Terry Butcher Anger Mangement

That's quite funny that actually about the cross-stitching and that - nice one. I'm just frustrated because I've got a new job and it's really stressful, although I'm very good at it . Dinnae take it so personally - just random zeros and ones flung aboot, that's all

I don't take anything on here personally, perhaps you should try it...

If you're crap at your job then the best thing for you to do would be to insult random people who're just getting on with theirs...

Need to ask tho, Are you Salmomds love child..??

you're frustrated, i'm trying to buy a rail ticket and all i'm getting is a wee circle going round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and round and . . . .


. . . .i think you get the picture!

TheDesertFoxhat wrote:That's one small part of a treaty that contradicts itself several times and also has no relevance to us whatsoever...

How do you come to that conclusion?

TheDesertFoxhat wrote:I don't take anything on here personally, perhaps you should try it...

If you're crap at your job then the best thing for you to do would be to insult random people who're just getting on with theirs...

Need to ask tho, Are you Salmomds love child..??

Why are you so obsessed with Alex Salmond?
It's like people should vote for or against Independence dependent upon their opinion of one man.
How about, A vote for the union is a vote for Dave?

therrawbuzzin wrote:

TheDesertFoxhat wrote:That's one small part of a treaty that contradicts itself several times and also has no relevance to us whatsoever...

How do you come to that conclusion?

I can't post links yet and copy and paste is a tedious affair on my phone...

The treaty itself is contradictory and unclear and a quick google search shows it also to be contraversial...

therrawbuzzin wrote:

TheDesertFoxhat wrote:I don't take anything on here personally, perhaps you should try it...

If you're crap at your job then the best thing for you to do would be to insult random people who're just getting on with theirs...

Need to ask tho, Are you Salmomds love child..??

Why are you so obsessed with Alex Salmond?
It's like people should vote for or against Independence dependent upon their opinion of one man.
How about, A vote for the union is a vote for Dave?

I wouldn't call it obsessed...

Salmond is the one doing most of the talking on behalf of the independence campaign so as I've stated, is fair game...

If it helps, Sturgeon and Swinney have been peddling the same lies...

I think we all know that without him the snp wouldn't be where they are now...

He's a shrewd politician but unfortunately their argument lacks much substance and most of the expert advice they've claimed on subjects has been nothing more than opinion from within their own party...

AS WE approach the halfway mark – sorry to depress you – in the long march to a referendum, I would nominate two stand-out moments along the route so far.

The first was publication of a Social Attitudes Survey in December 2011, which suggested that support for independence lurched between 21 and 64 per cent, depending on whether people thought they might be £500 a year worse or better off.I guess this conclusion startled both sides, even after a pinch of salt was administered, for it was powerful evidence of how much the debate turns on personal, economic arguments rather anything more romantic, cultural or philosophical. Not so much the hand of history as the 500 quid lottery.

While neither would admit to it, both sides have accepted the thrust of that message – which explains the constant flow of claim and counter-claim around what, to true believers, must seem like tedious minutiae about the consequences of independence for people’s pockets and financial security.On critical issues such as personal taxation, employment and pensions, those who do not want to break up Britain have a status quo to defend and continuity to invoke. Even when the facts are inconvenient, they have to live with them. The Nationalists, on the other hand, can just make it up as they go along – and that is exactly what they do.As the former chief economic adviser to the Scottish Government, Andrew Goudie, noted in yesterday’s Scotsman much of this stuff consists of no more than “cavalier assertions with little or no foundation”. He might have had in mind the recent fabrication of “Scotland’s second oil boom”, of which more in a moment.

