Scotland to vote on independence


Off-Topic Discussions

1 to 50 of 231 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
The Exchange

UK now resorting to threats that Scotland wont be able to use the UK pound.

What about all the things that become Scottish property like Edinburgh castle or the Scottish crown jewels? Anything else that reverts to Scottish ownership?


Read Adam Roberts nearly-fantastic New Model Army - a dystopian scenario where the Scots try to secede/devolution and hire mercs that use a wiki to make consensus decisions and can melt back into the populace to fight the British. Nice and disturbing. Don't bother reading the last few chapters. It descends into hopeless plot-wrecking guff.

New Model Army


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm English, but I lived right on the border with Scotland for most of my life. Honestly, I can see why they want independence. The British Government has never made Scotland a priority. Northern England doesn't get much better treatment. You can only take being spat on by rich toffs for so long before you wanna give them the finger.

That being said...I dunno how wise this will all be, economically speaking. I'm mostly worried this would kick-start the recession all over. I'm not overly clear on how things like Scotland taking a chunk of the national debt, membership with the EU and trade contracts would work, but I really hope someone does.

If it's economically a smart move to do it, then it's a good plan. Although it makes me sad to see the UK disintegrate, England has never been nice to others. They really don't owe us may favours. Hell, I suspect a lot of England would love to cut the bottom the bottom third of the UK and set the politicians adrift. But I'd want really, really strong evidence that this will make Scotland better off economically before I'd agree to it, myself.


7 people marked this as a favorite.

FREEEEEDDOOOOOOOM!

*throws claymore*

Liberty's Edge

yellowdingo wrote:

UK now resorting to threats that Scotland wont be able to use the UK pound.

What about all the things that become Scottish property like Edinburgh castle or the Scottish crown jewels? Anything else that reverts to Scottish ownership?

The current referendum would retain Elizabeth as Queen of Scotland, so nothing.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

If they get Independence, there is a good chance I'll be moving north of the border.

Scots politics is far friendlier to Further and Higher education professionals, and students, than England is currently. But then Britain is going to hell in a hand basket right now. Almost every institutions I value, in Britain is being destroyed, privatized or perverted by the Tories.

So once I have teacher training finished, I'd see about my partner and I moving north.

I have no desire to live in what it becoming a fascist nation.


Krensky wrote:
yellowdingo wrote:

UK now resorting to threats that Scotland wont be able to use the UK pound.

What about all the things that become Scottish property like Edinburgh castle or the Scottish crown jewels? Anything else that reverts to Scottish ownership?

The current referendum would retain Elizabeth as Queen of Scotland, so nothing.

Similar to Australia, New Zealand and Canada.... Liz 2.0 as non interfering head of state. I think that it will still be a combined military though.

The Exchange

JonGarrett wrote:

I'm English, but I lived right on the border with Scotland for most of my life. Honestly, I can see why they want independence. The British Government has never made Scotland a priority. Northern England doesn't get much better treatment. You can only take being spat on by rich toffs for so long before you wanna give them the finger.

That being said...I dunno how wise this will all be, economically speaking. I'm mostly worried this would kick-start the recession all over. I'm not overly clear on how things like Scotland taking a chunk of the national debt, membership with the EU and trade contracts would work, but I really hope someone does.

If it's economically a smart move to do it, then it's a good plan. Although it makes me sad to see the UK disintegrate, England has never been nice to others. They really don't owe us may favours. Hell, I suspect a lot of England would love to cut the bottom the bottom third of the UK and set the politicians adrift. But I'd want really, really strong evidence that this will make Scotland better off economically before I'd agree to it, myself.

How close to the border? Scotland intends to take the Scottish lowlands when they go.


54°40′ or fight.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm all for self-determinism for the Scots (I'm an English Southern Softie).

However...

If they want to break from the UK, then they have to completely break from the UK. Import/export duties, customs, law enforcement, military, banking, company registry, stock market, state benefits (such as the NHS), you name it: they should be no different to France in all of those respects, even though we share a land border.

If the Scots want that burden independently, more power to them, and I wish them the best of British luck.

