It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Billions of pounds wiped from value of Scottish firms after yes vote

page: 2
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 11:50 AM
link   
I haven't been following the issue as closely as others, but the prevailing thought I've had is what incentive is there to allow a fair vote in the first place? I believe that whenever anything of importance is voted upon, if it can be rigged by those with the money and a vested interest, it will be rigged. I firmly believe that it is quite possible to do such a thing. In fact, it would not be that difficult to enact certain security measures into any voting system, but I have not seen such a system put in place where many important votes are concerned...such as those that are essential to ensuring people elect their leaders. Perhaps it is impossible to ensure a fair vote, considering many people believe that money is more important than morality, and who would be willing to not do their job properly if they were paid well. And they wouldn't be that wrong, considering society conditions us to believe money is the most important thing, as we need it for just about everything. Give people the appearance of a fair voting system and there will be fewer people who protest the outcome of said vote. That is what I would be watching out for with this upcoming vote.
edit on 9/8/14 by JiggyPotamus because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: crayzeed

That seems more than likely and is certainly part of the story for some.

There is bound to be much more to it also. There are those who plant oak forests for the benefit of descendants they will never know. Such it is with Scottish Independence.

When I first stayed in Scotland in 1979 there was much talk of the motives for the road improvements being made. The way it was being done didn't match the needs. One possible motive could rapid transport for the 'elite' to their refuges in times of need.

Those doubtful don't know how important bloodlines are to the Scottish 'elite'. Arranged marriages are standard in the higher echelons of Scottish society. Read this for a snapshot. www.heraldscotland.com...

It goes far beyond the everyday considerations of simple country folk like ourselves.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 12:08 PM
link   
a reply to: flammadraco

This one. www.abovetopsecret.com...

It's a fraudulent story calculated to sway undecided voters who don't have time for in-depth research.

The 'elite' chose Scotland as a refuge several generations ago. It's what the clearances were for. Get the strong, native inhabitants out to make room for the inbred creeps. They're playing the independence vote to their benefit. Time will tell exactly how.

Source? I'm like Mary Poppins. I flounce upstairs when I'm asked difficult questions.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 12:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Kester

The Boris article from The Telegraph this morning.

www.telegraph.co.uk... er.html


Scottish independence: Decapitate Britain, and we kill off the greatest political union ever
The Scots are on the verge of an act of self-mutilation that will trash our global identity.

Right: it’s time to speak for Britain. If these polls are right, then we are on the verge of an utter catastrophe for this country. In just 10 days’ time we could all be walking around like zombies – on both sides of the Scottish border.
I don’t just mean that we will be in a state of shock, though that will obviously be true: most people (especially the Scots) have yet to think through the horrific financial and constitutional implications of an English-Scottish divorce.
I mean that we will be zombies, walking dead, because a fundamental part of our identity will have been killed. We will all have lost a way of thinking about ourselves, a way of explaining ourselves to the world. We are on the verge of trashing our global name and brand in an act of self-mutilation that will leave our international rivals stunned, gleeful and discreetly scornful.

We are told that if Scotland votes to cut its ties with England, that will be a disaster on a par with the loss of the American colonies in 1776; but it is far worse than that. Scotland isn’t a colony, for heaven’s sake. It’s a part of our being, of what makes us “us”. This vote isn’t just about saying “yes” to Scotland – as the ballot paper seductively and misleadingly implies. Under any circumstances, Scotland will exist and prosper. Under any circumstances people will wave blue and white Scottish flags and take pride in their Scottish nation and its success. Alex Salmond and his crew aren’t really asking people to say “yes” to Scotland’s success; they are asking them to say “no” to one of the oldest and most successful political unions in history. The Salmond campaign is not a manifesto for creation, but for destruction.

What we are fighting to protect is not so much the Act of Union of 1707, or even the United Kingdom. The Government has decided that in the event of the Scots voting to break away, the “UK” will simply refer in future to England, Wales and Northern Ireland; though no one seems to have a clue exactly what this truncated state will be called. No: the entity under mortal threat next week is Britain itself. You cannot refer to a state called “Britain” unless you include Scotland, because it is a basic fact of geography that Britain comprises everything from Land’s End to John o’Groats.

