topcat

Feeling hungry? ... ... then get yourself across to Manchester - they're giving away free hot dogs

1. if the vote is yes and some short sighted CEOs decide to up sticks and go south to appease their shareholders then I would fully expect they will be offering top-end sector leading relocation packages to their highly skilled workers to retain their services - it would simply not be possible to shut down in one city and open up at same capacity next day in another city with a fresh workforce up to speed on company policy and procedures - Standard Life and others news isn't new - they came out as firm No's a long time ago so are just getting their twobobs worth in the mix at a crucial time (not surprising to know that the standard life chairman used to have function at the MoD so throroghly establishment and not very objective) - as already stated they are spending a shitload on upgrading their HQ at the moment so undoubtedly just at the sabre rattling - any lost job would be a personal short term tragedy to any worker but realistically the same fate faces workers in the event of a No vote ... we stay part of the union but end up with huge cuts to the yearly handout from westminster resulting in the axe falling on thousands of workers in the public sector as councils pass on the budget cut to departments 2. the SNP have run the country well for two terms but realistically the whole political landscape in the event of a Yes should change - the SNP's sole raison d'etre (independence) would be realised and you have to wonder if they would be finished outright ... labours vote has been on the slide in past 6 years and the efforts of miliband and lamont have been pitiful (traditional labour voters deserting in droves since Blair/Iraq and now sharing an idealogical platform with the Tories on this) ... Tories are gubbed for next 30 years until the spectre of Thatcher is forgotten ... Libdems on slide too .... all in all leaving quite possible a yawning political chasm. Personally I reckon Salmond would stick it out for the negotiations over next year and a half but then step aside having realised his dream. I was working at the exams body over the weekend and some quite clever people round the table were still under the impression that this is all about salmond - it's not!

Good to see you are perpetuating the myth that it's all about you when the converse is true - once devolution kicked off in 1997, and with the slow demise of the labour party vote in Scotland (coupled with the rise in support for the SNP) then independence was always going to be the natural/possible end game Can't wait for the three amigos heading north tomorrow with their last minute desperate offer - should be a bumper day for the swing voters turning to Yes !

In a previous post on this thread I alluded to this being the case - it does however appear the ground has shifted in recent weeks - event the missus and her Tory supporting family have voted yes (postal votes)

Double good news day for the Yes campaign ... First we get royal baby announcement followed by Gordon Brown (a former dud PM, co-pilot of an economic shambles and a current back bencher with no powers whatsoever) pitch up and tell us how we'll all be better off together but with nothing in writing - panic button pressed after weekend polls I reckon. The additional powers (or devo max) option was removed by the establishment from the proposed ballot paper - now it's big Gordy dispatched north to sell it to us. Oh the banter - the joy of seeing the Labour Party side with the Orange Order, the BNP, the Tories, UKIP, the EDL and the Glib Dums is a sad sight indeed.

Debate was a shambles (as expected) - with BT continuing to peddle currency issue as they perceive it to be a weak point in the Yes argument - Salmond ,missed a trick to nail Darling (a slippery wee khunt) to the floor. Like JJ I'll be voting Yes and not particularly worried about the poll ratings at the moment - BT have to get their lot motivated to actually get out and cast their vote as most of them that I know have let on they most probably won't vote on the day.

and there it is - a quality comment from the terminally misinformed and smacking of that dominant partner arrogance that we have come to expect - lording it up from north sea reveues all the while the following figures pass you by ... - in 2011/12 Scotland contributed £56.9 billion in tax revenue, which isequivalent to £10,700 per person, compared to £9,000 per person for the UK as a whole; - since 1980/81 Scotland has contributed £222 billion more in tax revenues than if it had just matched the per capita contributions of the UK.

KCG has a valid point ...namely what would happen to the rest of the UK in the event of a YES vote ... there would have to be significant debate over whether it is a new state or a continuing one given the rest of the UK's slimmed down status. All UK signed treaties like agriculture and fishing which would be rendered redundant overnight. Scotland has also adhered to EU law for nearly 40 years so that would possibly be suspended in any interim period. As for Barosso he was talking absolute pish - led by the hand by Marr this morning and asked the real unionist question (strangely enough the interview was on the the BBC) and subsequently allowed the latitude to give the big scary story du jour - I thought they might have waited a week or so with this but they are really going for it good style. He was alluding to either a Spanish veto OR a UK veto on our future membership (presuming we even want to join it in the first place). However with that ginger twat Danny Alexander already stating on the record that the UK will recognise Scotland as an indepebdent nation it rules out a UK veto. As such recognition is in place it also rules out a Spanish veto ... Spain only oppose Kosovo as Serbia doesn't recognise their independent nationhood. Barosso talked about it being "difficult" and "if not impossible" ... to anyone with half a brain that means that is is, indeed, possible after all - no story here so fkin jog ron. I'll leave you with a link to Gideon and his smartphone clutching aides running away from Edinburgh - refusing again to engage with STV - seems that they only want to brief the BBC just now http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHzRILA43xU

