# Should Scotland have independence



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

What do you think ??????


----------



## redroses2106 (Aug 21, 2011)

I don't see anything good coming of it - I don't see it happening either.


----------



## ballybee (Aug 25, 2010)

I don't know anymore 

I've always believed Scotland should have more independence....but never totally. I feel as a country we should be allowed to have more say over how our country is run but to completely remove ourselves is ridiculous 

When the vote comes I'll be voting no, but I do fear the backlash from the UK government for taking this so far!


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

I just think if they want to go let them go then we won't have to listen to them whinging all the time. Not sure what good it will do them though.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

ballybee said:


> I've always believed Scotland should have more independence....but never totally.


Why should the Scots have independence yet not the English? Just one of the reasons I don't know.

In general this feels to me this is all about a small group of people empire building and lying where necessary about the practicalities. As a "nation" we are certainly stronger together. I'll be honest and ashamed to say, for me personally, if independence does go through, part of me will want Scotland to fail as I feel it's a betrayal. I don't know how common that viewpoint is and how it will influence things in regards to trade etc. I don't see people in England not being bitter about it though.

I also feel what it will come down to is will the propaganda campaign by the SNP be good enough, no matter how inconsistent and factual things like figures are.

I found TOM UTLEY: If the English and Scots don't kiss and make up, I could soon be married to a foreigner... | Mail Online to be interesting.


----------



## ballybee (Aug 25, 2010)

Goblin said:


> Why should the Scots have independence yet not the English? Just one of the reasons I don't know.


I don't want to be totally independent, just that as Scotland is a separate country we should be able to have more say in how we do things


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

ballybee said:


> I don't want to be totally independent, just that as Scotland is a separate country we should be able to have more say in how we do things


Shouldn't the English then not have to worry about taken Scotland into consideration when deciding things then if it affects choices?


----------



## mollydog07 (May 26, 2012)

ballybee said:


> I don't want to be totally independent, just that as Scotland is a separate country we should be able to have more say in how we do things


totally agree with this,no matter who we vote we are still goverened by Westminster,i don't think we can afford independence.


----------



## ballybee (Aug 25, 2010)

Goblin said:


> Shouldn't the English then not have to worry about taken Scotland into consideration when deciding things then if it affects choices?


lol do they usually??

On a more serious note, i can see points for both sides of the argument, Scotland does have it's own government, but they don't have much power over what we do as a country, it is frustrating and i can understand why Alex Salmond has been fighting for freedom but i don't think (and never have) that breaking off from the UK is going to benefit us.


----------



## JANICE199 (Feb 1, 2008)

*I still like the idea that the UK should be just that. But if the Scots want to vote for independence i also agree they should be able to vote. Personally, i don't think the majority will vote for independence.*


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

ballybee said:


> On a more serious note, i can see points for both sides of the argument


So do I, that's why I don't know but I know some english people who actually want the scots to leave and are saying good riddance. Isn't that one of the troubles with "proud" cultures?


----------



## egyptianreggae (May 26, 2012)

I'm English and I've lived in Scotland for nine years now. If I'm still here when the referendum comes up, I'm definitely voting no. Not just because I'd feel like a turkey voting for Christmas if I voted yes, but because I could never bring myself to vote for nationalism. I don't see any good coming of it. As far as I can see, the SNP have no basis for any of the claims they make in their white paper. I'm trying to avoid as much of the propaganda on both sides as I can, as well!


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

egyptianreggae said:


> ]I'm English and I've lived in Scotland for nine years now. If I'm still here when the referendum comes up, I'm definitely voting no.[/B] Not just because I'd feel like a turkey voting for Christmas if I voted yes, but because I could never bring myself to vote for nationalism. I don't see any good coming of it. As far as I can see, the SNP have no basis for any of the claims they make in their white paper. I'm trying to avoid as much of the propaganda on both sides as I can, as well!


But your not a Scot so why should you be able to vote.


----------



## egyptianreggae (May 26, 2012)

Because I'm over 16, and because I live here, which means I'm eligible to vote.


----------



## soulful dog (Nov 6, 2011)

I've always been in the don't know camp but I'm edging a little more towards voting yes. And I quite like this article in the Guardian for some of the reasons why.

The attitude of some English in thinking "good riddance to them" etc leaves me feeling a little uneasy though. To be fair I can understand why (people seem to be comparing it to a messy divorce), but I don't agree with it, and there doesn't need to be any nasty feeling about it.

There are good and bad points to Scotland being an independent country, just as there are good and bad points for us to stay as part of the UK.

Personally, I think it might be a good thing for us to be independent, but still very friendly with our neighbours. But then I am a bit of an idealist (and nationalism has very little to do with why I will vote one way or another)..... if I were to vote yes, it'd be more in hope than expectation - which is why I am still very much undecided.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

I'm in the 'yes' camp. If the Scots want it they should have it. The current situation is ridiculous and most unfair to England. Why is there a Scottish parliament AND Scottish MPs in Westminster able to vote on solely English matters?


----------



## Lurcherlad (Jan 5, 2013)

If they want to be independent, then let them.

If they think they will be better off - then good luck. 

I did see an article that said if the independent vote won, there were 200,000 scots who were going to move to England


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

Lurcherlad said:


> If they want to be independent, then let them.
> 
> If they think they will be better off - then good luck.
> 
> *I did see an article that said if the independent vote won, there were 200,000 scots who were going to move to England *


Oh no we have enough of them as it is. 

just a thought they'll need a visa


----------



## mollydog07 (May 26, 2012)

I really just cant stand the "fat controller" salmond and his sidekick Nicola sturgeon....based on this its a no from me!....maybe if we,d had mel Gibson on horseback fronting the campaign I might be swayed to vote yes!


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

mollydog07 said:


> maybe if we,d had mel Gibson on horseback fronting the campaign I might be swayed to vote yes!


As a scottish historians said.. that film put the education about scottish history back at least 100 years  Then again, it was Hollywood and we all know how history is from them.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> Personally, I think it might be a good thing for us to be independent, but still very friendly with our neighbours.


It's possible cordial relations are more likely with independence.


----------



## mollydog07 (May 26, 2012)

Goblin said:


> As a scottish historians said.. that film put the education about scottish history back at least 100 years  Then again, it was Hollywood and we all know how history is from them.


yeah but he looked good


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Don't know what the Scots will do about money if they vote for independance.. Euro isn't a likely option in the short term after all membership in the EU isn't guaranteed, sterling looks like it's been refused... Can the Euro be used by countries outside the EU?


----------



## mollydog07 (May 26, 2012)

Goblin said:


> Don't know what the Scots will do about money if they vote for independance.. Euro isn't a likely option in the short term after all membership in the EU isn't guaranteed, sterling looks like it's been refused... Can the Euro be used by countries outside the EU?


Wont be a problem! in our independant state all we require will be a trillion more foodbanks.considering that the fat controller claims £500 a month expenses on food he,ll need his own foodbank.


----------



## soulful dog (Nov 6, 2011)

mollydog07 said:


> I really just cant stand the "fat controller" salmond and his sidekick Nicola sturgeon....based on this its a no from me!....maybe if we,d had mel Gibson on horseback fronting the campaign I might be swayed to vote yes!


Salmond or Cameron?...... yes its easy to see why you might opt for Mel Gibson instead!

It IS funny, but then when you try to think of a politician you like and more importantly trust - it's not quite so funny :frown5:

I'd quite like to join that English bloke that lives on a remote island (is it off the coast of Scotland somewhere or was it near the Isle of Man?) and tried to claim he was independent of the UK so didn't need to pay any taxes. No politicians, sounds like bliss!


----------



## foxiesummer (Feb 4, 2009)

I need to know how it will affect me before I can make a decision. The reason being is I live in England but have a Scottish address. My doctor and vet are in Scotland, I buy most of my shopping in Scotland, my vehicles are serviced in Scotland and most of my customers are in Scotland. If they change the currency I will have to carry both the pound and whatever Scotland uses. I may even have to carry a passport, lol. When I first moved here I had an English address but a Scottish phone number. There are 13 of us in the hamlet most of whom run businesses. We had the option of staying 'English' or going with Scotland but if we stayed with England they wouldn't change the phone number so we all opted to go with Scotland. We all still however pay our business rates and poll tax in England. Confused?


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

Goblin said:


> Don't know what the Scots will do about money if they vote for independance.. Euro isn't a likely option in the short term after all membership in the EU isn't guaranteed, sterling looks like it's been refused... Can the Euro be used by countries outside the EU?


an independent scotland has to apply to be in the EU. IF they get accepted, that would take couple years, after which they are treaty bound to adopt the euro (assuming euro still exists).

sterling refused.

means scotland would have to invent own currency


----------



## Lilylass (Sep 13, 2012)

ballybee said:


> On a more serious note, i can see points for both sides of the argument, Scotland does have it's own government, but they don't have much power over what we do as a country, it is frustrating and i can understand why Alex Salmond has been fighting for freedom but i don't think (and never have) that breaking off from the UK is going to benefit us.


I'd like to see us having more say over things that happen here BUT full separation - nope

If you take the currency issue - for those who live near the border and maybe live in Scotland & work in England (or the other way around), they'd have to potentially have 2 different sets of money - that would just be ludicrous!

I also think there will be loads of other things that may cause problems but they haven't thought about them yet


----------



## Lauren5159 (May 28, 2013)

No! 

I just don't see much good coming from it. I would want good hard FACTS before I even considered voting yes... None of these, "just because" answers. 

I'm technically English... I have an English accent, an English father, grew up mainly in England... My mum's Scottish and most of our family all live up here. Yeah, I'm a complete Pad Brat lol...

What I don't like is all the animosity from some English people... "Don't we have enough of them already?" Like the Scottish are vermin and honestly, the Scottish could very much say the same about the amount of English people living up here. 

I love Scotland, I really do. I love living in the middle of nowhere, I love The Highlands and the people and my life up here are great. But if Scotland got independence, I would seriously consider moving back to England. 

Shove what other people think.

As for letting 16 year olds vote. Seriously?! At that age, you do what all your friends are doing! What about the NHS, the currency debates, all this free education?... I don't see the country being able to sustain it. Of course, those voting and complaining 'for' independence will say, "but we have the oil." No actually, we don't! We have a tiny minority of it but not nearly enough to back up and sustain a whole country! 

What other revenue does Scotland have and generate?..Whiskey?... Nope, not enough money there lol. Oh! Shortbread! Haggis? Harris Tweed? Tartan....

Ergh, it's all hypothetical and in an ideal, dream world it may just work. Realistically, I can't see it.

Rant over


----------



## Ceiling Kitty (Mar 7, 2010)

I can't see it happening, TBH. I would imagine that the people of Scotland will vote not to become independent.