The Exchange

How about states and a federal parliament like Australia?


Chemlak wrote:

I'm all for self-determinism for the Scots (I'm an English Southern Softie).

However...

If they want to break from the UK, then they have to completely break from the UK. Import/export duties, customs, law enforcement, military, banking, company registry, stock market, state benefits (such as the NHS), you name it: they should be no different to France in all of those respects, even though we share a land border.

If the Scots want that burden independently, more power to them, and I wish them the best of British luck.

So their taking their oil with them too right?


Chemlak wrote:

they should be no different to France in all of those respects, even though we share a land border.

Vive le Auld Alliance!


After the rather recent discovery that the white part of my family is Scottish, not Irish, I can only say GO SCOTLAND!


Whilst I consider Salmond probably one of the politically canniest and most charismatic operators in British politics right now, I'd find anything on economic matters which he has to say much more credible if he hadn't expressed so much admiration for the 'Celtic Tiger' phenomenon before the economic bust.
(Sadly economic competence in the British political classes seems to have been in decline generally for the past few generations.)


Interesting that all three parties united on this. Labour I can understand: if they lose Scotland, they lose a significant base of political support in the UK as a whole. Not enough to change too many things, but enough that it can spell the difference between majority rule and coalition government, at least.

The Tories, on the other hand, probably wouldn't be shedding too many tears if Scotland leaves. The loss of Scotland and the Scottish population drops us from our neck-and-neck position with France as the EU's second-or-third most populous nation and drops us back potentialy to fourth (behind Italy as well). But that doesn't really mean anything, as our economy would still be extremely strong. The loss of Scotland also increases the likelihood of Tory victories in future elections (though, again, it's not such an overwhelmingly huge difference as some make out). If the much-quoted Tory claim that Scotland costs the UK more than it contributes is true (a claim very heavily disputed), than they shouldn't mind because the rest of the UK would become better-off if Scotland left.

The only real headache from the Tory perspective I can see is what happens to the nuclear base. Scotland have made it clear that it will have to go, and that they will not tolerate any attempt to annex it (a stupid idea voiced by the MoD a few months ago that Westminster immediately crushed). There'll have to be a transfer window, but building a new base elsewhere in the UK is going to cost billions that the government doesn't have.

Quote:
What about all the things that become Scottish property like Edinburgh castle or the Scottish crown jewels? Anything else that reverts to Scottish ownership?

Queen Elizabeth would still be Queen of Scotland in her own right as well as Queen of England, so those shouldn't have much bearing on the situation.


We did some research amongst young Scots a while ago which put the % against at around 70%, going from memory - things may well have changed since then, though, and that's not the section of the population most likely to vote...

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out either way. I read something a couple of months ago that speculated on what might happen if London cut itself loose from the rest of the country, similar to Hong Kong and China. Given the size of its economy, that might be viable, and would probably please Boris. Disastrous for the rest of us, however.

Sovereign Court

I used to live in Scotland some gosh ... 17 years back, and they already wanted it. While I wish them all the best, I am far from certain that it would really work economically.

More luck to all my friends there anyways.

The Exchange

Freehold DM wrote:
After the rather recent discovery that the white part of my family is Scottish, not Irish, I can only say GO SCOTLAND!

That jus means you have a Lil more Viking in you than you think.

*breaks out the blue face paint*

The Exchange

Limeylongears wrote:

We did some research amongst young Scots a while ago which put the % against at around 70%, going from memory - things may well have changed since then, though, and that's not the section of the population most likely to vote...

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out either way. I read something a couple of months ago that speculated on what might happen if London cut itself loose from the rest of the country, similar to Hong Kong and China. Given the size of its economy, that might be viable, and would probably please Boris. Disastrous for the rest of us, however.

A city state of London would involve limiting suburnban sprawl in favour of vertical growth.


yellowdingo wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
After the rather recent discovery that the white part of my family is Scottish, not Irish, I can only say GO SCOTLAND!

That jus means you have a Lil more Viking in you than you think.