You are correct we did ask for clarity - and what we got was a BofE chairman telling us it was possible followed swiftly by Gideon arriving in Edinburgh, dropping the 'ye canny hav oor money' speech and then running out a side door without taking any questions - how very democratic and accountable. What most commentators didn't pick up from his speech was that there was some wriggle room - saying what they like now but come September and a possible YES vote he'll be on the blower pronto trying to broker a deal. Next weeks scare story will be along the lines of 'the EU won't have you" - from a Tory party who are having an in/out referendum at some point (hoping to come out ). It therefore follows that if the UK government have effectively closed ranks and are prepared to play hardball then so too should the SNP/supporters of the YES campaign - i.e. don't give us the pound or any share of the assets and you can shove you debt right up your hole. You really woudn't expect the YES crew to roll over and say tickle my fekin tummy. Effectively though it matters not a jot whether we keep the pound (which is partly ours as well), or continue to print our bank notes (aka funny money) and strike up a mint to print coins - either having a Scots pound as was the case pre-1707 which will eventually move over to the Euro OR having our pound linked to sterling in some way. The Wall Street Journal has alluded to this in recent weeks and has openly stated that Gideon 'hasn't got things right'. Commentators have stated that it is "viable" and "easy to implement option" to link a future Scots pound to sterling one-for-one and there would be little any Chancellor could do about it. You also have to question Gideon down there a bit more closely - is he and his cross party chums - really prepared to rule out a currency union that will cost the remaining UK taxpayers (i.e. you lot) possibly billions of pounds, blow a feking huge hole in your balance of payments, and also left having to fully pick up the tab for the whole UK debt - might be why he ran away and didn't want to answer any questions on the matter. As the polls narrow towards parity between YES and NO it makes me wonder what other utter drivel and hyperbole we'll be subjected to from the NO camp in the coming months.

