Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Yes. Scotland should be separate from the UK.

18 (42.9%)

No. Scotland should remain in the UK.

24 (57.1%)

Total Members Voted: 42

[Syreniac]

I think that Scottish Independence is a pretty bad idea for Scotland TBH. I don't think that the current levels of Scottish public spending could be sustained if not for the subsidies coming from England - And I think most of the Scottish public know that.

[Simmura McCrea]

And I think most of the Scottish public know that.

*insert sarcastic laughter here*
You'd be amazed at what the Scottish public don't know. There's a hell of a lot of idiots of voting age.

[olemars]

It'd save the English taxpayer quite a lot of money, probably.  Scotland takes out a lot more than it puts in.  Although the interesting debate would be on how to split the debt...

I think most of the oil found in the British sector of the North Sea was in what we could call Scottish territorial waters, so technically we could say they've put in a lot over the years.

[Darvi]

There's a hell of a lot of idiots of voting age.

*whistles inoocently*

But eh, that's pretty much true of every country.

[currie]

I'd disagree with "no better reason", considering that the Scottish probably suffered more than anyone else under Thatcher.  But that's slightly besides the point.  In any case, Scotland is usually very solidly Labour, who are the SNP's main opposition there.

If you only look at the short term, yes Scotland suffered. The only reason they suffered was because of a massive overdependence on industries that were no longer viable and giving too much power to the unions. What happened under Thatcher had to happen at some point or the situation would be far far worse than it was. Also I meant that, even if there was a reason to dislike Thatcher, most of the Scots who go on about her don't know why.

'Fuck Thatcher!'
'Why?'
'Because... something to do with poll tax and mines!'
:facepalm:

Blah blah condecension blah.  I like the way your two points contradict each other (The SNP secretly only advocates support for Scottish independence to win votes...  but the majority of Scottish people don't want independence, so they'll end up losing votes for it?  Huh?).

I like the way you point out my condescending manner.... by being condescending. And I don't see where I said either of those things...
The SNP trumpet independence because it means all the Braveheart-watchers (if you live in Scotland you know who I mean) vote for them (assuming a spherical cow in a vacuum- 33% of the vote) but they can't go through with it (unless they're insane) because we'll lose all the monies we get from England.

It's also the only political policy they have. Other things like tuition fees and prescription charges are just reactions to England so they can say 'look how much better we are than England, they're holding us back' despite the fact that, independent, we wouldn't be able to support those schemes at all because we wouldn't be subsidised by England.

I'm not sure what point you're making here since you're leaving us to guess what viewpoint you're proclaiming is the only correct answer.  You're either saying that AV is bad and anyone who supports AV is stupid (and that therefore places such as my hometown aren't as clever as they're meant to be), or that smart people voted for AV and anyone who opposed it is stupid.  Either way you're being staggeringly arrogant.

Those places are more likely to look at the facts and vote based on what they think is best for them and the country. This is due to a higher concentration of people with higher education and larger incomes (although the first is generally more important). Poorer areas are more likely to have lower levels of education and are (if they vote at all) more likely to vote on party lines. As eliteist as it sounds- I'd rather have Urist McPost-Grad run my country than Urist McRefuseHauler.

[scriver]

Nationalism is bad, mm'key? We should be moving away from all these ridiculous fantasies, not indulge in them. You stay, Scotland, until you fins a better reason to secede than "we're Scots and you're English hurdurr".

[mainiac]

'Fuck Thatcher!'
'Why?'
'Because... something to do with poll tax and mines!'
:facepalm:

As opposed to:
'Fuck Unions!'
'Why?'
'Because... something to do with union dues and markets!'
:facepalm:

God knows it's the unions fault that a inequality keeps going up across the Anglophone world at the same time that union rates decline.

[currie]

I don't think you quite got me there. I wasn't saying that unions are bad in any way, however there is a limit to what you can let them get their own way on. The recent protests in London for example: Massive numbers turned out to protest cuts to the public sector despite the fact that, if we don't cut the public sector (which bloated massively, and uselessly under Labour), then the deficit shall keep rising a lot faster than growth can counter it. Simply short-mindedness because they heard they would be losing their jobs. Yes, you'll be out of work for a while and might have to take another job you don't really want but at least we aren't bankrupt and, once we get the economy back to something optimistic, you'll probably end up better off in the long run.

