Two Js

Members
  • Content Count

    120
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Two Js last won the day on July 2

Two Js had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Location
    None of your Business

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Two Js

    Indy Ref 2

    As I have said, everyone knows what living in Scotland as part of the UK is all about (Brexit notwithstanding). You want people to vote for change, so it is up to you to convince people that things will be better. This, in the main, can only be achieved by convincing us that Scotland and its' people will be more prosperous. Something you admit you cannot do. Your argument that SNP MPs are far superior to any other politician in Scotland is fine however, despite your fervent hope, Nicola Sturgeon will not become immortal in an independent Scotland, and rule with her SNP government until the second coming (although I think Alex has burnt his bridges where that is concerned). What happens if people think "Well that's us got independence. No need to vote SNP anymore." and we end up with a coalition government of 3 or 4 different parties. So. in summary, the financial implications of staying in the UK are irrelevant until you come up with evidence that an independent Scotland will be better off. I'm not going to continue this discussion. You will just end up calling me names and posting childish GIFs (I think that's what they are). This will get us nowhere.
  2. Two Js

    Indy Ref 2

    You know Smarmy, I think you and I have similar ideas on how to assess whether Scotland should be independent or not. Apart from that I haven't a clue what you are talking about. Congratulations on getting AS to discuss the financial implications of Independence - I tried and failed. I shall follow this discussion (the bits I understand) with interest.
  3. Two Js

    Indy Ref 2

    Hands up - I don't have a vision. The Tories could not be making more of an arse of Brexit, and by extension running the country, as they are at the moment and I wouldn't trust Jeremy Corbyn to run a school tuck shop. I have already said that I think the SNP could make a good fist of being a UK party and I wouldn't be upset if they were given a crack at governing the UK. (If they would stop all this "Look what innovative policies we have that no other country has thought of" rubbish). My only problem is; I have heard nothing to convince me that Scotland would be better off if it went alone. Making our own decisions, getting rid of the Tories, Scotland governed by Scots, etc. are all laudable reasons for wanting Scotland to be Independent, but none of them say that Scotland and the Scots will be better off because of it. Once I start to see evidence that Independence WILL see Scotland's prosperity improve, then I will ask any No supporters to give their reasons why they still oppose it. (I can understand your argument that a more focused Scottish spending plan might work with a slightly reduced budget, but I think we have enough autonomy at the moment for this to make little difference). What really annoys me is that Independence supporters take the moral high ground; they are more patriotic than everyone else and anyone who doesn't agree with their viewpoint is open to abuse and ridicule. This is probably not a very satisfactory answer to your question. I'm not intelligent enough to come up with any answers to the problems that the country ails from.
  4. Two Js

    Indy Ref 2

    So our debate ends as it began - with you throwing around unsubstantiated accusations and abuse at anyone and anything that you feel do not support your vision of Scotland's future. This may have ended better if you had been able to produce some evidence that Independence would bring more prosperity to Scotland that it has at the moment. Can I suggest this would probably be a better strategy if you want to convince people to vote for Independence. Your last sentence was particularly cutting. I had hoped that I could win your admiration and respect. Devastated!
  5. Two Js

    Indy Ref 2

    No, I'm Naw. Apologies, maybe I didn't make that clear.
  6. Two Js

    Indy Ref 2

    So, you think one of the biggest political decisions the people of Scotland will be asked to make can be decided on a "Yeah but, No but, Yeah but" argument. This "He said, she said" rubbish would sound pathetic in a school playground. Now I'm sure you will say "Well you started it" but I was merely pointing out that the independence campaign has said nothing positive about their position for months. It's all "Look at what the nasty (insert something British here) are doing to us!" I have lived in Scotland, as part of the UK, for many a long year now, and I don't need any Unionist to tell me what it's like. What I need is the Nationalists to convince me that things would be better if Scotland was independent - something you have spectacular failed to do. If you come back after the full impact of Brexit is known you might have more success. You have managed to provide a lot of rhetoric without addressing any specific points. Quite clearly the Nationalists are still in full attack mode, so I will listen to their (your) arguments when they restart the charm offensive. Finally, you have practically accused me of being a Unionist supporter. Another problem with your cause - if your not with us then you must be against us. That's all from me. I'm out.
  7. Two Js

    Indy Ref 2

    I agree Broggy Man. Only a complete idiot would vote for independence if it was going to make their life worse, so we must make sure the data is correct AND it shows the lives of us poor Scots will improve before we vote YES.
  8. Two Js

    Indy Ref 2

    Jesus H Christ AS, it's like you have been brainwashed by some mysterious cult or you have some strange mental block. Way against my better judgement I am going to try one more time: I AM NOT AGAINST SCOTTISH INDEPENDENCE. If I could truly believe that an independent Scotland would be financially better off than it is today, and therefore bring extra benefits to the people of Scotland, I would be down at the voting booth putting my cross in the YES box - and so would every other Scot. The big stumbling block is even you have admitted that this cannot be guaranteed. One example: I think I remember that during the last campaign we were told that every Scot would be £700 a year better off, but on the eve of the referendum the man who had spent his entire political career getting to that point couldn't even tell us what currency we would be using. How can you carry out financial forecasting without taking into account which currency would be involved? My whole complaint is that the SNP have abandoned any hope of convincing people that we are heading for a land of milk and honey, and instead are attacking anyone and anything remotely connected to England and the Tories. (You do remember this started with your "Home Nations" complaint). The National is just another example of this obsessive and monotonous drive to alienate Scots against the rest of the UK, in this instance forsaking any attempt at journalistic integrity. (Can you honestly say the childish tweeting of a minor political figure in Ayrshire is more relevant than the tragic and mysterious death of a 6 year old girl?) Please, please, please don't reply with "whataboutery". I know the NO campaign produced more sh!te than a herd of cows with diarrhea. I am a proud Scot and I want the best for Scotland - everybody else is getting independence doesn't necessarily mean being independent is the right move for us at the moment.
  9. Two Js