No Nationalist worthy of his or her salt gives a toss whether anyone would be £500 better or worse off as a result of independence. Their’s is a fundamentalist belief rather than a calculation, and their is nothing inherently wrong with that. But they know this is not how many of their fellow Scots see it – so, economic arguments must be constructed to fit their case, while contrary evidence is bludgeoned into submission.And that leads to my second landmark event: the leaking of John Swinney’s internal paper on the economic risks of independence, which had the great merit of not being intended for the eyes of voters and, therefore, set out to be frank and honest about the massive potential pitfalls that independence would involve.The key message was straightforward – volatile oil revenues, already in decline, would threaten the “affordability” of state pensions and unemployment benefits, never mind additional expenditure. Loosely translated, if the price of oil failed to meet expectations, Scotland – with its disproportionately high levels of public expenditure – would be in deep doodoo.This paper is dynamite in the “500 quid” market for votes – a view borne out by the extraordinary efforts that have gone into neutralising it.

No number of spin doctors can erase Honest John’s words, so the alternative approach has been to rubbish his own scenario. None of the bad things will happen because oil revenues will not fall – no, nay, never.And that, in turn, has led to the sudden emergence of “Scotland’s second oil boom” – a phrase which did not exist even in the lexicon of cavalier assertions a month ago but is now a mandatory part of the mantra. Never has a boom been so quickly manufactured. Rarely has a cowed civil service been dragooned so urgently into producing facts on which to base a conclusion.Within a week of Swinney’s document becoming public, the Scottish Government published its first – there’s a surprise – Oil and Gas Analytical Bulletin, a cut-and-paste job devoid of independent verification on which remarkable new claims were based.

Brandishing his very own dodgy dossier, Alex Salmond proclaimed a newly-discovered £26 billion and the boom was born.The real world offers more sober assessments. North Sea oil production this year will be fully 25 per cent down on 2011. The market is assuming a slight recovery, flattening out by 2020 at one million barrels a day – half of what Salmond is claiming as a done deal on which plans can be based. The Brent price is predicted to drift downwards from an average $106 a barrel this year to $92 in 2017.I hasten to add that all of these are predictions that may be disproven by events. There might be wars, which drive the price up. Someone might turn the taps on, as the Saudis did in the late 1990s when the price went below $10 a barrel. The full impact of fracking remains utterly uncertain. So far, it has halved the price of gas in America, driving oil and coal out of power generation.

Even more critically, an easing of global demand is making investment decisions intensely competitive. Capital is scarce as other sectors offer greater certainty. Yet the potential value will only be realised if and when oil companies, spoilt for choices, explore and recover in the North Sea as opposed to other less costly provinces. Norway, faced with exactly the same scenario, makes no false boasts to the contrary.

None of this detracts from the fact that North Sea oil is a huge asset for the United Kingdom and would, proportionately, be an even bigger one for Scotland alone. That is obvious and nobody disputes it. But all of it points in exactly the direction described in Swinney’s paper – oil is a volatile commodity, there are lots of uncertain factors and there are huge risks in becoming over-dependent on it, as a separate Scotland would be.That is a truthful assessment, which most people in Scotland would be inclined to accept as common sense. It is bound to give many of them pause for thought about the economics of independence, particularly in light of the read-across that Swinney conveniently sketched out for them.

These are political and intellectual challenges that the Nationalists should address honestly by acknowledging the problems for their case, which are inherent. That way, they might win respect if not the argument. Instead, they have simply cobbled together a fantasy solution based on “cavalier assertions” and then sent the troops out to parrot it from every platform and in every studio.The whole charade of “Scotland’s second oil boom” sits uneasily with pious statements about the need for serious debate based on providing the voters with the hard facts that they crave. In fact, it makes a mockery of it. Just ask John Swinney.

Oil is a volatile commodity?

All commodities are volatile, or there wouldn't be a futures market worth hundreds of billions of dollars.

The point is, that the price of oil only affects exploration; once an oil rig is in production, the price is irrelevant, as the duty paid is on quantity not value.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-21003704

http://www.energytribune.com/5048/north-sea-oils-new-boom

I’ve been hearing dark mutterings about the imminent ‘end of North Sea oil’ all my life, with the dramatic impact that would have for the UK economy. North Sea oil was a diminishing resource that would be “gone by the end of the century” experts constantly assured back in the 1970s. But the rigs just kept right on drilling and producing into the new century – and the experts just kept right on being confounded. And it looks like they are to be confounded yet again as a new North Sea boom is set to boost oil reserves – and the UK’s economy.