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

Yes, if they really want it of course. I doubt that they do though, especially under the leadership of Alex Salmond. That man is motivated by his own self-aggrandisement and will stop at nothing to fuel his ego, including stirring up ugly nationalism. He used to sell a future wherein Scotland was nothing more than an offshore banking centre. He extolled the virtues of the Icelandic and Irish models, then all that blew up and he dropped his plan. He remained a fervent supporter of the Euro though, until Greece and Spain fell apart, now he won't touch the Euro with a bargepole and wants to exort the sovereign guarantees of another state to support his currency under threat of renaiging on national debt. Nothing of truth seems to leave his mouth. I just can't see the Scottish voters falling for it.


----------



## DogLover1981 (Mar 28, 2009)

I would be annoyed if Scotland became an independent country. I would probably need to go threw another set of customs when I visit England, Wales, and Scotland. lol I do want to visit the UK someday. Thinking of my situation, it may hurt tourism a little if they became independent.


----------



## ljs85 (Jun 2, 2012)

Gut says yes, but the head says don't know.

Apparently some places in England already think we have a foreign currency as they don't accept Scottish notes 

As for 16 year olds voting...

They can have sex, which may lead to baby, can get married and join the army, but voting is just too much responsibility for them to handle, _really_?!


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

and have Alec salmond running the show....no thanx.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

ljs85 said:


> Gut says yes, but the head says don't know.
> 
> Apparently some places in England already think we have a foreign currency as they don't accept Scottish notes
> 
> ...


I think the problem with currency is cos there are so many dud notes circulating in England that anything somebody isn't sure of there and they refuse to accept it.

Very confusing with different colours of bank notes anyway in Scotland.


----------



## Hanwombat (Sep 5, 2013)

Someone told me that if Scotland had been independent during the worse of the recession then they would of dive bombed as the UK helped them out a lot. Not sure if this is true or not.

Anyways I can't see it happening TBH, I doubt many will vote yes.


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

DogLover1981 said:


> I would be annoyed if Scotland became an independent country. I would probably need to go threw another set of customs when I visit England, Wales, and Scotland. lol I do want to visit the UK someday. Thinking of my situation, it may hurt tourism a little if they became independent.


Yes you would. The EU will not accept further new members unless they also sign up to the Schengen agreement. Since the UK is non-Schengen, if Scotland joins the EU, we will require a physical border, that's right - a patrolled fence right across Britain. Wonder who will pay for that?


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

Satori said:


> Yes you would. The EU will not accept further new members unless they also sign up to the Schengen agreement. Since the UK is non-Schengen, if Scotland joins the EU, we will require a physical border, that's right - a patrolled fence right across Britain. Wonder who will pay for that?


not neccesarily, as scotland and uk could have their own free movement bilateral arrangements. kind of like their being no border restrictions between uk/northern ireland and republic of ireland.

there have been other examples such bilateral agreements, such as between oz and nz (now abolished) and the benelux countries (superseded by the EEC)


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> If you take the currency issue - for those who live near the border and maybe live in Scotland & work in England (or the other way around), they'd have to potentially have 2 different sets of money - that would just be ludicrous!


When I lived on mainland Europe the shops and businesses coped perfectly well with two (sometimes three) currencies. I got quite used to paying in one and getting change in another. In today's cashless world it would be even less of a problem.


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

Tails and Trails said:


> not neccesarily, as scotland and uk could have their own free movement bilateral arrangements. kind of like their being no border restrictions between uk/northern ireland and republic of ireland.
> 
> there have been other examples such bilateral agreements, such as between oz and nz (now abolished) and the benelux countries (superseded by the EEC)


Yes they could but it won't work for the UK. It would mean that one could fly from any Schengen country without a passport into Scotland and then pass freely into the UK wouldnt it? So the UK would be exposed to borderless entry from Europe that it has not signed up for. Actually, that answers the question, who would pay for the fence I suppose.


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

Satori said:


> Yes they could but it won't work for the UK. It would mean that one could fly from any Schengen country without a passport into Scotland and then pass freely into the UK wouldnt it? So the UK would be exposed to borderless entry from Europe that it has not signed up for. Actually, that answers the question, who would pay for the fence I suppose.


but, in theory, they could already do via Ireland to N.I?


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

Ireland is still opted out, no?


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

Satori said:


> Ireland is still opted out, no?


good point!


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Satori said:


> Yes you would. The EU will not accept further new members unless they also sign up to the Schengen agreement. Since the UK is non-Schengen, if Scotland joins the EU, we will require a physical border, that's right - a patrolled fence right across Britain. Wonder who will pay for that?


For Scotland to join the EU would need every existing country to agree. In the case of France, this would mean they would have to hold a referendum. I doubt if Spain would be gladly to be seen to "encourage" independence considering Catalania, one of the most economically dynamic regions of Spain, wishes to go that route already.


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

Goblin said:


> For Scotland to join the EU would need every existing country to agree. In the case of France, this would mean they would have to hold a referendum. I doubt if Spain would be gladly to be seen to "encourage" independence considering Catalania, one of the most economically dynamic regions of Spain, wishes to go that route already.


i think you are right


----------



## CRL (Jan 3, 2012)

ive put i dont know. 
i have no idea what the pro's and con's of scotland gaining independence would be for them and for the uk. i dont watch the news or read papers so couldnt give an informed decision on the issue.


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

Barroso, president of the EU, has just said it is practically impossible for an independant scotland to join the EU. 

that just leaves a cast iron statement from NATO they will be denied entry if scotland bans NATO nuclear naval bases, and thats the whole SNP strategy ripped to pieces.

but really, who the hell came up with a policy document which said an independent scotland will join the EU, NATO, and the pound without getting permission from these organisations first!

crazy!

and to think, there are just as many votes to be had for the scottish independence yes campaign thru saying scotland wouldnt join these organisations!!

looks like they have lost the referendum now


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Tails and Trails said:


> looks like they have lost the referendum now


I don't think they have by default. When it comes down to it each "nation" in the UK has an island mentality and a fierce stubborn streak which rebels against someone else telling them what to do. I think that will be played on strongly when it comes to propaganda and it depends, as most referendums or elections, on who can promise the most and be believed.


----------



## soulful dog (Nov 6, 2011)

There are no guarantees & no agreements that can be made on these issues (EU, Nato etc), and only opinions can be given at this stage. If Scotland voted yes, the negotiations would then start.

The fact is, Barroso said over a year ago that any new states would have to rejoin the EU, so what he's saying now isn't anything new, it's still just his own personal view. There is no precedent on this issue, nor is there anything set down in EU law to deal with it, so it's not just the case of a new state = new entrant. As usual, the politicians are full of hot air and bluster.... 

Oh for the truth and not what Goblin sadly but quite rightly states


----------



## Valanita (Apr 13, 2010)

I voted don't know. As I'm not Scottish & have never been there I don't think I have qualifications to say yeh or nay.
I think it's up to the Scots to decide.


----------



## ForeverHome (Jan 14, 2014)

If the Scottish people genuinely consider and weigh up all the factors and want independence, then Scotland should be independent. 

However ...

Remember the Tories have little support in Scotland, so if you take the Scots out of British general elections, chances are the rest of us will be consigned to Tory rule forever. Regardless of your political leanings, monopoly is never healthy.

I do hope they don't whack massive import duty on Scotch and Haggis.


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

soulful dog said:


> There are no guarantees & no agreements that can be made on these issues (EU, Nato etc), and only opinions can be given at this stage. If Scotland voted yes, the negotiations would then start.
> 
> The fact is, Barroso said over a year ago that any new states would have to rejoin the EU, so what he's saying now isn't anything new, it's still just his own personal view. There is no precedent on this issue, nor is there anything set down in EU law to deal with it, so it's not just the case of a new state = new entrant. As usual, the politicians are full of hot air and bluster....
> 
> Oh for the truth and not what Goblin sadly but quite rightly states


what surprises me, as it seems to defy basic common sense, is the SNP publishing a white paper where they guarantee the electorate that an independent scotland would join a currency union with the UK, without even first running that past the UK, and saying an independent scotland would not have to apply to join the EU, as they could negotiate a place courtesy of their current UK membership, without first double checking that with the EU.
and they kept saying this even though Barroso has been telling them the contrary for over a year.

its hardly the starting point of a political campaign that wishes to be seen as credible


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

soulful dog said:


> The fact is, Barroso said over a year ago that any new states would have to rejoin the EU, so what he's saying now isn't anything new, it's still just his own personal view.(


How about Jean-Claude Piris, the former Legal Counsel of the European Council and Director General of the ECs Legal Service who has said the same thing?

There are various views, obviously partly depending on which side people are on. Everything I have seen, including referencing the majority of EU legal experts say Scotland would need to use article 49, joining as a new state, rather than that of article 48 promised as available by the SNP.

To list a few, but not extensive sources..

Frankly Independent: Article 48

BBC News - Scottish independence: Lawyers divided over Scotland&#039;s post-yes EU plans

French could say 'non' to Alex Salmond's plan for Scotland to join EU | UK | News | Daily Express

BBC News - Scottish independence: Mariano Rajoy says Scotland would be &#039;outside EU&#039;

Scottish independence: EU leaders

I believe it's a legal grey area.. nobody knows. However do you see the desires of continental politicians not having an impact on the legal resolution of the problems when there is such a situation and "negotiations"? Who's going to do the negotiations, lawyers or politicians? Personally I wouldn't want to bet my country on a legal grey area in such a situation.


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

As a Scot living in England (Sorry HP, but I am one of 'those' you derided in your earlier post), and having been here for over 25yrs, I do not feel qualified to give a yes or no answer. 

One thing though I DO feel strongly on though is this: If Cameron et all don't back off with all their hard boy tactics they will push the Scots into making a 'Yes' vote purely out of spite!!! Listening to some of the discussions & headlines last week - "If you have Scottish friends, tell them to vote No!" - was unbelievable. 

By all means lay out the facts but they need be careful how they do it otherwise the Scots will rebel against being 'TOLD' what to do by Westminster and the 'Yes' will be a majorty.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> If Cameron et all don't back off with all their hard boy tactics they will push the Scots into making a 'Yes' vote purely out of spite!!!


I think the Scots would (should) be most insulted at the suggestion that David Cameron can influence their carefully considered vote.


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

havoc said:


> I think the Scots would (should) be most insulted at the suggestion that David Cameron can influence their carefully considered vote.


Their 'carefully considered vote' will be swayed by the emotion of anger that they are continually being 'told' what to do by Westminster.

As I said, there is no problem with the information being given - this needs to be done to present a balanced arguement - but it is the manner in which it is being given. It smacks of bully boy tactics by desperate men who genuinely fear a Yes majority.

The Scots are, and always have been, a rebellious and passionate race. It is a strength and a fault in equal measure.

Being told what to do by a bunch of English public schoolboys will be like a red rag to a bull in many cases.


----------



## astro2011 (Dec 13, 2011)

MoggyBaby said:


> Their 'carefully considered vote' will be swayed by the emotion of anger that they are continually being 'told' what to do by Westminster.
> 
> As I said, there is no problem with the information being given - this needs to be done to present a balanced arguement - but it is the manner in which it is being given. It smacks of bully boy tactics by desperate men who genuinely fear a Yes majority.
> 
> ...


