Scottish Independence - Yay or Nay? (Poll)

[South Asia Minor]

The only debate over Margaret Thatcher's funeral should be whether or not she is still alive when she's buried. I'll admit, that is not mine.

[Alyakia]

I find it extremely embarrasing to hear Scottish people blame present problems on the actions of politicians that left office over 20 years ago!!!

Do you think that once a politician leaves office that all their policies and all the effects of those policies magically disappear? That a nation is run based on 4-5 year terms and nothing that happens within effects the next?

And "Not our people" sounds very racial, I would say racist. You are British, since you live on the island, known as Great Britain, in the British isles, hence those people who live there, are British. Just like people who live on Europe, are called Europeans. I won't go into that area, whether Irish are British. Since like its kinda off topic

No. Please go into it. If you want to try and say everyone who lives on the same island or in the same state must somehow be the same people then why should you get to conveniently ignore the obvious problem?

[Trixiestan]

Because a lot of the problems in modern British society are a direct result of Thatche and her policies? You're either blind or live in the south.

Can we not generalise by regions please? I live in the south and would quite happily piss on the bitches grave :/

Yeah, I suppose you're right. >:

Here have this shovel, you can help us bury her~

[Marcurix]

I am Scottish and the sooner we are independent the better. Here are four reasons -

1. Tories. If Scotland was independent we would no longer have to rely on England voting Labour. Scotland would never have to suffer under an unelected or unpopular Tory government ever again.

2. Oil. Around half the proven reserves of North Sea Oil have been brought ashore. We should as an independent nation explore having a sovereign wealth fund and invest in Scotland's future. Since the 1970's the UK government has not invested the oil money but rather wasted it on neo-liberal economic experiments such as Thatcherism and privatisation. For the record the vast majority of the oil reserves of the UK lie in waters that would be under the jurisdiction of an independent Scotland.

3. Currency. We could quite easily retain Sterling. All this talk about an independent Scotland being forced to join the EURO is unionist scaremongering. Not all EU members are in the EURO. Australia and New Zealand retained Sterling until the 1960's. That was 60 years after they ended their status as colonies.

4. Representation. At the moment Scottish Government ministers are sometimes allowed to join UK ministerial teams for talks at the EU etc. Sometimes they are not and Scotland's voice is not heard or her interests served. If Scotland was independent we could be full members of the UN, EU, Council of Europe etc. Scotland's voice would be heard at the top tables instead of being subsumed by a UK government that is led by a party with just one seat north of the border.

Scotland should forge it's own path in the world. We should separate from the English who are not our people and care little for us. Membership of the UK has done Scotland little favours in recent times. Whether it is illegal wars, neo-liberal economic policies or simply Margaret Thatcher. It is either Independence for Scotland or to be what Jim Sillars called "90 Minute Patriots"!

1. Tories. If Scotland was independent we would no longer have to rely on England voting Labour. Scotland would never have to suffer under an unelected or unpopular Tory government ever again.

Firstly, the Tory government was elected. As for the unpopular government bit, don't hold your breath.

2. Oil. Around half the proven reserves of North Sea Oil have been brought ashore. We should as an independent nation explore having a sovereign wealth fund and invest in Scotland's future. Since the 1970's the UK government has not invested the oil money but rather wasted it on neo-liberal economic experiments such as Thatcherism and privatization. For the record the vast majority of the oil reserves of the UK lie in waters that would be under the jurisdiction of an independent Scotland.

That's all well and good if Scotland wasn't running a net fiscal deficit even with accounted geographical oil revenues. The thing about a sovereign wealth fund is that you actually need money to invest to make it happen.

3. Currency. We could quite easily retain Sterling. All this talk about an independent Scotland being forced to join the EURO is unionist scaremongering. Not all EU members are in the EURO. Australia and New Zealand retained Sterling until the 1960's. That was 60 years after they ended their status as colonies.

Two points on this.
First, if Scotland did retain the Sterling it effectively removes all say it has about its own policy on the currency.

Secondly, the EU treaty says new member states must join the euro. Of the current 10 EU members not in the euro, only the UK and Denmark have formal opt-outs, something Scotland would probably not obtain. Scotland could could follow Norway and join the European Economic Area (EEA), giving it access to the Eu's single market without EU membership. But this means Scotland could not participate in decision-making, since it was not an EU member.