“The North Sea remains an important hub for investment and will continue to be at the heart of the UK’s energy security for years to come,” Charles Hendry, the new coalition government’s energy minister, said at the end of June. For once, an energy minister wasn’t shooting the political breeze. Hendry was announcing the grant of .356 new North Sea exploration licences – a record number of licences since they were first issued in 1964

http://www.alaskadispatch.com/article/new-tax-break-spurs-oil-investment-boom-north-sea

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/oilandgas/9890974/North-Sea-oil-enjoys-surge-in-investment-and-higher-profile.html

In total, the survey claims, companies plan to spend almost £100bn in the next few years. They are already committed to spending £44bn, and Malcolm Webb, chief executive of Oil & Gas UK, says there is more than a 50pc chance that another £30bn will be approved.

Production is forecast to rise by a third to 2m barrels of oil and gas a day by 2017, although by then it will be only back to the 2010 level. Forecasts suggest production this year could be down to 1.45m-1.5m barrels a day.

Mr Webb says that projects approved in the last two years alone will generate £100bn for the economy, create thousands of jobs and provide an additional £25bn for the Exchequer in production taxes.
In the last six months companies have announced investments worth more than £8bn, creating around 6,000 new jobs. Licence conditions are contributing to a surge in exploration with 130 wells planned over the next three years to help replace the fall of 500m barrels in company reserves because new discoveries failed to keep pace with production.

The Chancellor would have liked the windfall earlier with an election two years away and growth in the economy proving elusive. The industry is anxious to demonstrate that companies and investors are responding to the incentives and Government drive to squeeze more out of the North Sea.

There you have the reason for all the Unionist lies and black propaganda; the equivalent of 2.5 million people paying £100 a week in income tax for the two years.

Yet oddly enough it was the snp internal documents that raised serious concerns...

Concerns which were subsequently rubbished by themselves when they became public...

Aye, pure unionists lies...

Two things stand out in all that...

The British government has made this possible by offering tax relief and "assistance" on the decommissioning of expired platforms...

Secondly, production going up to a level it was at 3 years ago is hardly a boom...

The point of all this is that the snp are basing pretty much everything on the fact that the best possible scenario will happen and continue to do so...

If you're happy to believe a party who are taking a massive gamble and presenting it as fact then more fool you...

Unfortunately the party line to just about everything is "Aye, that'll be better with independence" without, for the most part, actually going into much detail...

I'm pretty sure if I were to visit an snp doctor with any number of ailments I'd be advised to take a yes vote on the referendum and all my troubles would just go away...

Nationalists live in an airy fairy world where anything can be said and the rest of us are supposed to just take it as gospel...

You, and others, seem to go on the assumption that I just simply believe anything that comes from the unionists... Not the case, never have and never will...

The same can't be said for most nationalists tho...

I'll be glad when the No vote gets the win and our country can get back to dealing with the important stuff rather than the circus that the snp have created...

They don't even have a majority of their own support who want independence...

TheDesertFoxhat wrote:Two things stand out in all that...

The British government has made this possible by offering tax relief and "assistance" on the decommissioning of expired platforms...

Secondly, production going up to a level it was at 3 years ago is hardly a boom...

The point of all this is that the snp are basing pretty much everything on the fact that the best possible scenario will happen and continue to do so...

If you're happy to believe a party who are taking a massive gamble and presenting it as fact then more fool you...

Unfortunately the party line to just about everything is "Aye, that'll be better with independence" without, for the most part, actually going into much detail...

I'm pretty sure if I were to visit an snp doctor with any number of ailments I'd be advised to take a yes vote on the referendum and all my troubles would just go away...

Nationalists live in an airy fairy world where anything can be said and the rest of us are supposed to just take it as gospel...

You, and others, seem to go on the assumption that I just simply believe anything that comes from the unionists... Not the case, never have and never will...

