Salmond "We can take Scotland in two weeks"

[Batcher]

Gordon Brown had the highest office (in the economics sphere) that this country has to offer, he still made a c**t of it.

I'm just waiting one of you quoting him as gospel next

Don't Panic!!

Speaking on behalf of the Yes Scotland campaign, former Scottish Labour Party chairman and Labour for Independence campaigner Bob Thomson said: "This smacks of utter panic and desperation by the No campaign as they lose their lead in the polls. Gordon Brown is in no position to offer anything - he is a backbench MP, and the Tories are in power at Westminster.

"The choice is to vote Yes for all the powers we need to create jobs and protect Scotland's NHS - or No for a Tory-led talking shop. The people of Scotland will not trust the Tories to deliver powers that in any event fall far short of what we need. The sure fire way to achieve the full range of powers Scotland needs to build a fairer society and more prosperous economy is to vote Yes a week on Thursday."

[EternalOptimist]

Brown has one eye on the future of the labour party. and the other up the chimbley.
bobble eyed *****

[Batcher]

Why are the 'yes' posters apolitical, but the 'no' posters all Scottish Labour branded?

And is Scottish Labour the same as Labour or is it a different party?

It's part of the No campaign's problem that they are trying to be one thing they are not - united.

They like to say it's a different party but there is no such thing registered as Scottish Labour. It is the 'Labour Party in Scotland' to give it it's proper title and it's run from London. They have a Scottish leader but she has to toe the party line and can't make decisions without it being okayed from London.

They have different views from London sometimes as they need to be seen to be opposing the SNP in Scotland. e.g. The Labour Party in London supported minimum pricing of alcohol whilst the Scottish version opposed it as the SNP had proposed it. Also, Andy Burnham has joined the marchers against NHS privatisation in London but in Scotland they denied it was happening.

[sirja]

Interesting comments for Nobel winning Economist Paul Krugman...

In his latest piece for the New York Times, liberal columnist and celebrated economic thinker Paul Krugman weighs in on the sudden possibility
that, after centuries of membership within the United Kingdom, voters in Scotland may soon vote to make their land an independent nation.
His advice: “Be afraid, be very afraid.”

“The risks of going it alone are huge,” Krugman warns. “You may think that Scotland can become another Canada,
but it’s all too likely that it would end up becoming Spain without the sunshine.”

At the heart of it, Krugman’s warning is not about the value of Scottish culture or any of the more on-the-ground level
arguments that have characterized the debate in the U.K. Instead, Krugman is focused on how the Scottish independence
movement has seemed to ignore one of the main lessons of
the recent past, one that Krugman himself has been sharing repeatedly in his columns for at least the past five years: t
he danger of not controlling your own currency.

“The Scottish independence movement has been very clear that it intends to keep the pound as the national currency,”
Krugman writes, after noting earlier that voters’ fear of economic dislocation is the main impediment to the independence movement’s victory.
“And the combination of political independence with a shared currency is a recipe for disaster,” he continues. “Which is where the cautionary
tale of Spain comes in.”

Krugman next explains the recent economic history of Spain, a country that does not control its currency (it’s on the euro),
and whose economy has suffered massively in the years following the pop of the real estate bubble that ballooned in many
Western economies — including Spain’s — during the middle of the previous decade. “Spain … bore all the costs of the housing bust on its own,”
Krugman argues, and ultimately faced “a fiscal crisis, made much worse by fears of a banking crisis that the Spanish government would be unable
to manage, because it might literally run out of cash.”
advertisement

In the end, Krugman says, the result has been “a horrific depression — including youth unemployment above 50 percent — from which Spain
has barely begun to recover.”

Having laid out the Spain example, Krugman thus leaves Scottish voters with one final warning:

[E]verything that has happened in Europe since 2009 or so has demonstrated that sharing a currency without sharing a
government is very dangerous. In economics jargon, fiscal and banking integration are essential elements of an optimum currency
area. And an independent Scotland using Britain’s pound would be in even worse shape than euro countries, which at least have some say
in how the European Central Bank is run.

I find it mind-boggling that Scotland would consider going down this path after all that has happened in the last few years.
If Scottish voters really believe that it’s safe to become a country without a currency, they have been badly misled.

[EternalOptimist]

It's part of the No campaign's problem that they are trying to be one thing they are not - united.

They like to say it's a different party but there is no such thing registered as Scottish Labour. It is the 'Labour Party in Scotland' to give it it's proper title and it's run from London. They have a Scottish leader but she has to toe the party line and can't make decisions without it being okayed from London.

They have different views from London sometimes as they need to be seen to be opposing the SNP in Scotland. e.g. The Labour Party in London supported minimum pricing of alcohol whilst the Scottish version opposed it as the SNP had proposed it. Also, Andy Burnham has joined the marchers against NHS privatisation in London but in Scotland they denied it was happening.

thats a bit weak. I want Scottish independance because the No campaign is a bit disunited.


er.....

stick to the positive reasons biatch

[TestMangler]

thats a bit weak. I want Scottish independance because the No campaign is a bit disunited.


er.....

stick to the positive reasons biatch

Don't think that was the point of his post EO. It was in answer to MS's question as to why the no campaign were disguising themselves as Labour and using labour colours etc.

[Batcher]

thats a bit weak. I want Scottish independance because the No campaign is a bit disunited.


er.....

stick to the positive reasons biatch

That's not what I said. I was explaining part of the reason the No campaign is failing.

[jemb]

Yes voters don't even understand devloution

Also, Andy Burnham has joined the marchers against NHS privatisation in London but in Scotland they denied it was happening.

....but the NHS in Scotland is a totally different beast to that in the rest of the UK - you do understand that don't you?

No? Really? Sigh.
Health policy in Scotland is the total preserve of the Scottish Parliament.
You didn't know that? Why does that not surprise me.

Only a Scottish Parliament can privatise the NHS in Scotland because health policy up here, along with education and the legal system, is the responsibility of Scottish ministers answerable only to the Scottish Parliament

If you are going to vote Yes - at least try and understand the issues and understand the paucity of some of your (non) arguments.

[EternalOptimist]

Don't think that was the point of his post EO. It was in answer to MS's question as to why the no campaign were disguising themselves as Labour and using labour colours etc.

the no campaign is not based upon a party. its pretty broad based
it includes many non politicals (like me)
imho, its up to the Yes people to make their case. In a positive way

[TestMangler]

the no campaign is not based upon a party. its pretty broad based
it includes many non politicals (like me)
imho, its up to the Yes people to make their case. In a positive way

And the connection between your post and mine or Mudskippers is ??

I wasn't commenting on the state/position or effectiveness of either campaign. The discussion was in response to MS's question about why the no campaign was using official labour colours.