this? The No side has better odds right now than betfair.

___________

Scotland to vote for independenceOptions: Yes | No

Seems like people that are actually willing to put coin down are expecting 'No'.

[wasserman99]

On a matter as time sensitive as this, the old folks should not vote at all. Let the younger generations have their say in what kind of world they will live in for the rest of their lives. The older generation is directly responsible for what ails much of society today. Yes, I'm playing generation politics here which is unfair and discriminatory but I don't care.

I would agree that this is the most fair, however the opposite will likely happen. At least in the US, the younger generation generally votes in lower numbers and the older generation will generally be the most active voters.

[Balthazar]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7qXYaepKPA

[murraypaul]

Anyone want to place some bets on this? The No side has better odds right now than betfair.

___________

Scotland to vote for independenceOptions: Yes | No

Seems like people that are actually willing to put coin down are expecting 'No'.

I'd expect the No vote to be somewhat higher than the No opinion polls, as I think the No demographic is more likely to actually vote.
It is be close either way though, which could be problematic in itself.
If the result is within a % or two either way, the losing side will claim that the winning side has no real mandate.

[bryant.coleman]

I'd expect the No vote to be somewhat higher than the No opinion polls, as I think the No demographic is more likely to actually vote.

If that is the case, then the margin can get to two figures. The latest opinion polls from Survation places NO at 52% and YES at 48%. But given the fact that the elderly people are more likely to vote, IMO the final margin will be something like 55% vs 45%. Also, the NO camp is mobilizing the immigrants and ethnic minorities all around Scotland.

[murraypaul]

Also, the NO camp is mobilizing the immigrants and ethnic minorities all around Scotland.

You do like to get the racist angle in whenever you can, don't you?
I could just as well say that the YES camp are mobilizing the zenophobes and racists all around Scotland.
And neither statement would give a true picture of what is happening.

[hdbuck]

For the last 50 years, 88% of the countries that voted for their independence voted YES.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-09-16/scottish-referendum-preview-170-years-voters-chose-independence-88-time

[Arctic]

For the last 50 years, 88% of the countries that voted for their independence voted YES.

and what's your point?

[wachtwoord]

For the last 50 years, 88% of the countries that voted for their independence voted YES.

and what's your point?

It's a very interesting list I didn't know existed.

[Balthazar]

Crimea (1991,2014) and Abkhazia (1991,1999) should be added too.

A referendum on sovereignty was held in the Crimean Oblast of the Ukrainian SSR on 20 January 1991.[1] Voters were asked whether they wanted to re-establish the Crimean Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic, which had been abolished in 1945.

Choice   Votes   %
For   1,343,825   94.30
Against   81,254   5.70
Invalid/blank votes   15,910   –
Total   1,441,019   100
Registered voters/turnout   1,770,841   81.37

Final results from the Autonomous Republic of Crimea

Choice   Votes   Percentage of registered voters   Percentage of all ballots cast   Percentage of valid votes
Join the Russian Federation   1,233,002   80.42%   96.77%   97.47%
Restore the 1992 constitution and remain as a part of Ukraine   31,997   2.09%   2.51%   2.53%
Subtotal of valid votes   1,264,999   82.51%   99.29%   100.00%
Invalid or blank votes   9,097   0.59%   0.72%   —
Total votes cast   1,274,096   83.1%   100.00%   —
Registered voters that did not participate   ≈ 259,112   16.9%   —   —
Total registered voters   [f] ≈ 1,533,208   100.00%   —   —

Summary of the 17 March 1991 Abkhazian new union treaty referendum results
Answer   Votes   %
Yes   164,231   98.61
No   1,566   0.94
Invalid   747   0.45
Total amount of votes cast   166,544   100.00
Turnout   166,544   52.32
Number of voters who collected their ballot papers but did not participate in voting   332   0.10
Abstention   151,441   47.58
Total number of registered voters   318,317   100.00

Summary of the 3 October 1999 Abkhazian constitutional referendum results
Result   Votes   %
Agree with the proposal      97.7
Reject the proposal      2.3
Total      100.00
Invalid votes      
Total votes cast (turnout: 87.6%)   
Registered voters   219,534

[hdbuck]

[BADecker]

On a matter as time sensitive as this, the old folks should not vote at all. Let the younger generations have their say in what kind of world they will live in for the rest of their lives. The older generation is directly responsible for what ails much of society today. Yes, I'm playing generation politics here which is unfair and discriminatory but I don't care.

