Should Scotland be an independent country?

It means 'If you're parents are rich you'll be rich' is 50% likely to be true in the UK but only 10% likely to be true in Denmark.

Think it was in the Spirit Level, they explained it as "if you want to live the American dream move to Denmark"

Yes.

Or was it No?

(In reply to DJ)

.

You don't know me pal, so step lightly. Are you suggesting I do nothing for anyone else, stick to my day job, pay my taxes and let the government sort it out. Then complain when they don't. Maybe that's how you live.

You don't know me pal, so step lightly.

lolz

Ok, so I was looking for data going the other way as well. 50% chance of riches to rags. Seems like a lot of people fall from grace. Given that a big influence in that is likely to be inherited property does that explain the difference with Denmark.

It's official, the vote was rigged.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/19/russia-calls-foul-scottish-referendum

Go begging on a Friday night ,doff my cap and say thanks guvnor ,share my hard earned bawbees and pray for a long term stay in one of those lovely nhs hospitals built by those well intentioned elite industrialists.
Good enough?

the point with inequality is that you've got a lot further to fall in an unequal society so you'd better look after yer own, ken.

Ok, so I was looking for data going the other way as well. 50% chance of riches to rags. Seems like a lot of people fall from grace. Given that a big influence in that is likely to be inherited property does that explain the difference with Denmark.

Data does not say anything about going up or down the income scale. It just says that if you want to have a different life from your parents then better not get born in the UK.

Are you suggesting I do nothing for anyone else

I'm not suggesting anything. I'm telling you that whatever you do as an individual can't possibly address any real need in society.
This is why we elect governments, so that we can address these needs collectively.

whatever you do as an individual can't possibly address any real need in society.
This is why we elect governments, so that we can address these needs collectively.

That's about 45% bollocks and 55% true.

The reanimated Scottish Labour frankenstein of Gordon Brown

Frankenstein's monster.

#schick

You place your hope in a group of individuals but not in any one of them on their own. So if I form a collective of individuals who help people in their local community I can make a difference, but not if I help people as an individual ?

Sounds about right. I realise my hope has been completely eroded by a lack of education and poor parents but I've successfully lowered my ambitions to stay happy. That's why I can't stand people challenging the status quo.

At least that was how I read the results.

Unionists/Orange Order acolytes in George Square now rioting draped in Union Jacks.

Will Darling and Cameron try to blame this on Salmond or take some responsibility for the narratives of intimidation and violence that they've been spattering these last weeks that leave goons like this feeling justified in starting real mindless disorder?

The sheer hypocrisy of branding weeks of peaceful, joyful Yes gatherings throughout the city as public intimidation when your own supporters wait till the referendum's over to try and claim a victory by default... Sad times.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/785c6b56-3ffd-11e4-a381-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3DmuVTGxL

Rangers fans / orangeist / unionist element in George Sq are beneath contempt. Well done to Yes for avoiding provocation.

flags are bad m'kay - live George Sq Glasgow now

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86lrybeUXIg&feature=youtu.be

I grew up in Glasgow and I remember orange marches down the street in the 70's. And as a Catholic child, I remember being very frightened of the intimidation that went with those marches. I went to a largely Protestant school and was singled out for a beating, more than once, by children who thought they were "orange order". (However, dear readers, Glasgow has improved immeasurably since then, and is much more tolerant, and a lovely place to visit, I'm glad to say.)

So what I really object to is the implication above that the #bettertogether voters are "Unionist/Orange Order acolytes" - to me that's a real slur. The "no" voters aren't that - they are reasonable people exercising their democracy - as are the "yes" voters.

Perhaps when the slurs stop, then the work of trying to work out a compromise solution that helps reconcile everyone can begin...

These racist Scots Nationalists, eh? What'll you do with them apart from photoshop out the Union Jacks?

What kind of fucking idiot thinks it right to do a Nazi salute?

fucking idiots thats who

these fuckheads would do the same at football - Glasgow does love the sectarianism

At no point do I say or imply this is all Better Together voters? I am saying rhetoric from their campaign has helped create the idea that Yes people have been unilaterally responsible for any atmosphere of intimidation and I'm talking about the people in George Square now.

I walked past on my way to the station and they were singing the sash and shouting abuse at the few Yes people who were there who had to be protected by the police.

I find it incredible that No campaign are happy to airbrush out this nasty side of unionism to suit their own narrative that the Yes camp are violent and intimidating and if its helped embolden dickheads like this to come out and start trouble then they bear the responsibility for it.

Sectarianists love the sectarianism and find justification in the slightest thing.

Glasgow and the normal people that have to live amongst it rightfully hate it.