The same can't be said for most nationalists tho...

I'll be glad when the No vote gets the win and our country can get back to dealing with the important stuff rather than the circus that the snp have created...

They don't even have a majority of their own support who want independence...

I don't even think that the SNP wants independence.
However, the two things that stand out to you aren't the amount of direct revenues, the jobs created, and the subsequent boost to the economy, they aren't the granting of a record number of exploration licences after 50 years, and they aren't the £8bn in investment in six months?

They are
1) The British government has made this possible by offering tax relief and "assistance" on the decommissioning of expired platforms...

Do you believe that it's beyond the realm of possibility for a future Scottish govt. to duplicate that tax relief, especially in the light of increased revenues from that extra 1/2m barrels a day? ($700m worth A DAY!!!)

2)Secondly, production going up to a level it was at 3 years ago is hardly a boom...

Perhaps that's true, but it is a 33% increase to $2.8bn worth PER DAY at a time when much of the World economy is in recession/depression.
When it comess out of recession, the price of oil will rocket to over $200/barrel, as demand increases.
That would make the oil coming out of the North Sea worth $1.4tn per year approx £1tn.

£1,000,000,000,000.

£200,000 per Scot per year.

Most of that hasn't happened yet and given the fact that everyone agrees it's a volatile commodity means that figures are only an assumption at present...

As for the exploration licenses granted... Just because you go fishing doesn't mea you're going to catch fish...

Seems most plausible that as existing well become depleted obviously newer ones are required to sustain revenue...

It doesn't mean a mass increase...

TheDesertFoxhat wrote:Two things stand out in all that...

The British government has made this possible by offering tax relief and "assistance" on the decommissioning of expired platforms...

Secondly, production going up to a level it was at 3 years ago is hardly a boom...

The point of all this is that the snp are basing pretty much everything on the fact that the best possible scenario will happen and continue to do so...

If you're happy to believe a party who are taking a massive gamble and presenting it as fact then more fool you...

Unfortunately the party line to just about everything is "Aye, that'll be better with independence" without, for the most part, actually going into much detail...




I'm pretty sure if I were to visit an snp doctor with any number of ailments I'd be advised to take a yes vote on the referendum and all my troubles would just go away...

Nationalists live in an airy fairy world where anything can be said and the rest of us are supposed to just take it as gospel...

You, and others, seem to go on the assumption that I just simply believe anything that comes from the unionists... Not the case, never have and never will...

The same can't be said for most nationalists tho...

I'll be glad when the No vote gets the win and our country can get back to dealing with the important stuff rather than the circus that the snp have created...

They don't even have a majority of their own support who want independence...

For the most part, absolute fucking claptrap

So you do agree with some of what I say...

Interesting...

Stage one in your transformation is complete...

Stage two is for you to mibbe contribute something...

So far all you've managed is the party line about not being ruled by some foreign country blah blah blah etc etc...

TheDesertFoxhat wrote:Most of that hasn't happened yet and given the fact that everyone agrees it's a volatile commodity means that figures are only an assumption at present...

As for the exploration licenses granted... Just because you go fishing doesn't mea you're going to catch fish...


Seems most plausible that as existing well become depleted obviously newer ones are required to sustain revenue...

It doesn't mean a mass increase...

Foxy, this ain't fishing. The analogy is very homely, almost charming, but the idea that this is a few wildcat chancers hoping to get lucky is tomfoolery. These are the most sophisticated exploration companies in the World.
Not only do they know that there is oil there, they know how much it will cost to extract it. They have already done most of their exploration by the time licences are applied for. You know it, I know it.
Now we totally disagree on this independence issue, but I've treated you and your arguments with respect, and I'd ask that you treat you my intelligence similarly, regardless of how you feel about it privately.

Seems most plausible that as existing well become depleted obviously newer ones are required to sustain revenue...

It doesn't mean a mass increase...

We don't need a mass increase. We don't require a small increase. We don't even rquire revenues to remain flat.
We will be one of the richest (per capita) countries in the World in 20 years, if we choose independence now, and that doesn't even depend, in the long run, on oil at all.