As a Scot I totally agree with this. I (others) don't like to be told what to do. Plus being told by a Tory what to do...haha!!!


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

"Being told what to do by a bunch of English public schoolboys", sounds like a definition of TV advertising..


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

MoggyBaby said:


> Their 'carefully considered vote' will be swayed by the emotion of anger that they are continually being 'told' what to do by Westminster.
> 
> As I said, there is no problem with the information being given - this needs to be done to present a balanced arguement - but it is the manner in which it is being given. It smacks of bully boy tactics by desperate men who genuinely fear a Yes majority.
> 
> ...


I think bottom line very well may be how it will affect everybody living in Scotland financially.

The Scots where I live feel the English are living off the fat of the land cos we nicked the North Sea Oil. The bitterness if strong


----------



## spid (Nov 4, 2008)

If the Scots want independence and are willing to face up to ALL that that means ( no £, problems joining the EU, the military pulling out of the bases up there - therefore Scotland suddenly having to either buy in the services of the RAF etc to patrol the skies etc, or buy in and make their own armed forces), of understanding that it isn't going to be an easy ride (as change never is) then if that's what they want, then that's what they deserve. It's a democracy and the voice of the majority should be heard. It's not a simple issue, its not just about oil.

For example, take blood donating. Scotland has it's own blood donation service - this is good! But, it won't allow Scottish donated blood to cross the border to England, it is ring fenced. BUT, not enough blood is donated in Scotland for all it's needs so they take as much as they like from the English blood donation service. Will that still happen? Or will they suddenly be forced to buy it in (and I imagine at a premium then)

Now I know that's a SMALL SMALL example, but these are the kinds of things that will need to be sorted out. And SO many of them.

I understand that Scots have a resentment in many cases, especially with Prat Cameron being an arse, and oil is one of them, but there are many, many other issues too. But I feel if Scotland leaves the UK there will be a lot of resentment back. Many English will feel snubbed.

Having said that I'd rather the Scots didn't leave. United we are a stronger nation. But, if they want to leave, much as I wish they wouldn't, they should.

It's a very complicated business

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...ottish-independence-is-taking-a-pounding.html


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

Perhaps I should have put the phrase 'carefully considered' in inverted commas in the first place. I'd sort of assumed the implied sarcasm was obvious. Anyone who votes on their whole economic future only to spite someone else is hardly making a carefully considered judgement.


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

havoc said:


> Perhaps I should have put the phrase 'carefully considered' in inverted commas in the first place. I'd sort of assumed the implied sarcasm was obvious. Anyone who votes on their whole economic future only to spite someone else is hardly making a carefully considered judgement.


I got the implied sarcasm just fine.

But, being Scottish, I know the mindset and it could easily be a case of hearts ruling heads.


----------



## mollydog07 (May 26, 2012)

They may take our English pound!....But they.ll never take our erm Scottish shekel....erm Scottish rupee:lol:


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

astro2011 said:


> As a Scot I totally agree with this. I (others) don't like to be told what to do. Plus being told by a Tory what to do...haha!!!


Not correct - not just the Tories or public schoolboy bit alp the mainstream politicians of the UK, including some Scottish ones


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

mollydog07 said:


> They may take our English pound!....But they.ll never take our erm Scottish shekel....erm Scottish rupee:lol:


I think the Scottish Pint would work just fine!!! :lol:

.


----------



## cheekyscrip (Feb 8, 2010)

Mr Barroso, the same Head of European Commission who sees nothing wrong in border queues made by Spain

says Scotland will not enter EU because Spain will block it (he is Spanish ..if you did not quess)

Madrid did not allow referendum in Catalonia...neither Basks can have it..
WHY
SPain , must corrupted of EU countries, just one giant sponge of EU funds..
has so much to say?


maybe EU should kick them out? (and keep Scotland and Catalonia in?)




Scotland ..wave your flag..and decide what is best ...!!!!

at least appreciate that you CAN!!!


----------



## lostbear (May 29, 2013)

I think that Britain should be separated into its traditional kingdoms of Northumbria, Wessex, Mercia, Scotland, Wales etc - or alternatively, we should kick out London and the Home Counties, the huge leech on our economy, and the rest of us can get on with it.

Up here in t' North, we get nowt for our taxes, all of our industries have been destroyed, and there is nothing for our young people to work towards in the way of jobs, homes or anything else - and all the money and investment seems to get ploughed into the wealthy south.

I feel heartily sorry for those people whose homes and livelihoods have bee destroyed by the recent flooding, but if it had happened up here we'd have just been told to stop whinging and get on with it.

I volunteer myself as Acting Queen of Northumbria until we get our own despot. I promise not to wage too many wars against our traditional enemies, the Picts, but rather to see if we could arrange a mutually beneficial peace treaty that would allow us to cross one another's borders so that we can enjoy our foreign holidays without fear of indiscriminate slaughter.


----------



## lostbear (May 29, 2013)

ForeverHome said:


> If the Scottish people genuinely consider and weigh up all the factors and want independence, then Scotland should be independent.
> 
> However ...
> 
> ...




Or scotch eggs! The dogs like scotch eggs!


----------



## lostbear (May 29, 2013)

Satori said:


> ]Yes, if they really want it of course. I doubt that they do though, especially under the leadership of Alex Salmond. That man is motivated by his own self-aggrandisement [/B]and will stop at nothing to fuel his ego, including stirring up ugly nationalism. He used to sell a future wherein Scotland was nothing more than an offshore banking centre. He extolled the virtues of the Icelandic and Irish models, then all that blew up and he dropped his plan. He remained a fervent supporter of the Euro though, until Greece and Spain fell apart, now he won't touch the Euro with a bargepole and wants to exort the sovereign guarantees of another state to support his currency under threat of renaiging on national debt. Nothing of truth seems to leave his mouth. I just can't see the Scottish voters falling for it.


The man is living proof that the tories don't have a monopoly on pillocks.


----------



## lostbear (May 29, 2013)

Satori said:


> Yes you would. The EU will not accept further new members unless they also sign up to the Schengen agreement. Since the UK is non-Schengen, if Scotland joins the EU, *we will require a physical border, that's right - a patrolled fence right across Britain.* Wonder who will pay for that?


Now I WANT them to be independent!

The sight of battalions of be-kilted Scots, patrolling the windy border that is Hadrian's Wall would be an attraction to this sad old bat - especially if they wore the 'traditional underwear" ::


----------



## lostbear (May 29, 2013)

cheekyscrip said:


> Mr Barroso, the same Head of European Commission who sees nothing wrong in border queues made by Spain
> 
> says Scotland will not enter EU because Spain will block it (he is Spanish ..if you did not quess)
> 
> ...


Hear, hear!


----------



## foxiesummer (Feb 4, 2009)

Satori said:


> Yes they could but it won't work for the UK. It would mean that one could fly from any Schengen country without a passport into Scotland and then pass freely into the UK wouldnt it? So the UK would be exposed to borderless entry from Europe that it has not signed up for. Actually, that answers the question, who would pay for the fence I suppose.


Passports already have to be carried between Scotland and England and vice versa when travelling by air.


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

foxiesummer said:


> Passports already have to be carried between Scotland and England and vice versa when travelling by air.


Thats an airline ruling though, and IN THEORY only an ID card is required for inter-EU travel, drive and you never get checked on mainland Europe within the EU


----------



## labradrk (Dec 10, 2012)

I don't follow politics so I have no idea. What would the benefits be to Scotland re: becoming independent?


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

Right - somebody is going to have to explain this to me in simple terms. Presumably Scotland wishing to keep the 'pound' isn't just a case of keeping the name. For such arguments to be raging it has to be that they wish to keep a unit of currency called the pound and still tied to the value of the English pound against other currencies no matter what happens to their own or the remaining UK economy in the future. Yes? No?

If so then it makes no sense to me. Surely if they choose independence then the whole point is complete economic independence. If not will somebody please explain it all to me.


----------



## MCWillow (Aug 26, 2011)

What would happen to all the Scottish people living in England, and all the English people living in Scotland?

If Scotland are not part of the EU, then surely Scots wouldn't be allowed to live or work here without applying for a Visa, like all other non-EU members have to would they?

*Kidnaps Mavis* No-ones taking my Mave! :yikes: :nono:


----------



## spid (Nov 4, 2008)

havoc said:


> Right - somebody is going to have to explain this to me in simple terms. Presumably Scotland wishing to keep the 'pound' isn't just a case of keeping the name. For such arguments to be raging it has to be that they wish to keep a unit of currency called the pound and still tied to the value of the English pound against other currencies no matter what happens to their own or the remaining UK economy in the future. Yes? No?
> 
> If so then it makes no sense to me. Surely if they choose independence then the whole point is complete economic independence. If not will somebody please explain it all to me.


If you read the guardian link in my pst about 3 pages back it tries to explain it.


----------



## egyptianreggae (May 26, 2012)

MCWillow said:


> What would happen to all the Scottish people living in England, and all the English people living in Scotland?
> 
> If Scotland are not part of the EU, then surely Scots wouldn't be allowed to live or work here without applying for a Visa, like all other non-EU members have to would they?
> 
> *Kidnaps Mavis* No-ones taking my Mave! :yikes: :nono:


Scottish people living in England will be all right, but English people living in Scotland will be chased out by angry Scottish people wielding sticks and flaming torches.

Those of us who are English but living in Scotland with Scottish cats will be even worse off


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

Colliebarmy said:


> *Thats an airline ruling though,* and IN THEORY only an ID card is required for inter-EU travel, drive and you never get checked on mainland Europe within the EU


Yes it's for security so they can check the identity of who is on their aircraft.


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

Another if those many small issues that spid referred to. Imagine being of pension age and living in Scotland. I assume your state pension is guaranteed buy the UK Treasury? and after independence you would have only the Scottish treasury to fall back on; oh and it would be paid in Scottish thistles or whatever the new currency is called so it will massively depreciate once the speculators short the currency to death. Who'd want that really? Oh, and what about the NHS, I wonder how that will work, And will my accounts at natwest become foreign accounts, and will RBS ever pay back the UK treasury once control passes to a foreign country? It just gets sillier the more you think about it.


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

MCWillow said:


> What would happen to all the Scottish people living in England, and all the English people living in Scotland?
> 
> If Scotland are not part of the EU, then surely Scots wouldn't be allowed to live or work here without applying for a Visa, like all other non-EU members have to would they?
> 
> *Kidnaps Mavis* No-ones taking my Mave! :yikes: :nono:


After 26 yrs, I could become an illegal immigrant!!!! :yikes:



egyptianreggae said:


> Scottish people living in England will be all right, but English people living in Scotland will be chased out by angry Scottish people wielding sticks and flaming torches.
> 
> Those of us who are English but living in Scotland with Scottish cats will be even worse off


You can use your cats as a reason for not being deported back to England and to maintain asylum in Scotland.  :lol:

Owning a cat helped immigrant avoid deportation - Home News - UK - The Independent

.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Satori said:


> Another if those many small issues that spid referred to. Imagine being of pension age and living in Scotland. I assume your state pension is guaranteed buy the UK Treasury? and after independence you would have only the Scottish treasury to fall back on; oh and it would be paid in Scottish thistles or whatever the new currency is called so it will massively depreciate once the speculators short the currency to death. Who'd want that really? Oh, and what about the NHS, I wonder how that will work, And will my accounts at natwest become foreign accounts, and will RBS ever pay back the UK treasury once control passes to a foreign country? It just gets sillier the more you think about it.


