|
Post by bormes on Dec 25, 2013 9:22:28 GMT -1
Happy Xmas everyone.
|
|
|
Post by ozneil on Dec 25, 2013 21:09:00 GMT -1
|
|
|
Post by notanimby on Dec 26, 2013 17:36:13 GMT -1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2013 19:32:05 GMT -1
So what does other 60% want?
First lot from SE Asia about 40,000 years ago then various migrations in waves dependent on climate, all hunter gatherers. Then first Europeans in 1628, the Dutch but they left asap. In all when Philips arrived in 1786 it was estimated about 250,000 Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders in roughly 3,000 clans. In NSW alone there were 300 different languages. They now number about 517,000. Mostly assimilated but some in settlements throughout the country. In 1786 the Brits started a penal Colony but by early 1800s it had become a desirable place to live , according to Begge report felons in UK were committing crimes so they would be sent to NSW. Steady trickle of migrants till 1850s when large gold fields were discovered then it took off. By turn on century about 3-5 mill mostly from UK & Ireland but fair number from America, Europe & China. Forget the "White Australia Policy" it was brought in in1910 by the Labour Government to protect union labour and was repealed in 1958. Since end of WW2 Immigration has really taken off now 23 Mill. To stabilish the intake the Government has introduced a test for would-be migrants in addition to UN sponsored refugees. Race. colour or creed is no barrier. My own staff at one stage had 6 different nationalities including the mandatory token Pom. The earlier inhabitants were not driven out by early settlers but assimialted pretty fast. Realised our way of life was better than theirs. The aborigines were treated under same laws as anyone else since 1786. Forget the left wing & greenies exaggerated claims most have or want to be assimilated into general society. They much prefer nicking down to the Chinese Take-away than going out hunting for a goanna for tea. The lies broadcast are easily disproved just look at Place names. Still bear aboriginal names such as Barrenjoey, Woolloomooloo. Paramatta, Narabeen, Collaroy and Bondi in Sydney alone. These names were not chosen by Europeans but by the local population. In UK your migration started about 15,000 years ago and came from all over . My own mob arrived in 14th or 15th century from Scandinavia and started trickling out here in 1800s That answer your Question Rolo? I think I already knew that a huge percentage of any country's population are immigrants from somewhere to somewhere, Oz, but thanks for your expansive answer! ;D Re IndyRef, what do the other 60% want, you ask? At the moment, less than 40% think they want to stay in the union, while another 30% are undecided. That answer your question, Oz?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2013 19:33:19 GMT -1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2013 19:39:51 GMT -1
Hope you all had great Xmases and hangovers arent too bad. Roll on Hogmanay Cheers, Oz, yeah, great couple of days with nearest and dearest, you? No hangovers yet..and unlikely at Hoggers as well, Mr Rolo's working as usual, Stirling Castle, hopefully a big gathering of musos, crew and our various children on the night. So no mad drinking then either, unless the teens go mad with a bottle of Jack.
|
|
|
Post by ozneil on Dec 26, 2013 20:43:10 GMT -1
BTW forgot to mention in my reply 5% population here was born in UK (about 1.25 million) and 75% claim UK & Irish ancestry
Interesting Scottish Statistic For Independence
Yes vote 40% No Vote 40%* Undecided 30%
* :)Approx
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2013 21:09:05 GMT -1
Can only speak for myself, Oz, but I've had so many conversations recently with previously committed No voters who're now undecided. I should mention said NO voters were all left-wing, some very much so, who feel that New Labour has let them (and us) down by siding with the Tories on so many major issues.
It augurs well for a left of centre, social democratic Scotland.
|
|
|
Post by ozneil on Dec 26, 2013 21:22:41 GMT -1
One of my Scottish friends a dyed in the wool Tory is a very passionate NO voter. I wont enter into arguments but he gives, to him, very valid reasons. He is a very successful professional On another subject what is a BB code (at bottom)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2013 21:35:17 GMT -1
It's not an argument, it's a discussion!
So fire away.
I've also talked to a few who're staunch No voters and have no interest in listening to anyone else's point of view, Oz. There will be valid reasons on both sides, it would be stupid to deny that.
But it's a fact that the wealthier you are, the less likely you are to vote YES. There is tangible fear amongst the 'haves' that they might have to shell out a little bit more in tax in an independent Scotland. And as we all know, you don't get obscenely wealthy by being generous to your fellow man.