Look at the map – so often rendered by cartoonists from the 18th century onwards as Britannia sitting down: rump in east Anglia, feet in Cornwall, and topped off with that sweeping Scottish cerebrum and helmet. Chop it off – decapitate Britain at Carlisle and you can no longer call it Britain; and what goes for geography must go for politics, too. Take Scotland away from England and you are losing a critical part of our political nomenclature. There was no British government before the union with Scotland; there was no British electorate; there were no British interests.

There was England and Wales, and there was Scotland. Take away Scotland, and we destroy Britain.
About 15 years ago people such as John Redwood and Peter Hitchens produced books called The End of Britain or The Abolition of Britain. They saw the principal threat as coming from the EU, I think; and though they were obviously right to be concerned about the erosion of sovereignty, I don’t think either of them expected the constitutional annihilation of the country. Now those book titles look prophetic, frankly.

Every year I speak at a ceremony in City Hall, at which we congratulate people who have lived and worked hard in this country, and who have become British citizens. They come from all over the world, and it is always moving to see the enthusiasm with which they sing the national anthem, and then have their picture taken with the big photo of the Queen. I always tell them that in becoming British, they have achieved something fantastic – and they plainly agree.
What are we to tell them in the future, if the Scots vote to go it alone? That they have become citizens of the rUK (rest of the UK) and that they must uphold rUkish values? We could tell them that they were all now “English” – but that doesn’t mean quite the same in a city where 40 per cent were born abroad and where not everyone can have an “English rose” complexion.

Britain, British, Britishness: these are precious terms, and they stand for something wonderful across the world. They represent freedom, democracy, an independent judiciary, sense of humour, reasonableness, you name it. They weren’t just the result of the exertions of the English and Welsh, and they weren’t just Scottish achievements. Johnson needed Boswell, and vice versa. It was the fusion: the Scottish scientist in the London lab who produced penicillin; the Scottish inventor who went out to the British empire and invented the telephone; the Scottish economists and philosophers whose ideas formed the basis for Britain’s commercial and political greatness.
Together the English and the Scots built the British foreign service and the British Army, and the British Broadcasting Corporation, and the British Museum. It is very far from clear what would happen to any of those institutions – all of them world-class, all of them now in peril from this vote.

Is Salmond going to ask for the Elgin Marbles to be restored to Elgin? No one has thought any of this through, and I am frankly appalled by the complacency and apathy of so many of my non-political friends – people who haven’t focused at all on the debate, and think we can afford to let the Scots go because a) we subsidise them, and b) they have so many Labour MPs.

Something tells me that in the end the Scots will step back from the brink, but in the next few days we need to be explaining passionately that this is not just about Scotland – though Scotland would lose heavily from the split. This is about all of us. I am praying that we will wake from this sleepwalk to tragedy; and that the Scots vote no to divorce, and yes to Britain, the greatest political union ever.

edit on 8-9-2014 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 12:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Parthin

Here again I have to say my best informed source tells me Scotland has vastly more influence on the world than is generally known or acknowledged. We are kept in the dark.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 12:17 PM
link   
a reply to: SovereignEve

Thank you.

As you see from my profile I am firmly United Albion in spirit. However I'm told by my hugely informed friend that YES is appropriate on this occasion.

We'll see where this goes.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 12:22 PM
link   
Scotland should vote YES!!!!

The future of the world and a good life style is mainly in small, energy efficient, culturally intact, modern nations.

The day of the Large Nation State offering a good quality of life is OVER, Small nations with small populations are going to be able to make the shift to sustainability fairly easy, the technology for food, water, power from renewable and sustainable methods exists, it's the "cost" for large nation states and the raw monetary power of embedded multinational energy companies in the tax base that makes it impossible for them to escape from expensive, polluted methods....

Another factor which regards energy is continued involvement in wars for these resources, be a part of a mega state consider it a given your sons will be dying for it maybe your daughters as well.

