The Great Scottish FREEEEEEEEEDOOOMMMMM!!!!1!!! vote

[kentonio]

Highly doubt it on my end, being smaller and more flexible they have a higher chance being next Ireland (without the housing fiasco, and still with some oil to boot) than next Ukraine.

Have you forgotten how long it was after independence before Ireland actually became prosperous on the back of EU funding? Incidentally Ireland is now not prosperous. In fact they're quite deeply in the ****.

In case of no war, a smaller more flexible government closer to home is always better than the distant entity where you are on the periphery being handed out "help" while they are actually being pillaged by the centre (oil) .

Also it is an illusion that England is "rich", London is rich, in principle City, insanely so (and it makes up 1/6th of UK's economy I believe) while England next to it is poor large fragments of it on Eastern European level (except Home counties and Aberdeen for what is worth). Getting out of that grip could be the best they will ever do, and with knowing English they can setup much better conditions for business to move across the border than England can ever do. Irish did it, no reason why Scots could not, they are even better positioned to do so.

a) Small countries are most certainly not better placed to withstand economic issues, as they're usually reliant on far fewer (and smaller) sources of funding. If the price of oil collapses (or supplies dry up) then a huge percentage of Scottish GDP would go with it. Salmond is promising a sovereign wealth fund, yet is also promising huge increases in social spending, no tax increases (in fact a corporation tax cut) and a number of other hugely expensive items. It's nonsense.

b) 'handed out "help"'?! Were you actually aware that significantly more money is spent per capita on people in Scotland than those in England? As for oil being 'pillaged' that's just bollocks. North sea oil has funded increased spending all across the UK, and the investment into getting it up and running came from tax payers across the UK. Funny how when it's oil it's a case of those dreadful pillaging English, but when it's the vast well of money coming from the city there's no mention of which part of the UK is providing it.

c) 'Getting out of that grip'? If being part of the UK is such a burden they can quite frankly **** off and take their oil with them. I'm extremely confident that the UK can deal with the loss of roughly 2.5% of its income a hell of a lot better than Scotland can deal with not having a currency, having to find the funding to set up all it's new national instutions (and embassies around the world), and being at the mercy of the markets with a new reduced credit rating.

Seriously though, if Scotland want to go then good for them, I hope it works out for them. This idea that they've been somehow a subjugated race however is ****ing idiotic. Have we forgotten why the union came about in the first place exactly? Scotland was bankrupt because they tried to establish their own colony in Panama and needed someone to bail them out. Not so bloody romantic after all.

[regexcellent]

Not good for them, they'd better keep up the ****ing sub bases and those northern airbases. And SOSUS.

Besides that, I'll enjoy watching them shoot themselves in the foot.

[Dinner]

As I recall they spent the entire savings of the nation trying to set up that colony in Panama only to find it a malaria infested swamp where none of the crops they brought from northern Europe would grow and not even any natives to pillage. Just about everyone died in short order and the dumb asses wouldn't even stop wearing heavy wool clothes in the tropical heat so heat stroke was right up there with malaria, dysentery, and starvation as causes of death.


One the upside there is still a bay in Panama officially named after the doomed colony though to this day no one but a few native hunter gatherers live there. The BBC had a video on this a while back.

[regexcellent]

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...l-no-vote-lead Apparently the No vote is up by 6 points now.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Ireland not prosperous? While not as much as before the crisis they still have higher GPD per capita than UK and as far as I am aware not all of it is focused in Dublin, like it is in London for the UK.

a) Dependable how you define small - Scotland is about 5m people, but if we consider "small" up to double that size, about 3/4 of top 20 most developed countries are small. In my view this is largely due to a smaller region being better able to set their policies to their advantage. Devolution of power/states rights would be the equivalent in the US, is a good thing in my view.

b) Well, transfer of money to Scotland, whatever you want to call it, or "subsidy" ; that is what ends up happening as the centre is not stimulating economic activity in the periphery, so it ends up transferring tax money there, and you may end up spending more per capita in Scotland, but overall the periphery is screwed. If the decisions were made locally however there is a large chance that Scotland could compete better with the rest of England on new factories being setup, service centres, attracting new business which currently it has no chance to as many of those policies are decided in London. Sure there is devolution, which is a lot better than nothing (and Scots already benefit - ie university funding system, better healthcare), but independence gives you full control of your own destiny. The fact that devolved Scotland is already doing better than England gives me high confidence that they will do even better if they go fully independent.