*breaks out the blue face paint*

Plenty of Irish Norsemen about (at one point)

My paternal grandma was an Armstrong, however, so an independent Scotland might mean that the happy days of border reiving could come back again. More fun than what I'm presently doing, for sure.


If I fight for scottland, do I get to kill the English?

No? Just mildly annoy them? Well hell, better than nothing..

The Exchange

BigNorseWolf wrote:

If I fight for scottland, do I get to kill the English?

No? Just mildly annoy them? Well hell, better than nothing..

The soviet method. Annex one house at a time till its all Scotland. Who would go to war over one house.


Quote:
The soviet method. Annex one house at a time till its all Scotland. Who would go to war over one house.

England and Scotland have gone to war over the control of Berwick-Upon-Tweed several times, so we would quite frankly go to war over far less (not that I'm sure it's possible to find a less impressive casus belli).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If the Scots want to exercise their democratic right to national self-determination, then the Commonwealth Party of Galt (M-L) supports them while at the same time calling for cross-national class solidarity. No killing of the English, comrades!

Scots, Welsh, English, Island of Wight,
Same Struggle, Same Fight,
Workers of the World, Unite!

At least, no killing of the English workers.

Remember the fate of Charles I!

Vive le Galt!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I prefer the fate of Charles II... Death due to kidney failure after too much partying.

The King of Bling


Kidney failure is too good for 'em!


Scotland will declare it's independence, and then England will declare war. It will be a long, bloody conflict. My hope is that Sean Connery will be declared the new Scottish King.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Soooo... there will be a Second Battle of Bannockburn, then?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

"Ohhh, cut down in my prime by a Lochaber axe! Dead! DEAD! DEAAAD!!! Oh, wait. Not dead. Mildly annoyed! Mildly annoyed! Mildly *coughs pathetically* mildly... m... m... mildly... That's it for me... Pongo?"

"Yes, Twinkles?"

"Tell... Tell Mother I love her, and that there is one small forgotten corner of Wee Gaunachuchiemcgowlaing-on-Clyde that is forever England. G... God save the Queen!"

(Expires heroically in a mild huff, then goes home for tea)

Anglo-Scottish conflicts: the musical interlude.

The Flowers of The Forest

Jamie

Jonnie Cope

See, The Conquering Hero Comes

1 and 3 come from the Scottish point of view, 2 and 4 from the English, so take yer pick.


Labour will keep austerity, says Miliband

For a socialist federation of the British Isles, from the Hebrides to Old Hampshire!

Vive le Galt!


The difference between Labour and the Tories on the issue is that Labour has some notions about improving living standards, raising the minimum wage to the level it needs to be to actually match massive hikes in food and infrastructure costs and so forth. Labour don't fill me with hopes for the economic future of the country - the current economic crisis was pretty much made worse by a combination of both Labour and Conservative irresponsibilities in previous government - but at least they seem to be talking about creating opportunities, whilst the Tories' talk is all about crushing people and starving them.

We can't even protest-vote for the Lib Dems, knowing they're never going to get into power any more. Frankly, the SNP should start standing candidates in English, Northern Irish and Welsh constituencies, they'd probably win the next election even if Scottish independence never happens ;-)


As a Yank with some Scottish and English blood who only occasionally pays attention to Britishiznoid politics: whatever happened to Scargill's SLP? Fall apart? Sink into obscurity? Jeezus, is Arthur even still alive?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yes, he is (and presently being sued by his union, I believe). The SLP never really got off the ground - as with so many of these things, it was somewhat dominated by one man's ego (see also: Respect) and was prey to various people's entryist ambitions (Maoists, too. Maoists!). It does exist, but I've never met a member, and there are very few sects of whom I can say that. Remind me to tell you the rules of Pinko Bingo at some point.

Still, I voted for them once, would happily do so again and might consider joining if I wasn't happy where I was. I'm not fussy.


Limeylongears wrote:
Yes, he is

For he's a jolly good fellow/For he's a jolly good fellow...

In all my years of reading Spart publications, Scargill was one of only two contemporary union leaders they ever said anything nice about. (The other, btw, was former Teamster president Ron Carey who led the 1997 UPS strike and then got taken out by the Feds after he got sued by his union.)