Then there's the BA strikes....

It's not unions that are bad, a body to regulate employers and keep them playing fair is good.
A body that sacrifices the rest of the country and the survival of the business for its own short-term gain is bad.

[mainiac]

Be that as it may, cutting government spending in the middle of a depressionesque recession is a brain dead idea.  No economist worth his salt is surprised that it immediately lead to the British economy tanking.  If you want to reform the civil service, don't do it when the economy is in the worst recession of 70 years!

[currie]

Well necessity is the mother of invention.

Why would we reform the civil service in a good spell? Telling people they're losing their jobs during a recession is bad enough for the government but telling them during a good period is going to obliterate the party's chances for a long time. Yes, it needs to be done, but no one has the balls to do it when there isn't an immediate problem.

I'll be honest and say economics is nowhere near a subject I'm expert in but the majority of the cuts are in the 'non-essential' public sector, bureaucrats and such, whilst front-line services have been somewhat protected (except in certain constituencies where it's been used as a weapon*). The public sector, generally, doesn't create growth or revenue. The only way the Public sector can exist is with a thriving private sector to fund it with taxes: Scotland's private sector is outnumbered by the public sector and has the third most people working in the public sector (as a percentage) in the world. Only Cuba and Iraq have more and they're different situations completely. Cuba's public sector produces- it's where all the countries industry lies. Iraq is still trying to rebuild after the war and is bankrolled by the US largely**. That's why we need to cut it now.

The economy was going down either way. It's building it back up that's the main issue and spending on a bloated, inefficient and corrupt*** public sector is not the way to go about that.

Now, the asterisks:
*Certain Labour constituencies in England along with SNP and Labour constituencies in Scotland have been cutting a lot more than Tory constituencies and then blaming it on the Tories' cuts. This has been mentioned both in newspapers, parliament, PMQs and I received leaflets through the post from both Labour and the SNP pretty much saying exactly that.

**I suppose the situation of a country's public sector being bankrolled by another country could evoke some parallels...

***I can't think of any specific cases of actual widespread corruption atm but just think of the widespread crony-ism, over-sized pay-packets, unsustainable pensions, numerous 'sick days', the people who do fuck all during the week and then collect time and a half at the weekend.... one of my old school-mates is on Aberdeen City Council (and involved in the whole Trump fiasco to) so I have first hand information as well as all the other mountains of cases.

[Nilocy]

Oh my, a Scottish thread I wasn't aware of until 5 minutes ago. I voted for the SNP, the so called Scottish separtists. So, I want independance.

Right, I shall address stuff in the most fun way possible:

Spoiler: @Ampersand (click to show/hide)

If you concede the point to the Scottish, do you also concede it to the Welsh? What about North Ireland? Should it be handed over to the Republic of Ireland? The United Kingdom is a shorthand method of writing, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Great Britain isn't Great Britain without Scotland, now is it?

There is nothing stopping Wales and Ireland from becoming independant, just they don't want.

And if we really do want to hold onto this concept of Self Determination for all, would we not be considered hypocrites if we did not extend this principle to the Basques in Spain and France, to the Bretons in Brittany province in France? Should not Belgium be divided into Flanders and Walloonia? Should the region of Veneto be granted independence from Italy? How many which ways can you divide the Balkan Peninsula along ethnic lines? How much territory is the United States willing to surrender to the Lakota and other assorted tribes that it, at least in their eyes, stole land from? Do we really want to go into the Middle East and completely redraw the map lines to actually respect post colonial ethnic lines this time? Should Mexico surrender Chiapas to the Zapistas?

Scottish people arn't bombing trains.

Spoiler: @Pnx (click to show/hide)

A) I'm pretty sure the British government has said it will "not block" Scottish independence since long before I was born.

Yup, this is true.

B) All the Scots I've ever met, which admittedly isn't a whole lot, have been quite firmly against independence. At this point, there isn't a lot of reason to be independent of the rest of the UK.