The difficulty is, anything seen as defaulting on positions will be taken into account by potential investors. On the plus side, if it possible to do so, tying Scotland to the EU more closely may actually increase foreign investment, those which are worried about the UK leaving and acting as their bridge/stepping zone into the EU. Then again what's the difference between tying themselves to Westminster and tying themselves to Brussels?

Not a simple issue at all...


----------



## BoogieWoogie (Nov 13, 2013)

I'm voting yes because it would be an easy 12 points every year when eurovision pops up


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> If you read the guardian link in my pst about 3 pages back *it tries* to explain it.


I've looked at it Spid but nowhere can I find an answer to what the Scots would do - what THEY say they intend to keep or abandon in terms of control over a combined currency and why there is any belief that they can unilaterally declare such a thing. I don't claim to understand international finance but the whole idea seems bonkers to me.


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

BoogieWoogie said:


> I'm voting yes because it would be an easy 12 points every year when eurovision pops up


And, if Scotland put in an act each year, we'd probably finish a lot higher up the board than the UK does.


----------



## BoogieWoogie (Nov 13, 2013)

MoggyBaby said:


> And, if Scotland put in an act each year, we'd probably finish a lot higher up the board than the UK does.


This is possible, They love the Irish Riverdance they will most likely go just as crazy for bagpipes. :cornut:


----------



## spid (Nov 4, 2008)

havoc said:


> I've looked at it Spid but nowhere can I find an answer to what the Scots would do - what THEY say they intend to keep or abandon in terms of control over a combined currency and why there is any belief that they can unilaterally declare such a thing. I don't claim to understand international finance but the whole idea seems bonkers to me.


It's a very complicated thing - I don't think anybody really knows as Mr Salmond has said he is keeping the pound - but the 3 main parties have said he can't. So who knows what plan B is?


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

According to Scots speaking on the lunchtime news there is no plan B. Complicated doesn't begin to describe it which is why I can't get my head around the idea that Salmond can declare in such a simplistic and overarching manner that they will remain economically tied to the rest of Britain - whether the rest of Britain agrees or not.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

MCWillow said:


> What would happen to all the Scottish people living in England, and all the English people living in Scotland?
> 
> If Scotland are not part of the EU, then surely Scots wouldn't be allowed to live or work here without applying for a Visa, like all other non-EU members have to would they?
> 
> *Kidnaps Mavis* No-ones taking my Mave! :yikes: :nono:


very good question. 5 of my 7 grandchildren were born here but all the adults are English.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

spid said:


> It's a very complicated thing - I don't think anybody really knows as Mr Salmond has said he is keeping the pound - but the 3 main parties have said he can't. So who knows what plan B is?


like he will ever listen to anybody who doesn't agree with him anyway.


----------



## mollydog07 (May 26, 2012)

Its gonna get down right petty!.....toys thrown out the pram big time! its my ball and your not playing,we have all the way till 18th sept to put up with all the shenanigans!.....will we still get corrie and easties?...in fact can we abolish the tv licence:biggrin:


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> in fact can we abolish the tv licence


It's things like this which really confuse me. I have no issue with the fact that if Scotland chooses independence then it can do whatever it chooses - such as abolishing a TV licence fee. What I don't understand is why there is then such animosity over the idea of the BBC pulling out of Scotland completely. Surely an independent Scotland would choose to have a Scottish Broadcasting Company. How they choose to pay for this is up to them. As far as I can see the only thing which will change for me is that the BBC weather will not include anything north of the border.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> will we still get corrie and easties?...in fact can we abolish the tv licence


It's very sad that things like this could actually sway a vote but I'm fast realising you are probably right that it's this level of argument which matters to many voters.


----------



## soulful dog (Nov 6, 2011)

Reading this thread is really interesting (although the 'oh let them piss off maybe they'll stop whining' attitude is sadly predictable, but probably as predictable as the Scots who'll say daft stuff about the English!). To be honest, I'd never thought about the reaction of the rest of the UK to Scotland wanting independence, and as I mentioned earlier in the thread, the fact English folk (not sure if Welsh or Irish feel the same way) might feel snubbed leaves me feeling uneasy - and a bit sad.

I can't see it happening, unless there are a lot of answers forthcoming before the vote, as right now there are too many unknowns even for people like myself who are considering voting yes. But if it were to happen, particularly to the English folk on here, don't take it personally! 

The talk of independence isn't about how people feel about any other part of the UK. Its more about being in charge of our own destiny, and shaping our country in a way it could be, not just sticking with things as they are. While it's not true of everyone in Scotland, I certainly feel that as nations, we have generally different values. There is always talk of wanting to be more like some of the Scandinavian countries, with a more socially democratic outlook, instead capitalism and self-centred culture is prevalent and along with a shrinking welfare state it feels almost anti-Scottish. At the same time, I'm well aware that's not true of everyone, and there are plenty of people elsewhere in the UK who might feel similar.

There is also the problem that lack of knowledge, or mis-leading information leads to bitterness. Two things already mentioned in this thread; resenting Scottish MPs voting on English issues - the fact is, Irish & Welsh MPs vote on them too, is this also an issue? And, as they've voted on matters that amount to less than 1% of the total, is that really something to get that worried about. North Sea oil, there seems to be arguments on both sides, whose oil is it, and whose should it be, who has benefited most from it, it depends on who you speak to, is there a real truth? And stuff like the British armed forces pulling out of Scotland, or the BBC not broadcasting in Scotland, don't people realise that Scots are a part of the armed forces and the BBC, so why would they just completely pull out. Things would change, but remember, British doesn't just mean English?

As it is, the No/Better Together campaign is all about negativity, I don't hear an awful lot of why we are better together, just sniping at the Yes campaign. Cameron & Osbourne's recent comments are typical. It feels like we are continually being told independence is doomed to failure, you can't do this, you can't do that, that won't work. It's been compared to a messy divorce, and to me Scotland feels a little bit like the downtrodden wife that neutral observers would be thinking, why on earth are you still with that man?


----------



## mollydog07 (May 26, 2012)

havoc said:


> It's very sad that things like this could actually sway a vote but I'm fast realising you are probably right that it's this level of argument which matters to many voters.


Havoc its very much kidology with my posts....in fact if peter kay where to ask scots to refrain from independence it might work:biggrin:..dave Gideon ids et all are loathed in Scotland,so some pepps will vote yes soley to be rid of them.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> the fact English folk (not sure if Welsh or Irish feel the same way) might feel snubbed leaves me feeling uneasy - and a bit sad.


I wouldn't feel snubbed - in my first post on this thread I said I was in the 'yes' camp if that's what the Scots wanted. I have no heartache whatsoever with Scots controlling their own destiny if that's what they wish. What I am beginning to feel a little uneasy at is whether it would be true independence or if it would be like my grown up children. They don't live with me, they pay there own way ..................... but somehow I still have a DD paying out for a mobile phone and bank of mum and dad is always available when necessary. Down here in the south of England the whole circus is only just starting to be reported and I'm trying to understand it. It has come of something of a surprise to me that things have not been worked out in more detail by now.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> Havoc its very much kidology with my posts....in fact if peter kay where to ask scots to refrain from independence it might work


That's what worries me. I'm not even Scottish and I seem to take the issue more seriously than those with a vote


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

soulful dog said:


> And stuff like the British armed forces pulling out of Scotland, or the BBC not broadcasting in Scotland, don't people realise that Scots are a part of the armed forces and the BBC, so why would they just completely pull out.


Simply put. Do we expect French garrison troops in the UK (I'll include Scotland here)? The only country which used to have a lot of foreign troops on native soil was the Germans during the cold war and americans everywhere 'cos they just are. If independence is achieved, that means two nations, two nationalities of troops. Nothing to say they can't work together, although Scotland not potentially being a member a NATO may complicate issues but UK troops would be in the UK, Scottish troops would be in Scotland. Each government responsible for the maintenance of their national troops and each "army" responsible to only their governments.

Now of course I'm using UK to represent everything but Scotland in the above. If they left, could we still use UK as it's not a united kingdom, or is it? Would we have to change the Union Jack... argh... Will kids in the future ask "Mom.. why is there blue in the flag?"

My understanding though. It's not a pick and choose bits you like/dislike, it's independence with everything that entails.


----------



## mollydog07 (May 26, 2012)

havoc said:


> That's what worries me. I'm not even Scottish and I seem to take the issue more seriously than those with a vote


I will make my mind up nearer the time when all the bluster has cleared and I can fully understand the pro,s and cons of independence(if ever)....not to worry havoc we will rent out andy murray to the highest bidding country for wimbeldon! its not all bad:biggrin:


----------



## mollydog07 (May 26, 2012)

Just a thought.....where will we elope to?...will we still be welcome at Gretna? so many questions!


----------



## catpud (Nov 9, 2013)

soulful dog said:


> not sure if Welsh or Irish feel the same way


As a welsh person, I wouldn't feel snubbed, and I doubt most will.

If the Scottish people think that independence is better for their country then all power to them - I don't really know the issues facing them when it comes to going either way so don't feel able to comment from that point.

I think it will effect Wales and Northern Ireland a bit though. Something like 92 percent of the new UK's population would be in England, with the other 8 percent divided between Wales and Northern Ireland (or so I have heard, somebody correct me if this isn't true) in that case it does make me wonder how much of a say the two countries will have, hopefully the government would come up with new ways of working so that Wales and Northern Ireland still get their voices heard.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> not to worry havoc we will rent out andy murray to the highest bidding country for wimbeldon!


Guess he's better cultivate an American accent then as they'd surely pay more. Don't think we need temporary ownership of a player to carry on running Wimbledon 



> I will make my mind up nearer the time when all the bluster has cleared


There does seem to be plenty of bluster. Lord help us there's going to be TV time given over to it ad nauseum. I'm sure we're all going to be sick of it by the referendum and just be glad it's over whatever the result.


----------



## soulful dog (Nov 6, 2011)

Yes, in regards to the armed forces, that's right, UK troops in England, Wales, N. Ireland, Scottish troops in Scotland. My point is just that the British armed forces wouldn't just completely cease to exist in Scotland, as part of the armed forces are Scottish soldiers, bases etc, just the same as part of the BBC is made up of Scottish presenters, offices etc in Scotland. They wouldn't just disappear or move down to England, they'd still exist in Scotland.



Goblin said:


> Now of course I'm using UK to represent everything but Scotland in the above. If they left, could we still use UK as it's not a united kingdom, or is it? Would we have to change the Union Jack... argh... Will kids in the future ask "Mom.. why is there blue in the flag?"