I remember when the SLP was launched back in the nineties, it was the first time I had ever seen the Sparts give critical support to a candidate running for office. I remember reading the reports in the Boston office: "We showed up at Scargill's campaign headquarters, knocked on council flat doors, told people to vote for Scargill, got back to headquarters, passed out leaflets denouncing Scargill as a Stooge of the Plutocracy, didn't recruit anyone..."

Ultraleft sectarianism? Pfft, Vive le Galt!!!

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
JonGarrett wrote:

I'm English, but I lived right on the border with Scotland for most of my life. Honestly, I can see why they want independence. The British Government has never made Scotland a priority. Northern England doesn't get much better treatment. You can only take being spat on by rich toffs for so long before you wanna give them the finger.

That being said...I dunno how wise this will all be, economically speaking. I'm mostly worried this would kick-start the recession all over. I'm not overly clear on how things like Scotland taking a chunk of the national debt, membership with the EU and trade contracts would work, but I really hope someone does.

If it's economically a smart move to do it, then it's a good plan. Although it makes me sad to see the UK disintegrate, England has never been nice to others. They really don't owe us may favours. Hell, I suspect a lot of England would love to cut the bottom the bottom third of the UK and set the politicians adrift. But I'd want really, really strong evidence that this will make Scotland better off economically before I'd agree to it, myself.

The rest of the UK is largely bank-rolled by southern England. The south is the only part of the UK which pays more in tax than it receives in public spending. So a lot of the grousing about how the north is being abused gets pretty irritating. Give us the finger by all means - but then your public services will probably then collapse.

And that's the basic problem that the Scots are havng a problem getting round. They are actually quite screwed in many ways, the Socttish nationalist plans don't bear a lot of looking at. They wanted a currency union with the rest of the UK. That actually would impose a burden upon the rest of the UK as, for it to actually work, the rest of the UK would have to underwrite Scottish banks (RBS and HBOS, anyone?). The Scots, similarly, would actually lose control over a large chunk of their economic sovereignty, making independence largely illusiory. It's basically a lose-lose. The Scots don't really have much leverage in this, or in taking a fair share of the national debt with them if and when they go, because the UK could block EU membership for an independent Scotland, assuming another country with a troublesome region (Spain being a prime example) doesn't do the same.

And the Scottish Nationalists complaining about "intimidation" by the UK government are missing the point - why would the UK do something for an independent Scotland that would not be in the interests of the remaining UK electorate? All this anti-English/anti-Southern propoganda pretty much makes me, as an English voter, very happy to let Scotland sink or swim on their own. I can't see too many English politicians going out on a limb for independent Scotland. The fact the Scottish nationalists are so bothered by this exposes the basic fragility of their arguments in favour of an independent Scotland. Independent is independent - the Scottish Nationlists don't really want that, they want a free ride off the back of the English tax payer. I.e. they want the staus quo.


The currency argument is a huge problem for the independence campaign. When their platform was that they wanted to join the Euro, that actually had some mileage behind it: it meant that an independent Scotland was attractive inside (when the Euro was working well) and outside the country (the Eurozone gets another, relatively wealthy and well-off, member-state).

After the Euro imploded, the SNP didn't really have a Plan B. Even the 'keep the pound' argument is highly problematic for the reasons outlined above. There seems to be an expectation that the SNP will keep the pound until the Eurozone stabilises and recovers, and then switch to the Euro instead. However, they can't come out and say that as it sounds a bit cynical.

What is interesting is how the vote ties in with the prospect of the UK as a whole leaving the European Union in the referendum of 2017. Where this backfires for the UK is that Scotland seems to be a lot more pro-EU than the rest of the UK, and I know several Scottish people who have said they are more inclined to vote for independence as it ensures they will remain part of the EU, whilst voting to remain part of Britain and then potentially leaving the EU three years later would be worse in the long run for Scotland and for them.

If it wasn't too late in the day, it'd be better for the SNP to delay the independence referendum until after the EU vote, as that both clears up the uncertainty in that area and also gives the Eurozone another few years to recover. But such a delay would be a PR disaster for the SNP.