For North Sea Oil, if you think that billions of oil revenue from 1975 to now would be spent in the same way if Scotland was independent - something tells me that you would disagree with that one too. If they go solo they can only hope for the third or whatever reserves are left, but this is still a decent chunk of change, which can only help. This will nether make or break the deal, they will be better off on their own without oil too, due to the issues highlighted before. How do you think that so many businesses setup shop in Ireland instead, do you think it would have happened if the Irish stayed in the union?

c) UK can surely deal with Scotland leaving. In my view it is a benefit for all parties.

It is just the effect that a strong centre like London has on the rest of the country. The rest of England (not to mention Wales) also suffers from it.

[C0ckney]

i must say that it's a shame that certain posters learnt nothing from the previous thread on scottish independence and continue to spout ill-informed rubbish in this one. more tomorrow.

[kentonio]

Ireland not prosperous? While not as much as before the crisis they still have higher GPD per capita than UK and as far as I am aware not all of it is focused in Dublin, like it is in London for the UK.

Living costs in Ireland are horrendous. If you think the Irish are doing well then you should probably tell them that, because they're not feeling it.

b) Well, transfer of money to Scotland, whatever you want to call it, or "subsidy" ; that is what ends up happening as the centre is not stimulating economic activity in the periphery, so it ends up transferring tax money there, and you may end up spending more per capita in Scotland, but overall the periphery is screwed. If the decisions were made locally however there is a large chance that Scotland could compete better with the rest of England on new factories being setup, service centres, attracting new business which currently it has no chance to as many of those policies are decided in London. Sure there is devolution, which is a lot better than nothing (and Scots already benefit - ie university funding system, better healthcare), but independence gives you full control of your own destiny. The fact that devolved Scotland is already doing better than England gives me high confidence that they will do even better if they go fully independent.

Scotland is not doing better than England, which is why the push for independence based on vague promises of prosperity are working. They have a heavily aging population, young Scots move south in huge numbers and they have pretty terrible health outcomes and life expectancy.

For North Sea Oil, if you think that billions of oil revenue from 1975 to now would be spent in the same way if Scotland was independent - something tells me that you would disagree with that one too.

How exactly do you think Scotland was funded BEFORE the oil? Its all well and good pointing at 40 years of oil revenue, but Great Britain as a whole was funded from a union (and an empire) built with both English, Scottish, Welsh and Irish efforts. Scotland played a huge part in the success of the union, but they received a hell of a lot of rewards from it too. This idea that once oil is found, we should suddenly start segmenting into 'this bit is just ours' is ridiculous.

c) UK can surely deal with Scotland leaving. In my view it is a benefit for all parties.

It won't, it'll weaken both of us.

[kentonio]

Re Ireland, does this look particularly healthy to you?

[Fake Boris]

This thread is hilarious.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

What I'd like to know is what do the Scots think of the Ulster-ites? Are they seen as gigantic a-holes over there like they are over here?

Like many Americans, you appear to be forming your opinion from exclusively pro-Unionist/Catholic sources and that's why you're so baffled. There is huge support for the Loyalist/Protestant cause in Scotland- just look at any crowd of Glasgow Rangers supporters.

[Ben Kenobi]

Like many Americans, you appear to be forming your opinion from exclusively pro-Unionist/Catholic sources and that's why you're so baffled. There is huge support for the Loyalist/Protestant cause in Scotland- just look at any crowd of Glasgow Rangers supporters.

Chances are nil that Northern Ireland stays if Scotland leaves. Only County Down and County Antrim want to stay in.

Scotland leaving would mean that the experiment is finished.

exclusively pro-Unionist/Catholic sources

I had to read this twice to understand that you meant the Nationalists. The Unionists are the folks who want to stay in Britain.

[Ben Kenobi]

As for an oppressed peoples, I find it curious that Scotland refers to itself as Holyrood (vs Westminster).

Do they not understand the history of Holyrood? The reformers (Knox et al), trashed the Catholic abbey at Holyrood, twice. It's a sad story.

[Dauphin]

It could be, you know, that the Scottish parliament is in the district of Holyrood, next to Holyrood house and Holyrood park and Holyrood Abbey.

[Ben Kenobi]

It could be, you know, that the Scottish parliament is in the district of Holyrood, next to Holyrood house and Holyrood park and Holyrood Abbey.

The district is named after the Abbey. It's just a very Catholic name, and the history is very sad. The Queen of Scots was married there.

[kentonio]

Chances are nil that Northern Ireland stays if Scotland leaves. Only County Down and County Antrim want to stay in.

Scotland leaving would mean that the experiment is finished.

Oh stop being a ******. You've been demonstrably wrong about Northern Ireland every time the subject has come up. A majority of the N.Irish want to stay in the union, and nothing Scotland does is going to change that. For one thing Northern Ireland is hugely subsidized by the rest of the UK.