Another major issue is technology, the education system of large nations is very difficult to shift to take advantage of the modern world, poverty will exist where ever stupidity does, wiring 90 million people for 1 gig a second bandwith is a lot more difficult than wiring 12 Million for example...

And then of course being a major player in "globalism" means "multiculturalism" has to abound and that brings with it a lot of issues...

So here is what i'm saying Scotland...

Screw the money, Vote YES

You will be in 20 years or so....

1: Energy Independent

2: Have enough water

3: be Eating Healthier non GMO foods

4: Your local laws will be your own

5: Your education system will be modern and leave you competitive

6: Your culture will be intact, you will be Scotland not over run by Islam

7: You will not be bleed out by war

8: You will in the long run not be burdened by the political and Economic issues that will surely plague London



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 12:22 PM
link   
a reply to: JiggyPotamus

CONSPIRACIST! NUTTER! TIN-FOIL-HATTER! You sound just like me.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 12:27 PM
link   
a reply to: criticalhit

Giving it a quick read makes me want to read it again. Thank you.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 12:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Kester
a reply to: flammadraco

This one. www.abovetopsecret.com...

It's a fraudulent story calculated to sway undecided voters who don't have time for in-depth research.

The 'elite' chose Scotland as a refuge several generations ago. It's what the clearances were for. Get the strong, native inhabitants out to make room for the inbred creeps. They're playing the independence vote to their benefit. Time will tell exactly how.

Source? I'm like Mary Poppins. I flounce upstairs when I'm asked difficult questions.



Thanks for the link, I read the News Story regarding "secret oil" and it's all rumour and unnamed sources. Whilst it merits further investigation I don't believe IMO it has anything to do with the referendum.


The"Elite" thingy you speak off, any sources for this? I only ask as it seems you state as fact rather than opinion.

I lived in Glasgow for 8 years, moved away 3 years ago and I for one will be sad if the yes vote wins, that being said, I think it's time for the English to have our own parliament as we are the only country within the UK not to have own own within the UK. Just because Westminster is based in London does not mean it represents the views of the English, for example NHS prescription charges and Cancer Drugs. Perhaps the English should have a referendum to see if we want to be part of the UK anymore, perhaps it's time all four countries paddle their own canoes.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 12:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: theabsolutetruth
a reply to: Kester

I grew up in Scotland, I have lots of family and relatives there.

Most are voting No though a few are voting Yes.

This thread should probably say ''poll' on the thread title.

There are so many businesses that would leave Scotland as well as many that wouldn't trade there anymore, many of which Scottish industry depends on.

The stock market now is just a glimpse of how affected they would be.

Added to that the fact they wouldn't be able to use the pound and would have to reapply to the EU and that adds to a lot of affected people.

Much of Europe wouldn't even bother trading there at all and many nations would see it as a third class nation, a defector and way behind in the queue for the much lauded EU membership.

Most of the money in the UK is in London, from foreign investors.

If Scotland wants more autonomy then I can see the government giving it though it should be at the expense of Scottish MP's voting on English matters and having MP's in Westminster.

People in Scotland need to stop being seduced by some tartan and bagpipes romantic notion perpetuated by Braveheart and wake up to reality.

Boris Johnson has his detractors but in this article he says a lot of things that needs saying.

www.telegraph.co.uk... er.html


Norway is in the exact same situation that Scotland wants to be in. They are an independently run country.

With Scotland, you have five different regions; the four cities Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen, Dundee and the Highlands and Islands; Edinburgh has the banking industry. Aberdeen has the oil industry, Dundee and Edinburgh, Glasgow also have the entertainment software and arts industries, The Highlands and Islands have crofting and self-employed businesses. Every area has the tourism industry. 30% of the population is employed in the public sector, 25% in retail, and another 30% in private businesses. Why would all of this suddenly come to an end simply because a demarcation line has been put around the countries finances?