Let's get rid of voting altogether. Go for common law which says freedom for everyone in every way as long as the freedom doesn't:
1. Harm anybody;
2. Damage anyone's property;
3. Break a contract.

[Lethn]

Anyone want to place some bets on this? The No side has better odds right now than betfair.

___________

Scotland to vote for independenceOptions: Yes | No

Seems like people that are actually willing to put coin down are expecting 'No'.

LOL! That's really funny, the username who made it is donaldtrump

[countryfree]

On a matter as time sensitive as this, the old folks should not vote at all. Let the younger generations have their say in what kind of world they will live in for the rest of their lives. The older generation is directly responsible for what ails much of society today. Yes, I'm playing generation politics here which is unfair and discriminatory but I don't care.

Do you realize what you say?

No one should be denied of any rights because of age. The older people have experience. It isn't only about pensions, it's about taking risks, and it's quite normal that the young are bigger risk-takers. The same goes for driving.

[wachtwoord]

On a matter as time sensitive as this, the old folks should not vote at all. Let the younger generations have their say in what kind of world they will live in for the rest of their lives. The older generation is directly responsible for what ails much of society today. Yes, I'm playing generation politics here which is unfair and discriminatory but I don't care.

Do you realize what you say?

No one should be denied of any rights because of age. The older people have experience. It isn't only about pensions, it's about taking risks, and it's quite normal that the young are bigger risk-takers. The same goes for driving.

Taking educated risks is the way forward. The route away from stagnation. The route away from Brittan.

[Balthazar]

On a matter as time sensitive as this, the old folks should not vote at all. Let the younger generations have their say in what kind of world they will live in for the rest of their lives. The older generation is directly responsible for what ails much of society today. Yes, I'm playing generation politics here which is unfair and discriminatory but I don't care.

Do you realize what you say?

No one should be denied of any rights because of age. The older people have experience. It isn't only about pensions, it's about taking risks, and it's quite normal that the young are bigger risk-takers. The same goes for driving.

I haven't seen such idealism during a long time. Populist decisions are good in short-term but could result with inevitable crash in the long term. A majority of older people would always prefer to vote for populist decisions rather than good long-term solutions, that's a main issue of the representative democracy. Populists are exploiting them by offering lower taxes, higher pensions, "stability" etc. It's the same everywhere and their experience is usually irrelevant.

[yayayo]

On a matter as time sensitive as this, the old folks should not vote at all. Let the younger generations have their say in what kind of world they will live in for the rest of their lives. The older generation is directly responsible for what ails much of society today. Yes, I'm playing generation politics here which is unfair and discriminatory but I don't care.

Do you realize what you say?

No one should be denied of any rights because of age. The older people have experience. It isn't only about pensions, it's about taking risks, and it's quite normal that the young are bigger risk-takers. The same goes for driving.

I haven't seen such idealism during a long time. Populist decisions are good in short-term but could result with inevitable crash in the long term. A majority of older people would always prefer to vote for populist decisions rather than good long-term solutions, that's a main issue of the representative democracy. Populists are exploiting them by offering lower taxes, higher pensions, "stability" etc. It's the same everywhere and their experience is usually irrelevant.

The same is true with women. Women as a group like to preserve the status quo. They hesitate to take risks, even if the relation between risk and reward is highly favorable. In politics most women vote for candidates that either look trustworthy or offer comforting messages. Not so much because of serious interest in political topics.

So without women being allowed to vote we would see a lot more progress in the world. Just saying.

ya.ya.yo!

[leannemckim46]

On a matter as time sensitive as this, the old folks should not vote at all. Let the younger generations have their say in what kind of world they will live in for the rest of their lives. The older generation is directly responsible for what ails much of society today. Yes, I'm playing generation politics here which is unfair and discriminatory but I don't care.

Do you realize what you say?

No one should be denied of any rights because of age. The older people have experience. It isn't only about pensions, it's about taking risks, and it's quite normal that the young are bigger risk-takers. The same goes for driving.

The outcome of the vote will impact younger voters more then older voters. His argument is that more people whose lives will be impacted the longest should vote in larger numbers.

A vote that affects all voters for the same amount of time (for congress or the president for example) is a very different story because such a small percentage of votes will die before they have the chance to vote again for the same issue.