Countries with a more even share of the national income tend to be better, happier societies.
|
|
|
Post by ozneil on Dec 26, 2013 22:11:00 GMT -1
I dont know enough even to formulate a completely uninformed opinion.
I can see pros & cons on both sides but not having lived in Scotland for nigh on 50 years cannot judge which are realistic and which are emotional
My heart says "Go for it" My Brain say "caw canny"
All I can do is sit on side lines and hope you make the right decision either yea or nay.
Remember the average IQ is 100 , Trouble is a lot of voters cannot/will not try to assess the facts "My family always voted **** and so will I till I die" Try reasoning with that attit :-[ude (couldn't find an icon for beating head against a brick wall... tried searching Public Service web sites as well)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 26, 2013 22:45:23 GMT -1
You know plenty, Oz, you're a smart man. Yeah, there are a few Braveheart-ian types who give it emotional diatribe but they're on the fringes and rightly so. The vast majority of Scots are eschewing that extreme and considering the pros and cons.
You're right in saying there's a historic vote, that's certainly been the case for the past what, hundred years or more. Except.......there ARE big changes going on, people ARE thinking and not just giving it automatic 'support'.
My feeling is that YES will get just over 50% of the vote come September 2014. I'd SO love it to be 70%+. And it could just happen ;-0
|
|
|
Post by ozneil on Dec 27, 2013 19:36:06 GMT -1
I must admit I was a bit disappointed in Salmond's speech I thought it was a "politician's" speech long on rhetoric and platitudes but short on "how" but maybe the "hows" were elsewhere.
Before any sensible decision can be made the methods of government and income must be spelled out and preliminary budgets shown to the people not just ideals and wishful thinking. I thought Salmond's speech had a lot of wishful thinking and relied too much on other countries co-operation. I do not believe other countries co-operation can be guaranteed.
All these may have been thought out and negotiations held.
But as I say I dont know enough about the situation to form a meaningful opinion.
|
|
|
Post by notanimby on Dec 27, 2013 20:04:09 GMT -1
I must admit I was a bit disappointed in Salmond's speech I thought it was a "politician's" speech long on rhetoric and platitudes but short on "how" but maybe the "hows" were elsewhere. Before any sensible decision can be made the methods of government and income must be spelled out and preliminary budgets shown to the people not just ideals and wishful thinking. I thought Salmond's speech had a lot of wishful thinking and relied too much on other countries co-operation. I do not believe other countries co-operation can be guaranteed. All these may have been thought out and negotiations held. But as I say I dont know enough about the situation to form a meaningful opinion. That's part of the problem Oz, apparently the UK HMRC ( tax authority) cant give anywhere near a real 100% picture of the tax receipts for Scotland, one of the reasons being that an employee is taxed at the place their company is taxed, so a worker in say Perth, may be paying tax at an office in Bolton or Cardiff or somewhere. Same with EU membership, only the UK govt can ask for a definitive answer to Scotlands position after independence vis-a-vis EU continuing membership - tehy refuse to do that, probably because they know they'll probably get answer they dont like. As for other countries cooperation - that's a two way street, fortunately in Trident we have a trump card - be nice to us or take yer subs and stick them somewhere souf of Carlisle right now.........sor of thing
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 27, 2013 20:17:05 GMT -1
Fair comment, Oz. If you're up for a fair bit of reading I'll send you a copy of the White Paper to your email address. Just re 'other countries' co-operation, I take it you mean our position on the European Union and Nato. There's been a lot of debate on both here. The Spanish prime minister threw a spanner in the works this month, saying he'd block any attempt by Scotland to remain in the EU. But in all honesty, that itself is highly political. The Spanish govt in Madrid DO NOT WANT my beloved Catalonia to become independent from Spain. The parallels between Scotland and Catalonia are uncannily similar. That said, I don't think ANYONE in Scotland believes our continuing membership of the EU would be blocked. It's to our mutual advantage, after all. As for NATO, it's certainly the common myth that any country has to espouse the notion of nuclear deterrence to be a member. The vast majority of Scots want an end to Trident being based on the Clyde. Ultimately it's all about alliances. And I do believe NATO would rather the nuclear-free Scots remained a member. But given we'll have a defence force, not an aggressive war mongering stance, perhaps we'll be sidelined. No bad thing. <pee ess. I'd not seen Nota's post before I wrote mine... )
|
|