It continues to alarm me that Ewerk thinks I'm some sort of Saltire waving haggis shagging recreator of the Bannockburn spirit - when nothing could be further from the truth - and yes I do know it's an internet discussion board and (by and large) these forums do have a proportion of absolute dafties and trolls but hiscontinued assertions in this regard are well wide of the mark. Onto the studying of the facts. I have read (cover to cover - and available free of charge if you wish a copy) the following document: Published by the SNP it details, as much as any forward plan can two years ahead of time, how they see things panning out. It continues in the same positive manner as Scottish politics has developed since devolution - one that continues the ideals of a fairer society for all who live here. It's now out there and the opposition are taking aim at every page (currently on currency) but in doing so are trodding down an extremely divisive and negative path. So despite reading this document I would still not say I am in possession of ALL of the facts. I have waited each day for the Better Together campaign to put together a similar document detailing why, indeed, we would be better off with the status quo. However they simply cannot splice anything cohesive together for publication as they know Salmond will tear it to shreds. He's not some bogey man as he's being made out - he can be a total pain in the ar*e but he is, like it or not, a clever politician and staggeringly head and shoulders politically above any MSP up here ... and the reluctance of Cameron to concede to a televised debate also shows the understanding that he fears being ripped apart on national TV. If the BT campaign ever get round to publishing a document then I'll happily order a copy and read it cover to cover too. You also assert that I am the YES campaign's dream voter. I alluded in a previous post to (quote) I will be voting YES and I am unlikely to be swayed by the incessantly negative politics emanating from Westminster . I stand by that quote in contradiction of your dream voter tag, I remain open to discussion of facts - sadly there are no positive poilitics emanating from the No camp for me to make a fully informed decision - therefore at the moment it is a YES. Regrettably though, it suits the unionist parties to peddle the daily negative scare stories in the hope that the constant drip drip will seep into the minds of the undecided. The latest one is the front page of the Glasgow Herald newspaper where apparently we will be denied independence even if we vote YES - has this been given top billing on the BBC news or do they continue to push the currency agenda? Yet another negative story which perhaps will undoubtedly push some peolple over to the YES side - and I agree that after Carney from the Bank of England spoke canidly that a currency union may be possible the other week, Gideon has come out to say it can'y happen shows that they are perhaps getting rather worried that the BT campaign is having so little effect. Finally, I'll leave Ewerk with a question - what have all these places have in common? Federation of South Arabia, Sudan, Australia, The Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Lesotho Basutoland, Bermuda, Botswana, British Antarctic Territory, Guyana, British Guiana Belize British Honduras, British Indian Ocean Territory, Solomon Islands, British Somaliland Protectorate (left in 1964), British Virgin Islands, Brunei, Burma (left in 1966), Cayman Islands,Dominion of Ceylon Ceylon (Sri Lanka), Cyprus, Egypt (left in 1947), Falkland Islands, Fiji, The Gambia, Ghana, Gibraltar, Tuvalu Gilbert and Ellice Islands (Kiribati and Tuvalu), Hong Kong, Iceland, Republic of Ireland (until 1971), India (including Sikkim), Iraq (left in 1959) Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait AnguillaAntigua and Barbuda,Montserrat,Saint Kitts and Nevis Leeward Islands (comprising Anguilla, Antigua and Barbuda, Montserrat, and Saint Kitts (Saint Christopher and Nevis)) Libya (expelled in 1971) Malawi Malaysia Maldives Maldive Islands Malta Mauritius Oman Muscat and Oman (Sultanate of Oman) Nauru New Zealand (including, Cook Islands, Niue, and Tokelau Islands) Nigeria Israel British Mandate for Palestine (required to withdraw in 1948 following the creation of the state of Israel & New Breed Pakistan Papua New Guinea Pitcairn Islands Qatar Rhodesia (Zimbabwe) (expelled in 1965) Saint HelenaUnited KingdomTristan da Cunha Saint Helena (including Ascension Island and Tristan da Cunha) Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore South Africa Namibia South West Africa (Namibia) Swaziland Tanganyika Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Oman Trucial Oman (United Arab Emirates) United Kingdom Turks and Caicos Islands Uganda the Channel Islands, and the Isle of Man Samoa Dominica,Grenada,Saint Lucia,Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Windward Islands (comprising Dominica, Grenada, Saint Lucia, and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines) Zambia Zanzibar

That may be your opinion sir, but I can absolutely assure you that I am neither anti-England/UK/London or any other tag you wish to put on me - it may be hard for you to get your head round that the Tartan army invasions for the bi-annual match at Wembley and the jingositic kilt and glengarry wearing anti-English nonsense that was part and parcel of it in the 60's and 70's has largely gone by-the-by over the years and really only applied to a minority of the population. The TA may have sang about hating England but they also sang about Jimmy Hill being a poof and going to win he world cup - in the grand scheme of things none of them were really firmly held beliefs at all. You may very well be of the opinion that currency blah blah blah is important but that's only becaulse the BBC EBC are giving it so much airtime - say it often enough and peolple start to believe it (weapons of mass destruction anyone?). What you maybe haven't realised yet is that the BBC also have a strong vested interest in the outcome of the vote ... as should we go we'd still get the TV and radio output but they wouldn't have a mandate to collect the licence fee - hence the output so far nationally being heavily weighted towards the No campaign and the media manipulation by the Tories - anything to get the news away from a few puddles down on the Somerset levels. Simple fact is I'm a Scot who lives up here and therefore I'm entitled to vote any way I wish. I will be voting YES and I am unlikely to be swayed by the incessantly negative politics emanating from Westminster or from the parties whose HQ is in London purporting to be 'Scottish' branches of the parties who have consistently failed to grow some balls and have their own opinion (I personally know of a few labour MP's and MSP's - also related to a sitting MP - who privately confide that they are being denied any voice at all on the matter). I still would like a bit of grown up discussion from the No side but sadly, as things stand, they have offered littlle of anything constructive and seem happy to stick out a wee scare story every day. Finally, given the fact that we have more pandas up here than Tory MP's, it really is not a wise move for these chaps to be seen to be lecturing us on a daily basis - we all remember Thatcher and what she did to us and the north of England/Wales and have long memories - but I'm delighted that they care so much to continually blather on about it - even the mother-in-law has swung towards the YES side last week which I never saw coming at all ... that swing was solely attributed to Cameron's speech at the velodrome - lecturing us from London didn't go down too well with the old bat.