[foxbitcoin]

With the results in from all 32 council areas, the "No" side won with 2,001,926 votes over 1,617,989 for "Yes".

[hdbuck]

Poor scotland. They dropped this opportunity to cut loose, the next one is not going to be so peaceful.

[Lethn]

Poor scotland. They dropped this opportunity to cut loose, the next one is not going to be so peaceful.

They were a bunch of pussies, I honestly think that was part of the problem, because they were talking about things like trying to keep the pound and so on, that's not what somebody who truly wants independence does.

[hdbuck]

Poor scotland. They dropped this opportunity to cut loose, the next one is not going to be so peaceful.

They were a bunch of pussies, I honestly think that was part of the problem, because they were talking about things like trying to keep the pound and so on, that's not what somebody who truly wants independence does.

I guess people are just afraid of the unknown. Specially the old people, they dont want their habits to change. Very sad that they refuse the young their independence and a much brighter future away from pounds, banksters et al.. embrace misery and cowardliness.

[Lethn]

Poor scotland. They dropped this opportunity to cut loose, the next one is not going to be so peaceful.

They were a bunch of pussies, I honestly think that was part of the problem, because they were talking about things like trying to keep the pound and so on, that's not what somebody who truly wants independence does.

I guess people are just afraid of the unknown. Specially the old people, they dont want their habits to change. Very sad that they refuse the young their independence and a much brighter future away from pounds, banksters et al.. embrace misery and cowardliness.

Not to worry, the old people will be dead in 20 or so years and the Scottish might get another chance

[Arctic]

I think you'll find that in 20 years time there will be a new batch of old people to replace the current ones...

[Balthazar]

I think you'll find that in 20 years time there will be a new batch of old people to replace the current ones...

I guess that won't help.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=788220.msg8892843#msg8892843

Westminster officials shouldn't take any part in organization of local referendums. Otherwise we'll see the same results every time.

[Paya]

This referendum isn't the end of the world, Scots might get another chance in 15-20 years. This generation probably lost it, though. Independists will have more than enough time to rethink their strategy and to find out why the majority of people wasn't convinced that independent Scotland would be better for them.

[hdbuck]

This referendum isn't the end of the world, Scots might get another chance in 15-20 years. This generation probably lost it, though. Independists will have more than enough time to rethink their strategy and to find out why the majority of people wasn't convinced that independent Scotland would be better for them.

Yea right excatly the same as the majority of people are going to take their time to figure bitcoin is freedom. Maybe next generation. Fucking sheeps.

[leannemckim46]

Poor scotland. They dropped this opportunity to cut loose, the next one is not going to be so peaceful.

They were a bunch of pussies, I honestly think that was part of the problem, because they were talking about things like trying to keep the pound and so on, that's not what somebody who truly wants independence does.

I guess people are just afraid of the unknown. Specially the old people, they dont want their habits to change. Very sad that they refuse the young their independence and a much brighter future away from pounds, banksters et al.. embrace misery and cowardliness.

I would disagree. The scottland economy would be much weaker without being part of the UK, and having their own currency would mean less stable prices. One reason why many people did not vote "yes" was because the Bank of England said that an independent scottland would not be able to use the british pound after an 18 month grace period

[Nemo1024]

When 'Yes' means 'No'...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUR-HgAtwtg

[hdbuck]

Poor scotland. They dropped this opportunity to cut loose, the next one is not going to be so peaceful.

They were a bunch of pussies, I honestly think that was part of the problem, because they were talking about things like trying to keep the pound and so on, that's not what somebody who truly wants independence does.

I guess people are just afraid of the unknown. Specially the old people, they dont want their habits to change. Very sad that they refuse the young their independence and a much brighter future away from pounds, banksters et al.. embrace misery and cowardliness.

I would disagree. The scottland economy would be much weaker without being part of the UK, and having their own currency would mean less stable prices. One reason why many people did not vote "yes" was because the Bank of England said that an independent scottland would not be able to use the british pound after an 18 month grace period

pff you dont have the beginning of a clue as to what could happen. This is like the global warming scam, you are all afraid and crave paying taxes and be dominated by some psychopathic elite. If bitcoin taught me something, it is that independence is precious. Every single people should be independent. Sure it may not be easy in the beginning because those fucking banksters et al are going to crush you with their money (werent the banks in scotland threatening to flee to london? rofl fucking joke those scums), trying to prevent you from breaking free from this corrupted and enslaving system.