The argument isn't economic though; it's about making our own decisions for the benefit of our own people.
Have we become, like the old lag, so institutionalised, so unable to take on responsibility for ourselves, that we prefer to stay in prison?
Have we really?

I see "ourselves" as Britain tho...

I don't and never will buy into "one of the richest countries in the world" argument tho...

I do enjoy a good debate on independence but to be honest it's rather time consuming and I can't post half the stuff I'd like to on my phone...

Not an excuse, by the way...

I'm all for people voting for what they believe in and don't actively try to change peoples minds...

I get the whole point of view that some people born here want independence, I've just never been one of them...

I'm not any less Scottish nor am I brainwashed for holding these beliefs, not something that you've ever claimed of me, incidentally...

I'm happy with things the way they are just now and don't feel the need for years of massive upheavel, so to speak, just so one bunch of lying politicians can control things rather than another...

TheDesertFoxhat wrote:I see "ourselves" as Britain tho...

I don't and never will buy into "one of the richest countries in the world" argument tho...

I do enjoy a good debate on independence but to be honest it's rather time consuming and I can't post half the stuff I'd like to on my phone...

Not an excuse, by the way...

I'm all for people voting for what they believe in and don't actively try to change peoples minds...

I get the whole point of view that some people born here want independence, I've just never been one of them...

I'm not any less Scottish nor am I brainwashed for holding these beliefs, not something that you've ever claimed of me, incidentally...

I'm happy with things the way they are just now and don't feel the need for years of massive upheavel, so to speak, just so one bunch of lying politicians can control things rather than another...

see, i was with you up to the last line.

it's a given that all politicians are pretty scummy but i prefer mine to be working class* scottish rather than toffee nosed old etonians


* if there is still such a thing amongst the political classes

TheDesertFoxhat wrote:Most of that hasn't happened yet and given the fact that everyone agrees it's a volatile commodity means that figures are only an assumption at present...

As for the exploration licenses granted... Just because you go fishing doesn't mea you're going to catch fish...

Seems most plausible that as existing well become depleted obviously newer ones are required to sustain revenue...

It doesn't mean a mass increase...

Precise figures are an assumption, the general price direction is a certainty, and the higher the price, the more North Sea Oil is worth recovering.

The hoo-haa about the Falklands is oil related, similarly Rockall, the Azores. etc.
How much easier and cheaper to further exploit North Sea resources, where you have a skilled, sophisticated workforce which is in touch with its home?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-21955536

BP and partners announce $500m Clair field appraisal

A consortium of oil companies is to invest more than $500m (£330m) in an appraisal drilling programme which could lead to further development of a giant North Sea field.

The BP-led consortium said drilling had already started on the first of five wells planned over the next two years at Clair, west of Shetland.

Up to 12 wells could be drilled, depending on initial results.

The news came as the UK government unveiled a new oil and gas strategy.

BP's partners in the appraisal drilling programme are Shell, ConocoPhillips and Chevron.

It is the latest in a series of announcements, aimed at transforming the Atlantic's role as an oil-producing region.

Clair is already known as a "monster" field, holding eight billion barrels of oil.

However, it has been technically difficult to bring ashore.

Although the field was discovered more than 35 years ago, production did not start until 2005.

Last year, BP announced a further huge expansion.

The company and its partners hope the appraisal programme will lead to a third phase, taking production well beyond 2050.

New oil would continue to be pumped by pipeline to Shetland.

BP North Sea regional president Trevor Garlick said: "This is a major milestone and a further big commitment to the west of Shetland by BP and its co-venturers.

"If successful, the appraisal programme could pave the way for a third phase of development at Clair - this is now a real possibility."

Analysts believe that Clair - along with other developments in the area - could lead to the Atlantic overtaking the North Sea as the UK's biggest oil-producing region within 20 years.