4. Representation. At the moment Scottish Government ministers are sometimes allowed to join UK ministerial teams for talks at the EU etc. Sometimes they are not and Scotland's voice is not heard or her interests served. If Scotland was independent we could be full members of the UN, EU, Council of Europe etc. Scotland's voice would be heard at the top tables instead of being subsumed by a UK government that is led by a party with just one seat north of the border.

At the top tables? You realize of course, Scotland would not be part of the security council, the closest thing to the top table in the UN, have less seats in Europe and so on. A UK government with which Scotland is apart of it bound to fight for Scottish interests on the international stage, by sheer virtue that it is also within their own interests. That same government that you see oh so intent on ratting all over also pushed for Scottish products in trade talks with India and China, so don't spout such things.

I totally agree with you on all four points, the North Sea oil should help in Scotland's economy. And for too long Scotland ha been oppressed under British rule.

Yea, this is where I advise you to actually look things up before commenting.

[Marcurix]

The traitors who give her a state funeral should be burned...

people who relish in the death of others EVEN if they are Maggie Thatcher should be ashamed

People like that tend to be a bit set in their ways.

[Keronians]

Scotland shouldn't secede.

Population, what, 5 million?

The bias towards England's completely justifiable. England has a much larger population, and a much larger economy.

[South Asia Minor]

Scotland shouldn't secede.

Population, what, 5 million?

The bias towards England's completely justifiable. England has a much larger population, and a much larger economy.

Neither of those are reasons for Scotland not to secede.

[Fionnuala_Saoirse]

The traitors who give her a state funeral should be burned...

people who relish in the death of others EVEN if they are Maggie Thatcher should be ashamed

I'm not sure disagreeing with her having a state funeral equates to relishing in her death.

[Keronians]

Scotland shouldn't secede.

Population, what, 5 million?

The bias towards England's completely justifiable. England has a much larger population, and a much larger economy.

Neither of those are reasons for Scotland not to secede.

If the Scottish prefer reducing their standard of living, then all the more power to them, I guess.

If they don't, then they should take that into account. England's larger economy largely subsidises the Scottish people.

[Fionnuala_Saoirse]

England's larger economy largely subsidises the Scottish people.

Prove this. I keep seeing different figures.

[SD_Film Artists]

Scotland shouldn't secede.

Population, what, 5 million?

The bias towards England's completely justifiable. England has a much larger population, and a much larger economy.

Neither of those are reasons for Scotland not to secede.

Indeed, but it is something which shouldn't be confused with 'oppression'.

[SD_Film Artists]

England's larger economy largely subsidises the Scottish people.

Prove this. I keep seeing different figures.

I think it's more to do with the money into Scotland-money out of Scotland ratio rather than comparative economy sizes.

[The Matthew Islands]

Apparently Scotland would be humiliated by Salmond's plan to keep the pound.

[Keronians]

England's larger economy largely subsidises the Scottish people.

Prove this. I keep seeing different figures.

Scotland's GDP per capita: $33,680
UK's GDP per capita: $39,604

Scotland makes up $210 billion dollars of GDP. The total GDP of the UK is $2.48 trillion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... a_(nominal)

By being a part of the UK, the Scottish become a part of a great power, and as such can benefit from the resulting economic, military, scientific, technological, political, etc. economies of scale.

[Keronians]

Prove this. I keep seeing different figures.

I think it's more to do with the money into Scotland-money out of Scotland ratio rather than comparative economy sizes.

No, it has all to do with the economy sizes.

Scotland on its own doesn't have the industrial diversity that England has.

[Angleter]

I am Scottish and the sooner we are independent the better. Here are four reasons -

1. Tories. If Scotland was independent we would no longer have to rely on England voting Labour. Scotland would never have to suffer under an unelected or unpopular Tory government ever again.

2. Oil. Around half the proven reserves of North Sea Oil have been brought ashore. We should as an independent nation explore having a sovereign wealth fund and invest in Scotland's future. Since the 1970's the UK government has not invested the oil money but rather wasted it on neo-liberal economic experiments such as Thatcherism and privatisation. For the record the vast majority of the oil reserves of the UK lie in waters that would be under the jurisdiction of an independent Scotland.

3. Currency. We could quite easily retain Sterling. All this talk about an independent Scotland being forced to join the EURO is unionist scaremongering. Not all EU members are in the EURO. Australia and New Zealand retained Sterling until the 1960's. That was 60 years after they ended their status as colonies.