The Exchange

The real problem with the independence campaign is that the Scottish Nationalists are trying to pretend there will be no real consequences coming from independence. There a (wrong-headed) dislike of the toffs down south but in reality the appetite for independence among the Scots is pretty shallow beyond that. They want their lives to continue as before with the relatively generous welfare spending, but the reality of independence won't really allow that. So Nationalists have tried to pretend that they can get away with independence lite - basically retaining all of the stuff of Britishness while somehow also being independent - hence the desire to retain the pound in a currency union, retain the Queen as head of state, even retain the BBC. Unfortunately, they assumed that the English would just fall in line with all of this as being "plainly" in our interests too, but it actually implies a cost upon the English taxpayer that we are pretty much unwilling to bear. Why should we? The Scots don't seem to like us and want independence. Fine, they have a strong national identity and history, I have no objection to their nationist desires if that is what they vote for. I object very strongly if I'm expected to pay for it all.

Dark Archive

As a Pro Union Scotsman I do find a lot of the nationalists arguments to be either nonsensical or frankly very short sighted.


Aubrey the Malformed wrote:
The real problem with the independence campaign is that the Scottish Nationalists are trying to pretend there will be no real consequences coming from independence. There a (wrong-headed) dislike of the toffs down south but in reality the appetite for independence among the Scots is pretty shallow beyond that. They want their lives to continue as before with the relatively generous welfare spending, but the reality of independence won't really allow that. So Nationalists have tried to pretend that they can get away with independence lite - basically retaining all of the stuff of Britishness while somehow also being independent - hence the desire to retain the pound in a currency union, retain the Queen as head of state, even retain the BBC. Unfortunately, they assumed that the English would just fall in line with all of this as being "plainly" in our interests too, but it actually implies a cost upon the English taxpayer that we are pretty much unwilling to bear. Why should we? The Scots don't seem to like us and want independence. Fine, they have a strong national identity and history, I have no objection to their nationist desires if that is what they vote for. I object very strongly if I'm expected to pay for it all.

Wow. As a Canadian who has had to hear, for pretty much my whole life, how much the province of Quebec wants to separate and become its own nation, I can really sympathize with this.

I have seen 3 referendum votes on this issue alone in my lifetime (2 since I've been able to vote) and it just gets tiring. It erodes any sense of unity the country has when 20% of it wants to go its own way and yet keep all the perks the other 80% are paying for (in Canada's case it is mostly about language - 80% of the province of Quebec is french-speaking (while hold about 15% of the population) while that number drops to less than 20% across the rest of the country. Officially we are bilingual but in reality that only applies to a small portion of the population). We in Canada hear of violence towards and persecution of anglophones for something as meaningless as having the french and english wording of a shop sign being the same size (yes - this actually happened and the shop owner was fined) or Quebec's latest 'triumph' - banning "large" religious symbols from public workers (unless its a crucifix of course) this was mainly about persecution of Muslims, Hindi and Jews.

Sorry to ramble and thread jack I just thought some of the similarities in the 2 situations as noteworthy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
PsychoticWarrior wrote:
Aubrey the Malformed wrote:
The real problem with the independence campaign is that the Scottish Nationalists are trying to pretend there will be no real consequences coming from independence. There a (wrong-headed) dislike of the toffs down south but in reality the appetite for independence among the Scots is pretty shallow beyond that. They want their lives to continue as before with the relatively generous welfare spending, but the reality of independence won't really allow that. So Nationalists have tried to pretend that they can get away with independence lite - basically retaining all of the stuff of Britishness while somehow also being independent - hence the desire to retain the pound in a currency union, retain the Queen as head of state, even retain the BBC. Unfortunately, they assumed that the English would just fall in line with all of this as being "plainly" in our interests too, but it actually implies a cost upon the English taxpayer that we are pretty much unwilling to bear. Why should we? The Scots don't seem to like us and want independence. Fine, they have a strong national identity and history, I have no objection to their nationist desires if that is what they vote for. I object very strongly if I'm expected to pay for it all.