Meanwhile, the new oil and gas strategy aimed at securing thousands of jobs and billions of pounds of investment is to be unveiled by UK Business Secretary Vince Cable in Aberdeen, which is known as the oil capital of Europe.

He will address business leaders alongside Scottish Secretary Michael Moore and UK Energy Secretary Ed Davey.

The three secretaries of state will describe plans for "tax certainty", supply chain support and skills development.

Skills shortage

The government has also announced a £7m commitment to help establish the Neptune offshore technology centre of excellence in Newcastle!!!!!

Mr Cable, who will open a facility at offshore specialists Expro in Aberdeen, said: "I want us to consider what barriers are stopping British companies bidding for and winning work in the North Sea. This is an expanding industry. We can either help create more jobs and opportunities across the UK if we get this right, or see work going overseas if not."

The oil and gas industry employs about 400,000 people and provides nearly half the UK's energy needs, the government said.

The strategy states that government will work with the industry to tackle a looming skills shortage, partly by re-training military leavers to fill some of the 15,000 new jobs expected to be created in the oil and gas sector over the next five years.

It also says that perceptions of the industry are "out-dated and inaccurate", and the government will back a campaign to highlight its significance.

It pledges to encourage more technological advancement through research and development, and also to improve the ability of small and medium-sized businesses to access finance.

Malcolm Webb, chairman of industry body Oil and Gas UK, said: "The strategy fosters strong and meaningful collaboration between the government and industry and will help to focus efforts on addressing particular areas such as skills, technology and exports.

"It will further strengthen the oilfield services sector across the country, boost investor confidence, safeguard jobs and help to maximise recovery of Britain's oil and gas reserves."


The future of the oil industry is key in the debate about Scottish independence.

The Scottish National Party, which forms the Scottish government, argues that the country can look forward to an oil boom in the early years of independence, assuming a Yes vote in September 2014.

Opponents warn against over-reliance on a volatile resource, prone to fluctuations in revenue.

Commenting on the publication of the strategy, Scottish Energy Minister Fergus Ewing said: "I am delighted that the UK government are following the Scottish government's lead in recognising the strength and importance of the oil and gas industry by launching their own oil and gas strategy.

"I am pleased that the UK government highlight the positive future of the industry for years to come, the extent of reserves, and the benefit to the balance of payments, and production taxes.

"I welcome their view that there will be a long term future for the oil and gas industry well beyond 2055."

That's BEYOND 40 years Foxy; by which time the price of water will have long outstripped that of oil.

I can't disagree with this:

"As much as I dislike the coalition government in power in Westminster, which I didn't vote for, I also despise the SNP one in power in Hollyrood, which I also never voted for.It's no surprise people feel alienated by main stream parties, Labour was blamed for the poor economy, while the Coalition was blamed for the cuts. Cut backs and struggling economies are not unique to Britain, take one look across the Irish Sea to Ireland, or across the English channel to France, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Greece, Cyprus, etc. and you will see a far worse state of affairs.

Having governments you did not vote for is called democracy. More Scots voted for the collation government in 2010, than voted for the SNP in 2011. The SNP and the nats will always miss represent the facts and anyone who disagrees will be labeled a scaremonger!I'm not a scaremonger I'm just an average Scot with an opinion for which a vocal nationalist minority wish to beat me as a "traitor" for expressing.The fact is governments come and go, people vote them in and vote them out. I don't see the solution to a government I disagree with is the break up of a nation I love.Breaking things apart, dividing people, economies, industry, trade, wealth and debt never helped anyone. It's our unity that makes us strong, it's the division that will end in sorrow and debt.

Look at the way the EU treats debt in Greece, Cyprus, Ireland and Portugal to see what lies ahead for weak nations. Stay strong Britain. We need to stand up to those who try to beat us down for expressing our own opinions. Nationalists the world over share the same mentality towards those who don't share their views, or perceived ethnicity."

Why would we be so weak?

Are you arguing against an independent Scotland being a member of the EU?

These scare-mongering lies are the Unionists only argument.

Having governments you did not vote for is called democracy.

Having no say in whom is elected is not.