4. Representation. At the moment Scottish Government ministers are sometimes allowed to join UK ministerial teams for talks at the EU etc. Sometimes they are not and Scotland's voice is not heard or her interests served. If Scotland was independent we could be full members of the UN, EU, Council of Europe etc. Scotland's voice would be heard at the top tables instead of being subsumed by a UK government that is led by a party with just one seat north of the border.

Scotland should forge it's own path in the world. We should separate from the English who are not our people and care little for us. Membership of the UK has done Scotland little favours in recent times. Whether it is illegal wars, neo-liberal economic policies or simply Margaret Thatcher. It is either Independence for Scotland or to be what Jim Sillars called "90 Minute Patriots"!

1. Unelected? That's interesting. Anyway, part of a country voting for the losing party is not grounds for secession. Otherwise it's time for the North-East, Birmingham, and next time Labour get in Wessex (and Cornwall, whose LibDem sympathies are eternally ignored), to walk out. The 'England overruling Scotland' thing only comes into play when you see Scotland and England (and Wales and NI) as completely separate camps, and dismiss British identity altogether. So it all comes down to the question of nationality.

2. The whole point of neoliberalism and privatisation (adopted to some extent across the developed world, Norway included) being largely so that the government can sell things off and stop subsidising them aside, Scotland as of 2009-10 had a 10% of GDP deficit even with a geographical share of North Sea Oil revenues. Now, given the gloomy economic news, the SNP's opposition to the UK govt.'s austerity, and the need to establish various new public offices and institutuions in a newly-independent Scotland (which already has a slightly larger public sector than the rest of the UK, incl. geographical oil share), I'd say it'd be quite a long time before Scotland could think of having the money to put away in a sovereign wealth fund. And really, given the various wrong estimates beforehand, nobody can really claim to know how long Scotland would keep pumping out oil at the current rate (and price).

3. Whether Scotland would inherit the UK's right not to use the Euro if it wants EU membership is highly contentious, and would have to be sorted out at the time, probably between Scotland and the EU. And given that Scotland is supposed to become an oil-rich arc-of-prosperity sort of country with no more 'neoliberal experiments', surely its by all accounts completely different economic plan to EWNI's would make it absurd that Scotland still have its monetary policy dictated by EWNI, now acting entirely in EWNI's interests? Small countries with no monetary policy of their own have not fared all that well in recent years, I'm sure you'll know.

4. That is because Scotland is part of the UK. Scotland's voice is heard as part of the UK, which includes Scotland. If Scotland were independent it would be a small and largely irrelevant Northern European state who could sit at the top tables (not as a permanent UNSC member, mind) and not be listened to while the big boys (incl., but to a lesser extent, EWNI) actually decide the important things.

"The English are not our people." So here is the nationality question. We share one language, one (main) island, much of our culture (be it traditional to one nation and spread to the other, established over the last few centuries, or part of British pop culture), have much exchange between the elements of culture we don't share, have in over 300 years together formed one of the most powerful and successful states the world has ever seen (and created Canada, Australia, etc. in doing so), been at the forefront of academia and technology throughout that time. We also share a long history- both nations came under considerable influence from Vikings, Normans, and each other; both nations rejected absolutism for Parliamentarianism, and stood alienated from most of Europe for religious reasons; and while England was founded by Anglo-Saxons, Scotland's Anglo-Saxons took over dominance from the Norman-French (and became the dominant language soon after, supplanting Gaelic) in the 15th century. Said Anglo-Saxons inhabited either side of the often-changing Anglo-Scottish border, to the point that there was (and probably still is) more difference within each polity, than either side of that border. I firmly believe that we form one nation and one people, together with the Welsh and Northern Irish; much as (for example) the Bavarians, Saxons, and Hessians, all (particularly the Bavarians) very proud of their own unique identities, all form one German people.

[Angleter]

Prove this. I keep seeing different figures.

I think it's more to do with the money into Scotland-money out of Scotland ratio rather than comparative economy sizes.

The whole question of 'is Scotland subsidised' has to do with oil. Unfortunately, we don't know just what share of the oil Scotland will get, and we don't know how that will translate into revenue, especially considering the fluctuations in oil prices.

[Staeny]

I think it's more to do with the money into Scotland-money out of Scotland ratio rather than comparative economy sizes.

The whole question of 'is Scotland subsidised' has to do with oil. Unfortunately, we don't know just what share of the oil Scotland will get, and we don't know how that will translate into revenue, especially considering the fluctuations in oil prices.