    Indy Ref 2

    I am going to frighten you again Mr Broggy Man, but I agree with almost everything you say. The only problem with your argument is the "Independent" Governor. If someone has a vote in this country then they must have an opinion. If they have an opinion then they are not independent. This is also the problem with "Independent" reports. The people creating these reports are not brought in from some far-flung island and start with a blank piece of paper. Assumptions must be made when doing the calculations and everyone starts with their own views and feelings, so the results must be tainted. I don't believe we can ever be given the "true facts". This is my last post so I'll will finish with the complaint that set me off in the first instance. Today, the headlines in every Scottish national newspaper was about the poor lassie who was found dead on the Isle of Bute, except The National, who thought the biggest story in Scotland was a North Ayrshire Tory Councillor making a xenophobic tweet. If you want people to vote for Independence then tell us the benefits - stop being D***heads.
  10. Two Js

    Indy Ref 2

    Finally, a sensible, reasonable, articulate, well thought out and well presented post on the subject. Maybe if I had said something similar at the start I would have saved myself a lot of hassle.
  11. Two Js

    Indy Ref 2

    I'm sorry AS but you have spent a very long time proving my point. A vote for Brexit was a vote against the European parliament, a vote for Independence is a vote against the UK parliament. I could highlight a few points you have made that could be disputed, but I can't be bothered. (As I said I don't really do political debate). I will say, however, that I believe Scotland could "make it" alone - but is it possible we might not be quite as prosperous, or can you guarantee everyone will be better off?
  12. Two Js

    Indy Ref 2

    I think you are being a bit harsh there Smarmy, although I do get the impression that the vast majority of Independence supporters would accept a reduction in the standard of living in Scotland if it meant we were "free". It seems to me that everyone who actively campaigns for independence start from one of two positions: either it is an idealistic view that we are a separate country and should be making our own decisions, or they hate the Tories and it is the only way to get rid of them. It is only after they have made the decision that Scotland should be independent that they look for the evidence to prove that we will be better off (while dismissing any counter evidence as flawed, scaremongering, propaganda or irrelevant). The problems start when they get so involved in their utopian view that anything and everything can and should be done to achieve their goal. I want to hear a clear, balanced, sensible debate about the pros and cons of being independent, with both sides accepting relevant arguments from the opposition. (I accept that this will never happen).
  13. Two Js

    Indy Ref 2

    Firstly, I would like to point out I am not a political geek. I don't go looking for political information and I don't normally do debate, so you will have to forgive my simplistic point of view. I am not against Independence, but it would be nice to know what we were voting for. It appears to me that in the last few weeks (since that financial report thing came out) the SNP have abandoned their attempts to convince everyone that Scotland can be the greatest wee country in the world and launched a "look at what the nasty UK government is doing to us" campaign. This, I believe, is also what you were doing. We are now not being convinced to vote FOR Independence but AGAINST the English/Tories/BBC/Queen/British Media/National Anthem and everything else Scots are supposed to hate. This is exactly how we managed to get into the Brexit mess. People weren't persuaded to vote FOR Brexit, (and didn't know what that meant) rather they were asked to vote AGAINST immigration, payments to Brussels, having our laws decided for us, etc. Now to your question. I recently said that if the SNP abandoned their push for an Independent Scotland, had a quick re-brand, lost their attitude and launched as a full UK party they could do very well. They would take votes from both Labour and the Tories and it would be no bad thing. I'm sure Nicola Sturgeon wants the best for everyone in Scotland, but even she admits she joined the SNP as a direct result of her hate for Maggie Thatcher. It would be great to be Independent it if meant things were better for everyone in Scotland, but even the most progressive (I believe that's the current buzz-word) society can't look after it's vulnerable citizens if it doesn't have any money. Even the "We can make our own decisions" argument doesn't stand up if other outside influences restrict our decision making. So that is my final rant on the subject. Bottom line is - if you want to promote Independence BE POSITIVE. You can reply to this with TLDR. I won't mind.
  14. Two Js

    Indy Ref 2

    I don't know if I am being whooshed here, or perhaps you have got me hook. line and sinker but, believe me, life really is too short for this sort of debate. Please see the first and last sentence of my previous post. I want the Independence campaign to say: Scotland should be independent because ..................................................................... It shouldn't include "the BBC said something about the Home Nations" or "some Englishmen were called British". If Scotland really is better off alone then let's hear the positives and all this other stuff will be irrelevant.
  15. Two Js

    Indy Ref 2

    This is the sort of rubbish that absolutely destroys the credibility of the Independence argument. People see this and think "if this is the level of debate then I'm not interested". Home Nations has been used as a term for the countries of the UK (and occasionally Ireland) in all sorts of sporting competitions for years - probably before the BBC came into existence. Your last sentence is ridiculous. "Home Nations" refers to ALL the countries of the UK. Belgium are playing England. Ii would be like referring to a Saints v Aberdeen game as Tayside Clubs v Aberdeen. Please try and find some legitimate grievances to support the Independence campaign.