Which begs the question, if there is an argument that Scotland would have to put a case forward as a new state to join the EU, why wouldn't that be true for the rest of the UK (or whatever it's called)? And isn't it strange that there is rising support for UKIP (which I may be wrong about but I think it's support is mainly in England?), and increasing interest in a referendum of withdrawing from the EU, but for an independent Scotland it's a negative that we might not be in the EU?



> My understanding though. It's not a pick and choose bits you like/dislike, it's independence with everything that entails.


Yes, and that's exactly as it should be. To be honest, the SNP wanting to retain the pound was news to me, I just assumed they'd either be wanting the Euro or a Scottish currency. Wanting to stay with the pound seems a strangely half-hearted measure. Maybe I've just not being paying enough attention to it all up to now! 

I want a lot more answers from the Yes campaign, and at least a little bit of encouragement instead of negativity from the Better Together campaign before I make up my mind.



catpud said:


> As a welsh person, I wouldn't feel snubbed, and I doubt most will.


That's what I thought would be the case. Like I said, it has surprised me the ill-feeling its generated in some English people. And I do think you are right that it will have some effect on the Welsh and N. Irish. I guess you maybe don't feel it to the same extent as the Scots, but being dwarfed by the English voice due to sheer weight of numbers is always a concern.


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

Sotland couldnt be in NATO *and* ban atomic sub bases.... so thats one issue


----------



## lostbear (May 29, 2013)

havoc said:


> It's things like this which really confuse me. I have no issue with the fact that if Scotland chooses independence then it can do whatever it chooses - such as abolishing a TV licence fee. What I don't understand is why there is then such animosity over the idea of the BBC pulling out of Scotland completely. Surely an independent Scotland would choose to have a Scottish Broadcasting Company. How they choose to pay for this is up to them. As far as I can see the only thing which will change for me is that the BBC weather will not include anything north of the border.


Does that mean that Scotland will not be bound by the BBC weather reports - if, say, the BBC predict strong winds and horizontal, freezing rain, could Scotland choose instead to have a balmy, heather-scented breeze and warm yet refreshing showers?

I would like to apply for Celtic citizenship. I don't have any bagpipes, but I once tasted haggis, know what 'neeps' are, and never miss an episode of "Oor Wullie" or "The Broons". I have also eaten a macaroni pie, but I confess that I was "steamin' " - I won't make that mistake again.


----------



## lostbear (May 29, 2013)

mollydog07 said:


> Just a thought.....where will we elope to?...will we still be welcome at Gretna? so many questions!


Perhaps Gretna should be awarded neutral status, like the Swiss. (Just promise me that you won't abuse the privilege to make cuckoo clocks and Toblerone . . . )


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

soulful dog said:


> Which begs the question, if there is an argument that Scotland would have to put a case forward as a new state to join the EU, why wouldn't that be true for the rest of the UK (or whatever it's called)?


The government of the United Kingdom, in other words westminster, is already a member. Scotland would be breaking off and is therefore "new".

On a side note, UKIP is as full of misinformation as the SNP but that will not stop people from making decisions based upon them. One example is that trade agreements would be necessary between "in EU" Scotland and an "out of EU" UK, probably decided at an EU level though. This may mean tariffs are involved. It would likely be a mess, not necessarily for Scotland if it is in the EU.

Not sure how true it is but the Economist once stated the following if the UK left the EU.


> British dairy exports would incur an import tax of 55% to reach the EU market, with tariffs on some items of more than 200%. Cheddar cheese would face a tariff of €167 per 100kg; the mark-up on Stilton would be €141. Average tariffs on clothing would push up their price in European markets by 12%. Parts of Britain's car industry would move out. British-based producers would face a 4% tariff on car-equipment sales to the EU.


Another thought, I wonder if taxes, even VAT would be different for things, especially drinks and cigarettes after a time. How much smuggling would go on, especially if additional tariffs were in place?


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> British armed forces wouldn't just completely cease to exist in Scotland, as part of the armed forces are Scottish soldiers, bases etc, just the same as part of the BBC is made up of Scottish presenters, offices etc in Scotland


More and more confusing. Are you saying that military bases will stay in place taken over and manned by Scottish personnel only and that Scottish presenters working for BBC Scotland and currently paid from the licence fee will just stay in place and nothing will change? Where will their pay come from?


----------



## spid (Nov 4, 2008)

Re the Forces - some very interesting points in the comments on this thread

An Independent Scotland - Think Defence

Basically - yes Scotland would have it's own defence force - those that wish to leave an Un-united British force would have to PVR (premature voluntary redundancy) and join a Scottish force. Scotland has said it doesn't want much - but what will happen to the bases which belong to the crown I'm not sure. Scotland would be entitled to a small percentage of equipment - I believe around 8%, but not manpower (from what I can garner)

Would the ships no longer be refurbished at Fassnet or would the work go to Newcastle etc? Huge financial implications for the local Scottish economy there. And where the bases are a massive income base for local economies (with only 8% of the MOD being made up of Scots I would imagine a good percentage of those will be asked to 'go home') and bases not manned fully anymore the local impacts could be devastating. Where I was based Leuchars in Scotland at least 2 out of the 3 local schools would have to close down due to lack of pupils.

Two telling quotes (no reliable source) are

"As for defence well I suppose Scotland would come to resemble Ireland or New Zealand. A brigade of infantry, a few patrol ships, and a few helicopters." someone Welsh)

and

"I think we would be far too optimistic to expect anything that military nuts like us would recognise as a defence forces more like a specialist police unit" (from a Scot)

So like I said, a massive lot to be decided.

I wish the Scots would stay - but if they wish to leave so be it, I personally wont be snubbed, but I can imagine some people will be.


----------



## cinnamontoast (Oct 24, 2010)

I so couldn't care less, as long as they don't want the rest of the UK to prop them up with their desire to retain the pound or subsidise them for any other reason.


----------



## lostbear (May 29, 2013)

spid said:


> re the forces - some very interesting points in the comments on this thread
> 
> an independent scotland - think defence
> 
> ...


yes!!! Result!!!!!!


----------



## spid (Nov 4, 2008)

soulful dog said:


> Yes, in regards to the armed forces, that's right, UK troops in England, Wales, N. Ireland, Scottish troops in Scotland. My point is just that the British armed forces wouldn't just completely cease to exist in Scotland, as part of the armed forces are Scottish soldiers, bases etc, just the same as part of the BBC is made up of Scottish presenters, offices etc in Scotland. They wouldn't just disappear or move down to England, they'd still exist in Scotland.


Not sure what makes you think that Scots in the armed forces only serve in Scotland - they serve everywhere. The majority of the armed forces are made up on non Scots (92%). They would have to leave and join a separate, new Scottish force.


----------



## spid (Nov 4, 2008)

Another link for you Havoc http://www.ucl.ac.uk/spp/publications/unit-publications/51.pdf


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

Thanks Spid. My overriding feeling is still one of surprise that things are not more sorted at this stage. Admittedly there may be more detail in place than is being reported but if I had a vote I'd want more specifics on things like finance to help me decide. I'm a little disappointed that so close to such a monumental vote all we are seeing is the 'bluster'.


----------



## Starlite (Sep 9, 2009)

Should we be independent? Yes. Will we get it? No. Too many have the fear put in them by British media and the good old lying BBC and swallow it.

Fact is, Westminster cares about London, they don't even give a **** about the northern counties of England. Scotland should no longer be a guinea pig for London rule, its a joke and the situation in NI is a nightmare as their so called government atttemot to appease London rather than its own.
I don't hate England, I don't hate English people, I hate the system and the people who control it so would rather not be a part of it. Any time you say to an English person about independence you get a lecture on how we should **** off, we should be thankful to them and were basically vermin who need put in our place. we are blamed for any faults in the system, apparently its our fault English MPs did not vote in free prescriptions, how does that work?

We don't want to be part of the Euro, neither does the rest of the UK and there are countless countries who have their own currency and stand alone, nothing ventured nothing gained, but like I said we won't get it anyway as people are too scared!


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> Too many have the fear put in them by British media and the good old lying BBC and swallow it.


So what lies are being told to frighten people out of a yes vote and why are they swallowing it?


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> i personally wont be snubbed, but i can imagine some people will be


I think 'some' is a good term to use. I honestly think the vast majority of us don't care very much as it's a decision for the Scots. I do think we're going to be bombarded with so much on the subject over the next few months that we'd all like to feel there's been some point to it all and a 'no' vote could leave more bad feeling than a 'yes'.


----------



## lostbear (May 29, 2013)

Starlite said:


> Should we be independent? Yes. Will we get it? No. Too many have the fear put in them by British media and the good old lying BBC and swallow it.
> 
> *Fact is, Westminster cares about London, *they don't even give a **** about the northern counties of England. Scotland should no longer be a guinea pig for London rule, its a joke and the situation in NI is a nightmare as their so called government atttemot to appease London rather than its own.
> I don't hate England, I don't hate English people, I hate the system and the people who control it so would rather not be a part of it. Any time you say to an English person about independence you get a lecture on how we should **** off, we should be thankful to them and were basically vermin who need put in our place. we are blamed for any faults in the system, apparently its our fault English MPs did not vote in free prescriptions, how does that work?
> ...


Agree heartily with all of your post, especially the emboldened bits.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> We don't want to be part of the Euro, neither does the rest of the UK


What the 'rest' of the UK wants/thinks/does will be irrelevant though if Scotland gains independence.



> Fact is, Westminster cares about London,


That's a reason for voting yes but surely by now the 'yes' camp in Scotland should be looking forward to how they'll do things differently.


----------



## Starlite (Sep 9, 2009)

havoc said:


> So what lies are being told to frighten people out of a yes vote and why are they swallowing it?


The quick answer is how many positive peices have you seen about Scotland gaining independence on British news? Every story is doom and gloom.
Oh yes it will be irrelevant if we gain independence, fact is havoc were still I'm the union so our opinion is still relevant  a vote for independence is not a vote for SNP, the media seems to be skewing thatas well which I am putting people off, a lot of people can't stand the guy and the laughable fact Cameron promises an EU referendum after he is voted back in, you can't see lies for what they are?

Westminster didn't care about the floods till it started on the Thames, your government does not care about you, they would rather feed your distrust of the other countries in the UK than address issues which affect you now.


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

Starlite said:


> Should we be independent? Yes. Will we get it? No. Too many have the fear put in them by British media and the good old lying BBC and swallow it.
> 
> Fact is, Westminster cares about London, they don't even give a **** about the northern counties of England. Scotland should no longer be a guinea pig for London rule, its a joke and the situation in NI is a nightmare as their so called government atttemot to appease London rather than its own.
> I don't hate England, I don't hate English people, I hate the system and the people who control it so would rather not be a part of it. Any time you say to an English person about independence you get a lecture on how we should **** off, we should be thankful to them and were basically vermin who need put in our place. we are blamed for any faults in the system, apparently its our fault English MPs did not vote in free prescriptions, how does that work?
> ...


Seriously?