I'm more interested in how much of the debt they will get. I dunno whether it would be smarter to allow them to be free of debt and thus more flexible to innovative and develop more. Then again I'm not sure i'm confident of Scottish 'dynamism'....

[Staeny]

They should probably use the oil money to invest in hydroelectric so they can be energy independent and maybe even become the one the UK is dependant on...

[SD_Film Artists]

They should probably use the oil money to invest in hydroelectric so they can be energy independent and maybe even become the one the UK is dependant on...

Or England is dependant on, as a UK without Scotland will be a sorry sight.

[Keronians]

They should probably use the oil money to invest in hydroelectric so they can be energy independent and maybe even become the one the UK is dependant on...

Or England is dependant on, as a UK without Scotland will be a sorry sight.

What makes you say that?

[Angleter]

The whole question of 'is Scotland subsidised' has to do with oil. Unfortunately, we don't know just what share of the oil Scotland will get, and we don't know how that will translate into revenue, especially considering the fluctuations in oil prices.

I'm more interested in how much of the debt they will get. I dunno whether it would be smarter to allow them to be free of debt and thus more flexible to innovative and develop more. Then again I'm not sure i'm confident of Scottish 'dynamism'....

If it turns out Scotland's GDP is below the UK average, Salmond will probably want it on GDP, and the UK govt. population.
If it turns out Scotland's GDP is above the UK average, Salmond will probably want it on population, and the UK govt. GDP.

Either way, should be about 8%-10%, and similar to the UK amount of debt as % of GDP (projected around 70% by 2014). Which will be a fairly large amount, considering they'll have a deficit as % of GDP similar to the UK's at that point (projected around 4% by 2014- note that these figures are subject to change as the economy does, and could easily be larger), and will have to spend quite a bit in the first year or two establishing the institutions of an independent state that the Scottish Parliament and Government currently lack (and ending all the no-longer needed UK institutions that Scotland can't take over).

[Alyakia]

By being a part of the UK, the Scottish become a part of a great power, and as such can benefit from the resulting economic, military, scientific, technological, political, etc. economies of scale.

hey keronia

could you explain to these plebs why they should totally join your federal europe dream state

If they don't, then they should take that into account. England's larger economy largely subsidises the Scottish people.

nope

That's all well and good if Scotland wasn't running a net fiscal deficit even with accounted geographical oil revenues. The thing about a sovereign wealth fund is that you actually need money to invest to make it happen.

1) proof
2) hey isn't that the case for the UK too

People like that tend to be a bit set in their ways.

No, he's completely right! Do you want to tell you about the inherent value of human life and how all life deserves respect and death is not to be celebrated, or should I start shouting and swearing at you for making such a useless and shitty post with its content existing to attack "people like that"?

I think it's more to do with the money into Scotland-money out of Scotland ratio rather than comparative economy sizes.

scotland gives out slightly more than it takes. hth. ask the resident tories for more information.

1. Unelected? That's interesting. Anyway, part of a country voting for the losing party is not grounds for secession. Otherwise it's time for the North-East, Birmingham, and next time Labour get in Wessex (and Cornwall, whose LibDem sympathies are eternally ignored), to walk out. The 'England overruling Scotland' thing only comes into play when you see Scotland and England (and Wales and NI) as completely separate camps, and dismiss British identity altogether. So it all comes down to the question of nationality.

No, it doesn't also come into play when you dismiss British identity altogether. Sorry. I'm suprised I never saw "BRITISH ELECTION" in there. ):

4. That is because Scotland is part of the UK. Scotland's voice is heard as part of the UK, which includes Scotland. If Scotland were independent it would be a small and largely irrelevant Northern European state who could sit at the top tables (not as a permanent UNSC member, mind) and not be listened to while the big boys (incl., but to a lesser extent, EWNI) actually decide the important things.

we must have a large international penis (like the UK which is very very very important)

[Staeny]

They should probably use the oil money to invest in hydroelectric so they can be energy independent and maybe even become the one the UK is dependant on...

Or England is dependant on, as a UK without Scotland will be a sorry sight.

oh crap yeah....you see the subconscious view of an english person now...i say UK whether scotland is in it or not. although technically the UK includes northern ireland as well as england and so would still be named as a such.

[Alyakia]

shut up scotland

signed
englishman, man who lives in canada, spaniard, BRITISH MAN
total votes in the referendum: 0

oh no does this make me racist