The three major (London-centric) parties will continue to have a vested interest up here as, should we vote for independence, they will be actively campaigning to form the first post-independence government (i.e. it won't automatically belong to the SNP) - so they can effectively link arms just now and say they'll take our toffee apples away but if the vote ids YES they'll undoubtedly get their sweaty arses back round the table pronto so as not to appear a bunch of obtuse phannies. As for currency, pound/euro/zloty/puggy tokens/shortbread biscuits - couldn't give a flying phuck what's rattling about my pocket - but I'm not buying any shite spouted by Gideon and his 'independent' civil servant bum chums.

aye i suppose so ... but if you plan to come and visit better get your visa and inocculations before onward travel across the border

The solution to the currency issue is the unionist based politicians getting round the table with the SNP and having some proper grown up discussions about the currency - Salmond has been waiting for this for months but all he's getting is playgroung bullsh*t from the politicians in the south east. Most folk I know up here is have no real interest in the 'you're going to be poores/richer' argument (depending on who you listen to) - it's just not the major issue it's being made out to be in the media just now - the bottom line is that on a single day in September, the people of Scotland have a single question to decide whether we want to stay or go - the details and minutae will be thrashed out later before separation in March 2016.

That was a truly shockingly piss poor performance last night - think I preferred the difficult 4 hour speed limited drive back north in a poorly insulated minibus through the brutal sidewinds and pishing snow - at least I got to my kip just after 2am

Tell you what though - every time some English tory twat like Osborne opens his mouth and spouts some bollocks it guarantees an extra few thousand votes for the YES campaign - so I hope the Eton fandans keep talking all the way to September. Bottom line is come 2016 and Independence day 1 we can keep using the pound and there's effectively feck all the current UK treasury can be done about it. Also interesting to note that in the last 9 months I have heard not a single positive bit of politics from the NO campaign - there has been no explanation of why indeed we would be ' better together ' apart from cringy sh*te like this from fake jocks who don't even have the vote! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sArFksxhV-0#t=0

I'm bringing a minibus full of kids down for this match and will be in the upper leazes - it's our first night game in the Toon so any info on the state of the parking in the car parks beside the Strawberry boozer around 5pm would be appreciated (as the weekend games they are usually ok) - regrettably I feel this game has 0-0 written all over it.

The good thing about England is ... leaving it and seeing this sign on the M74 as you leave! - makes the hairs on my back stand up every time!

Can't wait on the odds to be posted for the Scotland v aussie ODI on 3rd September ... both teams with decent bowlers but neither can bat for fukin toffee so might be worth a punt on us jocks to do the green caps if the weather up here holds for the day

It's cheating in my book as it wasn't a wee tiny edge that he might not have felt - he fekin knew. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gVI8sOtdNk - apparently an Aussie has walked before I do however understand though that if the batsman walks and takes the morally correct route then they do so within the spirit of the game AND that they also have the right to stay and wait for an umpires decision under the laws of the game .. doesn't make it OK and shows an increasing footballisation of cricket which makes it harder to get across to the youth in the clubs up here

Diego Maradona - hand of god v England 1986 Lance Armstrong - doper Stuart Broad - didn't walk All cheating basteds in my book - but it's apparently OK as the Aussies don't walk and they'd used up their reviews (what a total c*ck Geoffrey Boycott is).

Spot on - they've just done a 1300km high speed line in 3 years - no CPO's over there though ... get in their way and you'll simply disappear overnight and never be seen again! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/8600749/China-to-open-Beijing-Shanghai-high-speed-rail-link.html

Fuk me that was a long day yesterday - back home and in a right bad mood today - total bollox back to front (krul exception though kept you in it) cisse and ba never put themselves about (or ameobi when he came on) all 3 seemed to want long balls on their chest or feet or they weren't fkin interested never chased anything back - ben arfa looked like the only one in midfield that wanted the ball but had fuk all options on most of the time and ended up dribbling into brick walls - rest of the midfield posted missing Thought the visitors were pulling the strings most of the game and looked like they could've killed it off if they really wanted - but seemed happy enough with being one up. Just hope they get a fkin rocket up their arses and start putting in a shift regularly on the pitch.