How many english people have you met that say scottish should fck off and you are vermin?
i havent met any english people that have said this?
what lies are the BBC etc telling?
and i dont understand your comment about english MP's and free prescriptions? what do you mean?

i agree with you about the EU? why on earth is alex salmond inventing this rediculous policy of saying we are going to leave the UK but we are going to keep the Uk's money and EU place, but we arent going to get permission from the owners of these things before telling the voters that is our plan. and why would you do all this knowing full well most people in the UK DONT want to be in the EU, so if you went along with that, you would get more yes votes! And why on earth would you want to be an independent country yet keep the money of the country you are trying to ber independent from! If thats the case, whats the point of independence?

The guy sounds bonkers. And i am English but am on the fence re independence, i can see some arguments for it, and i prefer the scottish system which is more Scandinavian like as i prefer their priorities compared to the UK in regards to not charging students to go to uni, and similar other things. And now after coming up with such ridiculous common sense defying policies, when some people say hang on a minute, reality check (ie, Barrasso, all the main parties of Britain), he gets angry and starts whining like a baby about bullying and people being ridiculous - that last point is very ironic! He is clearly game playing there, and by calling people bullies etc, he is simply just trying to deflect the focus away from responsibility for his own mistake. After all, he wrote these policies, not the other guys!

So these latest statements from Barroso and the British politicians re the EU and the pound, i can envisage 4 effects upon the vote:

1. Some people that were undecided or in the yes camp will now vote no, as although they want Independence they dont think Scotland is to small to function as a small economy.
2. Some people will think Alex Salmond is stupid, if you are going to indeoedance, you do it properly, that includes your own currency. So we are happy for the clarification from westminster, we will now vote yes.
3. Quite a lot of people in the UK want out of the EU, so some scottish people will glad for the clarification from Barrosso and vote yes.

4. Some scottish people will buy into this childish salmond propaganda about bullying, and now vote yes out of pique. 
I really hope the vote is not swayed by this one. If that happens, i would loose my respect for the scottish people, as i thought they were smarter than that. I would hope they vote according to either the proper issue in light of these EU and sterling announcements, ie, economic arguments, or on principles in regards to the true meaning of independence a'la the EU and having your own currency.

The sad thing is i heard some of salmond's speech yesterday, and he made some good arguments for the whole of the UK why we should share a currency. So he didnt need to then go and spoil it with all that silly politicking about bullying etc.


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

Tails and Trails said:


> Seriously?
> 
> How many english people have you met that say scottish should fck off and you are vermin?
> i havent met any english people that have said this?


Maybe not met any who are that rude - although read plenty of such comments on the internet from cowardly keyboard warriors - but have certainly had more than my fair share of anti-Scottish comments directed at me over the last 26 years in England.

Many Englanders look down their noses at the Scots - we are the poor relations, the hanger-ons. We are often the butt of derisory comments "oh you're cold? But you're Scottish, you should be used to it. Oh, you have heating up there do you, next you'll be telling me you can read & write...."

It often makes me wonder - if Scotland is, and Scots are, so blooming awful why did the English spend the best part of 400 years invading us and trying to take us over?


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

MoggyBaby said:


> Maybe not met any who are that rude - although read plenty of such comments on the internet from cowardly keyboard warriors - but have certainly had more than my fair share of anti-Scottish comments directed at me over the last 26 years in England.
> 
> Many Englanders look down their noses at the Scots - we are the poor relations, the hanger-ons. We are often the butt of derisory comments "oh you're cold? But you're Scottish, you should be used to it. Oh, you have heating up there do you, next you'll be telling me you can read & write...."
> 
> It often makes me wonder - if Scotland is, and Scots are, so blooming awful why did the English spend the best part of 400 years invading us and trying to take us over?


works both ways though this hate stuff.

Moved here almost 10 years ago and was shocked at the level of venom coming from some people simply cos we are English.

Overheard 2 old ladies in Tesco...one says...oh yes, you know her, she used to work at ###....she is English, but she is ok.

Grandchildren born here but have an accent the same as we do which is northern english and kids at school tease and bully.

My nearest neighbour is born and bred here...he orders stone for doing his driveway and his bill is half what mine is...and it goes on.

Common one.....You bloody English come up here, steal our cheap houses and take our jobs.You all bought your council flats in London , sell them and make a killing then come and buy a castle up here.....and think you arrived.......lol, I wish!


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Scotland is a beautiful place....so is England but Scotland has more open spaces and less population.....and contrary to popular belief, the weather in Aberdeenshire is better than many places in England, especially NW where I come from.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

As Alex Salmond is pushing so hard for Independence...maybe so he can go down in history as being the first First Minister......what will he do if it fails? cos that is him done and dusted in politics here I would have thought.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> You bloody English come up here, steal our cheap houses


We get that said about Londoners coming out here and buying our houses so the next generation can't afford to stay living in the village. When I point out that it was villagers who happily sold the properties to Londoners for inflated prices it all goes a bit quiet


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

havoc said:


> We get that said about Londoners coming out here and buying our houses so the next generation can't afford to stay living in the village. When I point out that it was villagers who happily sold the properties to Londoners for inflated prices it all goes a bit quiet


I think you can probably say things like this about most of the country. Yorkshire dales springs to mind and a couple of pretty villages in Lancashire where I originate from too. Everybody wants to be out of the rush and find a bit of peace......one of the reasons we moved to Scotland.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> if Scotland is, and Scots are, so blooming awful why did the English spend the best part of 400 years invading us and trying to take us over?


What's that got to do with the question of independence? You have your chance now to go FORWARD on your own terms. Surely that's where the effort and thought should be concentrated. What the English (or anyone else think) is of no consequence.


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

havoc said:


> What's that got to do with the question of independence? You have your chance now to go FORWARD on your own terms. Surely that's where the effort and thought should be concentrated. What the English (or anyone else think) is of no consequence.


I was merely pointing out that England went to great lengths in the past to conquer Scotland and bring it under English rule but, since doing so, has treated it rather badly and regarded it as the maiden Aunt that no-one wants living with them and they put up with her under duress!

This attitude has never changed and this is why the independence issue has gained momentum over the years. Had BOTH sides (because I know the Scots also continue to be arsey) played nice together maybe it wouldn't have come to this.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

havoc said:


> What's that got to do with the question of independence?


Actually I think it's an important point. It's gut feelings and culture simmering in the background for generations, dashed with a strong mix of patriotism. The Scots aren't alone in that. Why do English "hate the French" while at the same time, not.. could it stretch back even further to the Norman Conquest? Why was Braveheart taken to heart by so many Scots, crying out "Freedom" and doing William Wallace impressions?

The issues are politics but there is far more under the surface.


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

Goblin said:


> Actually I think it's an important point. It's gut feelings and culture simmering in the background for generations, dashed with a strong mix of patriotism. The Scots aren't alone in that. Why do English "hate the French" while at the same time, not.. could it stretch back even further to the Norman Conquest? Why was Braveheart taken to heart by so many Scots, crying out "Freedom" and doing William Wallace impressions?
> 
> The issues are politics but there is far more under the surface.


but all of that has just filtered down throughout history just to the harmless level of silly jibing. it happens the world over between many countries.

i think it a bit of a stretch to then factor that into the independence debate by defining it all upon the lines the english think we are vermin the BBC is telling lies, especially if you dont explain that properly

that isnt too say there arent people in different countries whom are being serious we they say this sh#t, but they are hardly mainstream and are viewed by the majority populations anywhere as just extremists and bigots


----------



## Jesthar (May 16, 2011)

MoggyBaby said:


> Their 'carefully considered vote' will be swayed by the emotion of anger that they are continually being 'told' what to do by Westminster.
> 
> As I said, there is no problem with the information being given - this needs to be done to present a balanced arguement - but it is the manner in which it is being given. It smacks of bully boy tactics by desperate men who genuinely fear a Yes majority.
> 
> ...


As the Conservatives have minimal support in Scotland, and will gain significantly in election percentage without the Scottish vote at General Election time, what makes you think that isn't the point...



egyptianreggae said:


> Scottish people living in England will be all right, but English people living in Scotland will be chased out by angry Scottish people wielding sticks and flaming torches.
> 
> Those of us who are English but living in Scotland with Scottish cats will be even worse off


You don't need to worry, ER - everyone knows that cats don't have owners, they have staff, so as an English servant owned by a Scottish cat, you'll be just fine 

And if Scotland does strike out on it's own, I'll get dual nationality...


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> regarded it as the maiden Aunt that no-one wants living with them and they put up with her under duress!


Well then this surely is the chance for the maiden aunt to move out to her own place and control her own destiny - not that I have ever thought that way and I doubt most English have either. The idea that the English put up with Scotland and the Scots under duress is something I find quite odd.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Tails and Trails said:


> but all of that has just filtered down throughout history just to the harmless level of silly jibing.


Silly jibing still can cause resentment if you are at the butt end of it, especially if it is a "conquered" people even if that "conquered" people helped save the English with things like Scottish regiments etc later on throughout history.


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

Goblin said:


> Silly jibing still can cause resentment if you are at the butt end of it, especially if it is a "conquered" people even if that "conquered" people helped save the English with things like Scottish regiments etc later on throughout history.


Only iif you let it ..as a brit and akiwi Ican get jibed by the euros Australia
s etc but whatever

still doesn't define a serious Scottish independence debate with un backed up claims like ths BBC is telling lies so on so forth


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

havoc said:


> Well then this surely is the chance for the maiden aunt to move out to her own place and control her own destiny - not that I have ever thought that way and I doubt most English have either. The idea that the English put up with Scotland and the Scots under duress is something I find quite odd.


Really? Because it is an attitude I have come across for many years, being a Scottish person living in England. Perhaps you have to be on the receiving end of the attitude to know it is there.

And the maiden aunt *is* considering moving out to get her own pad (is that not what this thread is about) but suddenly the put-upon rellies find they'd rather have her in the house after all but don't actually promise to treat her any better than they have done to date.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> And the maiden aunt is considering moving out to get her own pad (is that not what this thread is about) but suddenly the put-upon rellies find *they'd rather have her in the house after all*


But I don't want you to stay IF you don't want to. I'm beginning to wonder if it's the fact that we are perfectly happy for you to do as you please which annoys you.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Worth noting.. Ask a Scot and and Englishman their nationality.. Scot will say Scottish, Englishman will likely say British. That I think says an awful lot when it comes to possible resentment, both ways.


----------



## noushka05 (Mar 28, 2008)

If the Scots want their independence - good luck to them I say. Who could blame them if they do? 




.


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

havoc said:


> But I don't want you to stay IF you don't want to. *I'm beginning to wonder if it's the fact that we are perfectly happy for you to do as you please which annoys you*.


Eh??????  If this were the case, Westminster wouldn't be banging on about how they want Scotland to remain a part of the union, they wouldn't be scaremongering at every opportunity and they sure as heck wouldn't be saying "Tell all your Scottish friends to vote No."

David Cameron's love letter to Scotland pleas to preserve UK | Mail Online


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

I'm not David Cameron and I recognise the Scots on here aren't Mr Salmond.