The only reason I could imagine that the financial markets are spooked, is because they see the end of the gravy train and the financial industry being treated as a cash cow. If you look at the ownership of all the "local high-street banks", it all goes back to Goldman-Sachs and other international banks.
edit on 8-9-2014 by stormcell because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 12:50 PM
link   
A question in The Mail today. Scotland spent £65.2 billion in 2011 to 2012 yet Scotland s payment was only £47.6. That makes a shortfall of £17.6 that was paid to Scotland from Westminster. Just a thought for the Scottish people who say they owe nothing to Westminster.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 01:38 PM
link   
a reply to: stormcell

A lot of international industry and even UK industry said they wouldn't continue their trade to Scotland as it is part of a UK deal. The increased cost of transporting things to Scotland is a factor as is the fact that these deals are UK deals and if Scotland wasn't part of the UK, the trade link wouldn't apply.

There are Scottish companies that depend on English trade for the mainstay of their business. Those English business contracts are also part of the UK national deal, for example I know of machine contractors in Scotland that are contracted almost 100% by English schools, they would find other sources if Scotland wasn't part of the union.

The EU subsidises farmers and many industries and businesses in Scotland and all that would go if it wasn't part of the union, as would its EU membership. Trade with EU member states would also drop and in some cases cease.

Many nation's leaders have advised against a YES vote for and independant Scotland.

www.telegraph.co.uk...
edit on 8-9-2014 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 01:42 PM
link   
a reply to: crayzeed

Scotland also has free prescriptions and free education that England doesn't have. More is paid to the people of Scotland per capita than in England.

Scotland also votes on English elections but England doesn't vote on Scottish elections, nor are any of the rest of the UK allowed a vote on their independance.

It is silly for Scotland playing the victim and for SNP using that as an emotional bribe to the people there, plenty of which believe the propaganda and tartan fantasy a la Braveheart.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 02:45 PM
link   
Scotland invented geology as a modern science and buried the young Earth misconception. When you have two countries that are closely related by history, intermarriage, and language, they should stay together. a reply to: Kester



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 02:56 PM
link   
a reply to: flammadraco

The 'secret' oil thing seems to be a manipulative wind-up. As far as I can work out the supposed recent finds have actually been known about since the late 70's. It's just extraction technology that's changed.

I got into the habit of polemic assertion, then I wait to see who'll convince me I'm wrong. I formed my opinion that Scotland was long ago chosen as a refuge for the 'elite' using knowledge gleaned over more than three decades. I can't isolate any particular sources. It's a general idea.

You could be right. Time for a return to local canoe paddling. We'll find it easier to kick ten bells out of our representatives, should they go astray, in a smaller, cosier arrangement.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 03:14 PM
link   
a reply to: theabsolutetruth

You're talking a lot of common sense. Particularly when you mention emotional bribery etc. There's a lot going on in this that isn't common sense, and that makes me wonder what actual goals are being aimed for by those acting out the emotional roles.

When Labour got in a local politician happened to be outside my house as the news broke. She began bouncing up and down like Zebedee. I'm concerned that the same might happen when/if a yes vote is confirmed. Euphoria and silliness instead of immediately bearing down on the opportunists who are just waiting to implement their selfish plans.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 03:16 PM
link   
Somewhere on this planet Scotland's new currency has finished being printed, just in case, backed up with what oil is still available cheaply enough to be pumped out of the ground.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 03:18 PM
link   
a reply to: pikestaff

What's the rate? I'm buying.



posted on Sep, 8 2014 @ 04:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Parthin

True.

The UK is stronger together.

Consider also defense and all the Scottish jobs in Armaments, the town I grew up in is an MoD town and the Admiralty is a major employer. All the naval base staff.

Also that the UK's weapons are often stored in Scotland, a lot of the forces have bases there and those towns where they are thrive because of it.

Consider also the lack of defense that Scotland would have if the UK were to remove it's forces and alliance.

Divide and conquer in action?

And all down to the vote of those in a small nation sans regard for the whole. Also consider that those voting on the future of the UK might be biased, susceptible to grudge voting and fond of fantasy land speeches.
edit on 8-9-2014 by theabsolutetruth because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
11
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join