Wow. As a Canadian who has had to hear, for pretty much my whole life, how much the province of Quebec wants to separate and become its own nation, I can really sympathize with this.

I have seen 3 referendum votes on this issue alone in my lifetime (2 since I've been able to vote) and it just gets tiring. It erodes any sense of unity the country has when 20% of it wants to go its own way and yet keep all the perks the other 80% are paying for (in Canada's case it is mostly about language - 80% of the province of Quebec is french-speaking (while hold about 15% of the population) while that number drops to less than 20% across the rest of the country. Officially we are bilingual but in reality that only applies to a small portion of the population). We in Canada hear of violence towards and persecution of anglophones for something as meaningless as having the french and english wording of a shop sign being the same size (yes - this actually happened and the shop owner was fined) or Quebec's latest 'triumph' - banning "large" religious symbols from public workers (unless its a crucifix of course) this was mainly about persecution of Muslims, Hindi and Jews.

Sorry to ramble and thread jack I just thought some of the similarities in the 2 situations as noteworthy.

A major difference is that Scotland was once an independent nation so why should it not regain that independence - as Ireland did.


It's a foolish notion that independence is easy. That is not the question, though. The real question is if it's worth it.


And in this case, is it worth it for Scotland?


Not really.
Since currently they have their own parliament, social welfare policies, transport policies, schools and infrastructure.

How ever they don't have their own currency or ability to change taxation - the problem is if they became independent they'd still not be able to have their own currency & they'd have to take a portion of the UK debt.


They would be quite free to institute their own currency, which would be difficult, but doable. Taking a part of the national debt corresponding to their population doesn't make them worse off than anyone else with the same level of national debt. See, when you can change taxes and make trade deals as a nation, there is a lot to win too. If they want independence, they should go for it.


The EU is not really supporting the idea as it might spread to other countries like Belgium or even Spain (where you have separatist movements). It's why it was told to Scotland that becoming independent country will make them out of EU for a while (the time to apply to enter it officially as an independent country).
On the other hand it's a pressure toward the UK to remain inside the EU. If UK leaves the EU but Scotland remains inside, some UK based companies will relocate to Scotland to benefit an easy access to EU market.

To be honest I don't see who would get benefit from this. Definitely not the UK nor the EU, so the question is: will it truly benefit Scotland?
From my point of view, the timing is bad, Scotland should wait for the british referendum about staying or not inside EU.

A last word about Canada: "Vive le Quebec libre !" ;-)


Union bid to cut Labour link

The Exchange

Sissyl wrote:
They would be quite free to institute their own currency, which would be difficult, but doable. Taking a part of the national debt corresponding to their population doesn't make them worse off than anyone else with the same level of national debt. See, when you can change taxes and make trade deals as a nation, there is a lot to win too. If they want independence, they should go for it.

A lot of it depends on the quality of the economic stewardship. You have to wonder a bit, given the fantasy political economics on display from the Scottish Nationalists. The debate from the Nationalists has not been very honest. In the end, independence is about national identity and how far you want to take it, not so much about the cash. As I said above, I have no problem if the Scots want independence. But the Nationalist agenda seems to be a gradualist aproach to avoid spooking those who like the idea but aren't sure about the reality. Ironically, my take is that it causes more problems than it necessarily solves in respect of the politics and the unknowns involved, especially as it puts the whole thing in the hands of entities outside of Scottish control (like the EU and UK governments). Full independence from the off would clarify matters but that's maybe a scary, off-putting prospect. Having watched a few small countries be effectively obliterated economically by the financial crisis, that's maybe understandable. Especially as they could pursue more autonomy via a more federalised model of UK governance within the UK, which is on the cards if the referendum fails.

The Exchange

Comrade Anklebiter wrote:
Union bid to cut Labour link

This is more to do with changes Milliband wants to make to the funding of Labour and the influence upon it from the unions at a national level, rather than being an issue specifically associated with Scottish independence.


I reserve the right to go as off-topic as the mods will let me get away with.

Break with Labour!

For a socialist federation of the Britishiznoid Isles!

Vive le Galt!

1 to 50 of 231 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / Scotland to vote on independence All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.