----------



## spid (Nov 4, 2008)

Starlite said:


> Fact is, Westminster cares about London, they don't even give a **** about the northern counties of England. Scotland should no longer be a guinea pig for London rule, its a joke and the situation in NI is a nightmare as their so called government atttemot to appease London rather than its own.
> I don't hate England, I don't hate English people, I hate the system and the people who control it so would rather not be a part of it. Any time you say to an English person about independence you get a lecture on how we should **** off, we should be thankful to them and were basically vermin who need put in our place


I suppose I count as English (though I wasn't born here, and one of parents was Irish) but for the purpose of this debate . . . the bit in red I have NEVER heard. Maybe I mix with a better class of people. But . . . I think you find an awful lot of 'English' hate the system too. The problem has come with tactical voting. And the blinking Lib Dems, who had sound policies, and then decided to tart themselves to the Torys for the sake of a bit of power, have put their cause back by about 40 years. Never again will I vote for them, as I voted for lies.

I honestly believe not is the time to STOP tactically voting and (for me) voting for the party you REALLY believe in (for my that's the Greens as they actually advocate a way of living that ISN'T based on capitalism. And I know SO many who think like me. This way we will end up with a hung parliament and the voting system will have to be reformed and proportional representation will be brought in. And that can only be good (IMHO)



Starlite said:


> The quick answer is how many positive peices have you seen about Scotland gaining independence on British news? Every story is doom and gloom.
> Oh yes it will be irrelevant if we gain independence, fact is havoc were still I'm the union so our opinion is still relevant  a vote for independence is not a vote for SNP, the media seems to be skewing thatas well which I am putting people off, a lot of people can't stand the guy and the laughable fact Cameron promises an EU referendum after he is voted back in, you can't see lies for what they are?
> 
> Westminster didn't care about the floods till it started on the Thames, your government does not care about you, they would rather feed your distrust of the other countries in the UK than address issues which affect you now.


how many positive pieces have you seen about Scotland gaining independence on British news? can I tackle this first? - question? How many positive pieces have you seen in Scotland on the advantages of staying in the Union? Is the coverage 'up there' fair, balanced and impartial. If not then you can't really accuse the 'opposition' for what you aren't doing yourself. If you are, then I applaud the people making those decisions.

Flooding - living in the South West I did notice the 'sudden concern' once the Thames started to flood - but let me tell you, this hasn't gone un-noticed by the masses.This is a lovely rant We're a wealthy country… money's no object… | Jane Young Please don't assume that we haven't noticed what a pr*ck Cameron is, I mean the environment secretary doesn't believe in Global Warming! This government hopefully will fall very soon, we aren't all unthinking Tory sympathisers who lap up everything the evil IDS and his cronies say.



MoggyBaby said:


> Maybe not met any who are that rude - although read plenty of such comments on the internet from cowardly keyboard warriors - but have certainly had more than my fair share of anti-Scottish comments directed at me over the last 26 years in England.
> 
> Many Englanders look down their noses at the Scots - we are the poor relations, the hanger-ons. We are often the butt of derisory comments "oh you're cold? But you're Scottish, you should be used to it. Oh, you have heating up there do you, next you'll be telling me you can read & write...."
> 
> It often makes me wonder - if Scotland is, and Scots are, so blooming awful why did the English spend the best part of 400 years invading us and trying to take us over?


I'll say it again much as I don't want to MB, as I really like you, but the hostility we experienced in our two years in Scotland was horrendous. When we were offered a tour in Scotland we jumped at the chance, being part Celt I was really looking froward to it. But boy, the racism was rife. I was really disappointed, I had sincerely hoped that all reports had been overly exaggerated and that it wouldn't be like that, but it was. Yes, there were some lovely people, but there were also a lot of nasty ones.

On a simple level, my English awarded teaching degree wasn't recognised in Scotland and I had to ump many hoops (which I didn't mange to do in time before we left as it was SO convoluted) to be 'allowed' to teach. Scottish degrees are recognised in England. Go figure.

But basically all you experience in England as a Scot my family experienced as English (even though I'm a Celt and one of my daughters was born in Holland) people in Scotland. And we lived near St Andrews so very cosmopolitan. But the minute that accent was heard that was it, labelled. Of course, I am really, really sorry that you are treated this way. And I'm really, really sorry my children were treated the same way.

But the old adage of six of one and half a dozen of the other comes to mind.

I actually think independence will help. I wish people could get passed the past and live as people now, but that isn't human nature. I have NO beef with the Scots, I wish everyone thought like me. I can't be held responsible to what my fellow countrymen did over 400 years - especially as many of those kings were French or Spanish anyway - they were no more English than I actually am. And the fact that in history I actually sided with the Scots is immaterial because I have an English accent as so must be responsible (or so it seems)

For everyone's sake, ALL countries need to move on and stop looking back HUNDREDS of years and blaming the current generations.



lilythepink said:


> works both ways though this hate stuff.
> 
> Moved here almost 10 years ago and was shocked at the level of venom coming from some people simply cos we are English.
> 
> ...


Been there, lived it, moved back South.I wold have loved for it to be different. I love Scotland and it's culture and heritage, and scenery. And I would have once loved to live there. But, can't bring myself to face it all again.


----------



## spid (Nov 4, 2008)

stupid answer - as in what I just typed - in this post


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

spid said:


> I'll say it again much as I don't want to MB, as I really like you, but the hostility we experienced in our two years in Scotland was horrendous. When we were offered a tour in Scotland we jumped at the chance, being part Celt I was really looking froward to it. But boy, the racism was rife. I was really disappointed, I had sincerely hoped that all reports had been overly exaggerated and that it wouldn't be like that, but it was. Yes, there were some lovely people, but there were also a lot of nasty ones.


Spid - at no point have I made the Scots out to be any kind of angels; I know full well we are not. My comments were a direct reply to a poster who was not convinced that abusive / slanderous / untoward comments were being made, or had been made, to the Scots. I was merely pointing out that they had been made and still are being made.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> I actually think independence will help


This was how I felt when this thread started, the whole thought of moving forward rather than revelling in bitterness and resentment over history was most appealing. The only difference it could make to me would be economic and as the numbers don't appear to have been crunched yet I can't know if it would be better or worse for either England or Scotland. I'm therefore completely neutral and believe it's a decision for the Scots. I guess that puts me in the 'if you want to go then go' camp but this seems to annoy the very people who say they want to go.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

What I would like to see is a clear decision, not simply scraping past the goal post, no matter what the actual result is.


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

Goblin said:


> What I would like to see is a clear decision, not simply scraping past the goal post, no matter what the actual result is.





MoggyBaby said:


> Eh??????  If this were the case, Westminster wouldn't be banging on about how they want Scotland to remain a part of the union, they wouldn't be scaremongering at every opportunity and they sure as heck wouldn't be saying "Tell all your Scottish friends to vote No."
> 
> David Cameron's love letter to Scotland pleas to preserve UK | Mail Online


Please describe where the scaremongering has occurred ?


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

MoggyBaby said:


> Spid - at no point have I made the Scots out to be any kind of angels; I know full well we are not. My comments were a direct reply to a poster who was not convinced that abusive / slanderous / untoward comments were being made, or had been made, to the Scots. I was merely pointing out that they had been made and still are being made.


If that was me that wasn't what I said


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

If, has been said, the Scots won't be told what to do by a bunch of English public schoolboys AND David Cameron is making a point of publicly stating they should stay part of the UK then I'd have to wonder at his real intent.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Goblin said:


> Worth noting.. Ask a Scot and and Englishman their nationality.. Scot will say Scottish, Englishman will likely say British. That I think says an awful lot when it comes to possible resentment, both ways.


because...in England before I left and even now whilst in Scotland and speaking with other English people....if you say you are English, you are told you are a racist and we live in Britain so we are British.

I am English and live in Scotland.

The racist brigade will say anybody coming into England from anywhere in the world and living here can claim to be British so anybody can be British.....and so it goes on....so, they consider themselves English too....and thats where the racist stuff comes in...like English is better than British.

Next, if you say you are English, some clever clogs will say how can you say that? didn't your family migrate from wales or Ireland or Scotland? so how can you say you are English.

My answer. I don't know where my ancestors come from and I can't ask cos they are long dead..I was born in England, my parents are English....I am English.


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

I have experienced racism towards myself and my family when we moved to Scotland.

Before we moved to Scotland, my family was exposed to nasty racist remarks made by asian immigrants who could barely speak English.

Its all down to education and tolerance.

I miss the spicy culture from where we moved from, I love the countryside and quiet openness where I live now.

People are people and I don't care much for them really no matter what their nationality.

I was bitten by a cocker spaniel when I was a kid. When I grew up I understood it was just one dog and not all cocker spaniels that bit me.

Just because 1 Scottish person is narrow minded and racist towards me, doesn't mean the whole nation is.


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

This seemed appropriate.....


----------



## Jesthar (May 16, 2011)

lilythepink said:


> I am English and live in Scotland.
> 
> The racist brigade will say anybody coming into England from anywhere in the world and living here can claim to be British so anybody can be British.....and so it goes on....so, they consider themselves English too....and thats where the racist stuff comes in...like English is better than British.
> 
> ...


I'm 3/4 English and 1/4 Scottish. The way some people talk, I think I'm supposed to go through life kicking myself up the bum!


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

Jesthar said:


> I'm 3/4 English and 1/4 Scottish. The way some people talk, I think I'm supposed to go through life kicking myself up the bum!


and the funny thing is everyone in the british isles and ireland goes round calling themselves celts when they aint


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

Tails and Trails said:


> and the funny thing is everyone in the british isles and ireland goes round calling themselves celts when they aint


I'm a member of the beaker people !!! Actually I've no idea.


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

Goblin said:


> I'm a member of the beaker people !!! Actually I've no idea.


its ironic really, in an effort to assert their own unique identities, they try and tag themselves into a group that straddles half the area of the british isles and ireland, and coopts a large group from mainland europe, whilst not calling themselves after their own unique ethnic tribal heritage, ie, picts


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

Tails and Trails said:


> and the funny thing is everyone in the british isles and ireland goes round calling themselves celts when they aint


I don't and would never want to.


----------



## DoodlesRule (Jul 7, 2011)

Happy Paws said:


> I don't and would never want to.


Me Neither


----------



## soulful dog (Nov 6, 2011)

havoc said:


> More and more confusing. Are you saying that military bases will stay in place taken over and manned by Scottish personnel only and that Scottish presenters working for BBC Scotland and currently paid from the licence fee will just stay in place and nothing will change?





spid said:


> Not sure what makes you think that Scots in the armed forces only serve in Scotland - they serve everywhere.


I never said they only served in Scotland? The only point I am making is that just about any British entity is partly Scottish (partly funded, partly manned, partly based or whatever), so I'm struggling to understand why there seems to be an assumption things like the BBC & the armed forces would simply revert to the rest of Britian and Scotland would be left with nothing?

