And you would complain if they never appeared at all.

I have to say that I find this linking of the UK floods and the overseas aid budget very distasteful and is fairly typical of the UKIP/Daily Mail type intellect.
Those who benefit from UK aid should not be denied help because of some tawdry campaign by the worst aspects of the UK press. The Prime Minister has stated that “money is no object” so funds do not need to be diverted from anywhere.

The floods have been caused by the weather – lots of it. No-one can say for certain if dredging/defences etc would have helped but lots of people seem to be wise after the event.

Why is that sad? In my opinion it’s a great thing.

I’m not sure why anyone would think the break up of the United Kingdom is a good thing but there you go.

In the event of independence I would have thought that Scotland would be entitled to a share of the UK’s gold reserve.

The fact is that being tied to the Euro or the pound means that independence is nothing of the sort.

Salmond has deliberately disenfranchised large numbers of Scots; Scots who would largely vote “No” – that is despite the fact that my citizenship will be directly affected by a “Yes”, I do not get a say in that process. What is sad is that so many Scots are falling for his rhetoric and false promises. Let’s hope common sense prevails in September.

Ignoring moderator’s obvious trolling and his inability to answer a simple question I put to him ages ago, I have a simple question for Al.

Do you agree that anyone’s citizenship should be allowed to be changed without that person having a say?

Your points 1 to 6 are so full of mistakes that it might take me a while – I’ll reply when I’ve stopped laughing. On the other hand they say ignorance is bliss so why change it?

I’m an opponent of Scottish independence but arrogant English attitudes do make me waver at times.

Well I’ve had a think about Moggy’s provocative comments and I hope I’ve answered them. Not that he cares apparently

In a few words

1) A solution to the West Lothian issue
A bit of a red herring and a consequence of the way our parliament is set up. On the face of it seems unfair but only a very few policies have been affected by it. It has become less of an issue after devolution.

2) The unlikelihood of the Labour Party ever gaining control of the Westminster parliament and hence the economy ever again
So Moggy – you’re quite happy with the thought that the Tories will be perpetually in power?
I suspect he would be but he would be wrong. In recent times only the result second 1974 election would have been different without Scottish MPs

3) It relieves the rest of the UK of all liabilities for the two major, and faltering banks.
Why would the UK be relieved? They may have ‘Scotland’ in their names, and are based there, but in reality they are very little to do with us anymore – 80% of the Royal Bank of Scotland is owned by the UK government, and the Bank of Scotland, HBOS, was taken over by Lloyds.
Can’t argue with that

4) Whilst currently subsidies paid to Scotland roughly equate to taxes received from N Sea Oil, this will not continue to be in balance as production declines
I’m not sure I understand this. Scotland will stop getting subsidies if a YES vote is successful so the shortfall will have to be found elsewhere. I would have thought that this is a point in favour of the union rather than independence but whatever.

5) The lavish spending of the current Scottish government – social spending per head in Scotland is 13% greater than in the remainder of the UK – will no longer fall on non-Scottish taxpayers
Lavish spending? You make the higher social spending sound like a bad thing. Better the money spent on our citizens than on follies like Trident!
I know! Imagine spending to help people. Rather than have a go at the Scottish government, ask yourself why England hasn’t made the same provisions? We all want tax cuts don’t we? Rather than pay for our children’s education or to care for the elderly. Statistics are great though, there are others that show that social spending in Scotland is less than the rest of the UK.

6) The Scots will apparently be much happier outside the UK – Who are we to deny them of that happiness?
More sneering contemptuousness…
Well quite but not all Scots want to be outside of the UK.

After stating how you were laughing at the guy and that you were happy to leave him in ignorance you’re not on very solid ground to criticise debating technique are you?. For my part I’d like to see you address the errors in some of his points…most notably no.s 4 & 5

I am rather criticizing his statement about not caring about what others think when it suits (or when he has lost the argument – again :o)

Me, I can’t wait to see all the ‘No’ politicians in the Scottish government, who many Scots will deem traitors and Quislings after independence, try to ingratiate themselves back into power again!

And isn’t that exactly the problem with Salmond’s divisive policy. He is not only threatening to split the UK but families and communities. All for what?

Those that disagree with you are entitled to their opinion just as much as you are.

Exactly! Mother’s maiden name is a classic security question so posting it on an open forum is not smart.