[/quote]
Other than not being part of a ridiculous government in power atm, having the economic viability to sustain an independant economy... and the fact that England invaded us a few hundred years back and we've still not forgiven them?

Spoiler: @Leafsnail (click to show/hide)

It'd save the English taxpayer quite a lot of money, probably.  Scotland takes out a lot more than it puts in.  Although the interesting debate would be on how to split the debt...

Scotland generates quite a bit more than its fair share economy wise, the oil industry being the main one. Not to mention whisky, renewable energy potentinal etc. etc.

As for "Scottish people don't want independence"... well, the Scottish Nationalist Party (pro-independence) has won Scotland's first ever parliamentary majority.  There's got to be some support for it...

This, so much this.

I cba addressing all of the tabloid news points here, but I'd really really like to point out that one of the reasons why Scotland is 'taking' more is because I genuinely think we're entitled to more, purely because of the natural resources that the North Sea oil fields generate. Honestly, that thing is a treasure trove of tax money, and where does it all go? Westminster to be distributed throughout the UK.

Nationalism is bad, mm'key? We should be moving away from all these ridiculous fantasies, not indulge in them. You stay, Scotland, until you fins a better reason to secede than "we're Scots and you're English hurdurr".

Nationalism, in the sense where you go "We're better than you, now die." is bad, the nationalism in Scotland is more, "We can do better without being ruled by a parliment that doesn't give a rats ass about us. We've got the means, now let us." is good. Anyway, the SNP are pro Europe, the Conservatives in England are borderlines, take up the bigger issue about nationalism with them.

And, for those who don't say the Scots have been put down before by Westminster, I point you to this .

Also, corrie you're not a true scot.

[Darvi]

What has Ireland to do with this? You surely mean that little bit of land northwards of it?

[RedKing]

I used to support the notion of Scottish independence, until I looked at the hard numbers. There's just not enough there to be self-sustaining. Their economy would be built around dwindling oil, sheep, tourism, sheep, haggis, sheep, sex tourism for sheep-shaggers, and more sheep.

Scottish independence notions are built on a mishmash of cultural "differences" which have been romanticized over the centuries. Culturally and ethnically, the "Scottish" are a hodgepodge of Celts, Vikings, Norman French (who are themselves descended from Vikings) and Anglo-Saxons. And this is speaking as someone who can trace his ancestry back to Dunfermline in Fife, and his wife's to a clan that straddled the border with Northmuberland, with members in both the English and Scottish minor nobility. Love Scotland, but it's simply not in its best interests to seperate from the UK.

[currie]

Please don't call me Corrie.. I went out with a Corrie once, didn't end well. 
Currie on the other hand is a fairly pleasant suburb of Edinburgh where I grew up. Or at least it was a fairly pleasant suburb of Edinburgh.. *Looks out window at smoking twelve year old who never goes to school stroking a pitbull in a garden with more whitegoods than my fucking kitchen.*

When the oil was first discovered... maybe. We could of lived off that and built up industry to replace it when it runs out. Now, however, a lot of our industry is gone and so is most of the oil. We could always put in major effort to rebuild our countries economic set-up from the start by reducing the public sector, encouraging the growing 4th tier industry, dredging the Clyde and Forth to get the shipyards going again etc, then declaring independence. But why would the rest of Britain pay for us to do that when we're gonna fuck off at the end anyway?

As Redking said- Scotland and England are pretty much the same. Gaelic, tartan, haggis and all that was either a purely highland thing (Gaelic didn't leave Skye until the 1800s) or an invention by the Victorians to make their holiday camp more exciting. The whole concept of clan tartans was an English invention.

And don't be persnickety Darvi. 

PS: As RedKing mentioned his Scottish ancestry and I love bringing this up: My father's side of the family were rather well-off landowners in Aberdeenshire and through them I can trace my roots back to this guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Penny We ended up in Aberdeenshire due to a shipwreck and some romance-novel shelter taking in a farmer's cottage, marry the daughter and hey presto, here we are.

[Ampersand]

Scottish people arn't bombing trains.

Although that is both irrelevant to what I was talking about, and also irrelevant since most of the groups I mentioned ALSO are not bombing trains, since you bring it up, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_National_Liberation_Army