There would be some negotiation and things would be split up accordingly, the army Scotland is left with would be far smaller, but I don't think anyone expects anything different. The probable effect it would have on industries based around the defence industry in Scotland are another matter and one single reason why a number of people will vote no, regardless of any other views they have.

The only stumbling block is the UK's nuclear deterrent based at Faslane (& Coulport). Everything else can probably fairly easily be moved or set up elsewhere, those navy bases are another matter entirely. It would cost billions to build suitable bases elsewhere, if it could be done at all.



cinnamontoast said:


> I so couldn't care less, as long as they don't want the rest of the UK to prop them up with their desire to retain the pound *or subsidise them for any other reason*.


Why would you even think that would happen? Is it because you believe that is the case right now? I know that's something the Tories have tried to sell in the past, despite figures showing that Scotland pays in more to the Treasury per head of population. But as usual, there are two sets of figures, one from each side.



lilythepink said:


> I have experienced racism towards myself and my family when we moved to Scotland.
> 
> Before we moved to Scotland, my family was exposed to nasty racist remarks made by asian immigrants who could barely speak English.
> 
> *Its all down to education and tolerance.*


Exactly. Particularly for those of us in the UK, we should be celebrating our differences and laughing about our similarities! It's not always easy though.


----------



## DoodlesRule (Jul 7, 2011)

Gordon is saying you can't have British state pension either if separate

Gordon Brown warns Scots independence means losing British state pension - Telegraph


----------



## Happy Paws2 (Sep 13, 2008)

DoodlesRule said:


> Gordon is saying you can't have British state pension either if separate
> 
> Gordon Brown warns Scots independence means losing British state pension - Telegraph


Well said Gordon, let them fund their own pensions.


----------



## spid (Nov 4, 2008)

I think I'm now just finding this thread very depressing. 

When push comes to shove I think it's all going to be very immaterial anyway.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> There would be some negotiation and things would be split up accordingly, the army Scotland is left with would be far smaller


As has been pointed out Scotland can't just be left with a share of the current armed forces. Serving personnel have joined a UK force and taken an oath based on that. Those who wish to would have to leave their current job and join a new Scottish army/navy/air force. Resources would be shared out but personnel can't be.


----------



## spid (Nov 4, 2008)

Tails and Trails said:


> and the funny thing is everyone in the british isles and ireland goes round calling themselves celts when they aint





Tails and Trails said:


> its ironic really, in an effort to assert their own unique identities, they try and tag themselves into a group that straddles half the area of the british isles and Ireland, and co-opts a large group from mainland Europe, whilst not calling themselves after their own unique ethnic tribal heritage, ie, picts


But the Picts were in eastern and northern Scotland and the Celts were in parts of Cornwall, wales, Ireland, the rest of scotland and some of Europe. Am I, of Irish/ Cornish descent, meant to inflame the Picts by calling myself a Pict when I am not?

Celts - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Picts - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And this is why it is depressing - what the frell does it matter if I call myself a Celt when I am of Irish and Cornish descent and love the culture and language etc. Why is that so bad? I am more Celtic than English (wasn't even born here) but because I have an 'English' accent I am expected to bear the ire caused by the sins of forebears I have no genetic connection to.

Why can't everyone JUST GET ON?

So depressed now about this all.


----------



## spid (Nov 4, 2008)

A lighter note to end my dalliance on this thread

Alex Salmond claims he has every right to use gym he's no longer member of


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

spid said:


> But the Picts were in eastern and northern Scotland and the Celts were in parts of Cornwall, wales, Ireland, the rest of scotland and some of Europe. Am I, of Irish/ Cornish descent, meant to inflame the Picts by calling myself a Pict when I am not?
> 
> Celts - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> Picts - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> ...


I wouldn't want you to call yourself a pict if you are from Cornwall .

what iI'm saying is its great you all have these unique genetic tribal identities embrace ththem don't call yourselves cultural celts when you aren't the the genetic celts from Europe , call yourselves whatever your cornish or Irish or Scottish tribal ethnic genetic heritage is


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

spid said:


> A lighter note to end my dalliance on this thread
> 
> Alex Salmond claims he has every right to use gym hes no longer member of


Ah! That's where he got his policy idea from! Its all clear now LOL


----------



## spid (Nov 4, 2008)

Tails and Trails said:


> I wouldn't want you to call yourself a pict if you are from Cornwall .
> 
> what iI'm saying is its great you all have these unique genetic tribal identities embrace ththem don't call yourselves cultural celts when you aren't the the genetic celts from Europe , call yourselves whatever your cornish or Irish or Scottish tribal ethnic genetic heritage is


Because the Cornish and Irish *are* Celts! Why shouldn't I embrace the heritage? And like I said WHY DOES IT MATTER?

If I want to worship the spaghetti monster I can, if I want to call myself a Celt I can.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

spid said:


> If I want to worship the spaghetti monster I can, if I want to call myself a Celt I can.


You're a mis-mash, I'm a mish-mash, Everyone's a mish-mash (probably) I certainly don't care what people claim to be descended from.. it's what they do now that matters. Can I say I'm african as isn't that where we all came from, I get confused as they are always arguing about it.


----------



## soulful dog (Nov 6, 2011)

havoc said:


> As has been pointed out Scotland can't just be left with a share of the current armed forces. Serving personnel have joined a UK force and taken an oath based on that. Those who wish to would have to leave their current job and join a new Scottish army/navy/air force. Resources would be shared out but personnel can't be.


Are you deliberately ignoring the word negotiation from my reply? Can you not see anything wrong with the assumption that Scotland will be left with nothing from the UK army or UK whatever?



Happy Paws said:


> Well said Gordon, let them fund their own pensions.


Jeez, stuff like this drives me to despair.

The UK should be a partnership, but its pretty obvious one part of it thinks that without it, one of its partners will fail miserably. If that was a husband and wife, looking at it objectively, does that sound like a healthy relationship?


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

soulful dog said:


> The UK should be a partnership, but its pretty obvious one part of it thinks that without it, one of its partners will fail miserably. If that was a husband and wife, looking at it objectively, does that sound like a healthy relationship?


Using your own example, if it would be a husband and wife, if one files for divorce do you expect the other to continue as if everything is rosy?


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> Are you deliberately ignoring the word negotiation from my reply? Can you not see anything wrong with the assumption that Scotland will be left with nothing from the UK army or UK whatever?


I'm not deliberately ignoring anything. I never said Scotland would be left with nothing. I said resources can be shared, personnel cannot. Are you envisioning some sort of TUPE arrangement?


----------



## lilythepink (Jul 24, 2013)

Goblin said:


> You're a mis-mash, I'm a mish-mash, Everyone's a mish-mash (probably) I certainly don't care what people claim to be descended from.. it's what they do now that matters. Can I say I'm african as isn't that where we all came from, I get confused as they are always arguing about it.


this is where the confusion etc starts as to who is what. This starts re English heritage but nobody ever says to Scots...you are a mish mash, or the Welsh or the Irish. and then people wonder why Englishmen say they are Birtish and not English.


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

lilythepink said:


> this is where the confusion etc starts as to who is what. This starts re English heritage but nobody ever says to Scots...you are a mish mash, or the Welsh or the Irish. and then people wonder why Englishmen say they are Birtish and not English.


Just did.. I said everyone's a mish-mash  You think the Celt's or Picts came to an undiscovered country? After the Norman Conquest, aristocratic Saxons turned the lowlands of Scotland into refugee camp. Scotland's king, Malcolm, married one of them, Margaret, one of those refugees who happened to be a Hungarian-born Christian reformer.. Mish-mash.


----------



## soulful dog (Nov 6, 2011)

Goblin said:


> Using your own example, if it would be a husband and wife, if one files for divorce do you expect the other to continue as if everything is rosy?


Not all divorces are messy, some are amicable. Some people even get on better after a divorce.... but I do see your point, doesn't make it right though does it? And I did say, looking at it objectively.



havoc said:


> I'm not deliberately ignoring anything. I never said Scotland would be left with nothing. I said resources can be shared, personnel cannot. Are you envisioning some sort of TUPE arrangement?


My replies about the examples mentioned (armed forces, BBC) were in response to comments like the army would "pull out of Scotland", "Scotland having to buy in the services of the RAF", "don't understand why there is animosity over the idea of the BBC pulling out of Scotland completely". That doesn't imply any kind of sharing? I don't envisage anything because neither is something that matters a great deal to me in terms of voting yes or no.


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

spid said:


> Because the Cornish and Irish *are* Celts! Why shouldn't I embrace the heritage? And like I said WHY DOES IT MATTER?
> 
> If I want to worship the spaghetti monster I can, if I want to call myself a Celt I can.


actually, the irish and cornish (and scottish welsh etc ) arent celts

that has been established in the last decade thru genetic science.

genetic celts are in europe

the peoples you mention in britain are different ancient tribes that has always been in britain, eg, picts

the celt label for these people didnt come about until the victorian era, it was a fashion statement.

another reason these people got described as celts was the incidence of archeological discoveries of celtic art work and pottery pieces found throughout britain.this was due to trade, and the incidence of celtish people from europe migrating to britain and mixing and marrying in with the local ancient tribes of these isles. but those tribes where already there and a distinct genetic ethnicity of their own

so all these people have been called celts due to just cultural reasons including language

its very fascinasting, well worth studying
im really impressed how peoples of the isles value their own historical heritage and thus define their own identities. im just saying why not embrace all your own real and different identities from scotland wales cornwall ireland etc, instead of lumping yourself in with a big mass of people from europe.

im not complaining, im not saying it for some big divisive national reason. i just think its great! if i had ancient scottish heritage, for one example,id be well stoked saying im a pict.

but if you are up for just the cultural side of things and want to call yourself a celt, then why not 

i know lsome hippy type english people who love all that celtic art and culture stuff so they call themselves celts too

i guess that fine for all of you?


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> don't understand why there is animosity over the idea of the BBC pulling out of Scotland completely". That doesn't imply any kind of sharing?


Well Scotland would be left with the resources ie there wouldn't be a scorched earth policy. The studios would still exist and if a Scottish Broadcasting Corporation chose to form and use them having recruited appropriate personnel then I can't see there would be any animosity.


----------



## DoodlesRule (Jul 7, 2011)

soulful dog said:


> Not all divorces are messy, some are amicable. Some people even get on better after a divorce.... but I do see your point, doesn't make it right though does it? And I did say, looking at it objectively.
> 
> My replies about the examples mentioned (armed forces, BBC) were in response to comments like the army would "pull out of Scotland", "Scotland having to buy in the services of the RAF", "don't understand why there is animosity over the idea of the BBC pulling out of Scotland completely". That doesn't imply any kind of sharing? I don't envisage anything because neither is something that matters a great deal to me in terms of voting yes or no.


Rather than a divorce a better analogy is a long term business partnershp. One Partner decides they want to leave, the negotiation would consist of £x is your part of the debts £y is you share of the assets based on your percentage shareholding and off you go to do your own thing starting from scratch.

You would not expect to dip into the original companies bank account nor use their company cars, other assets, retain membership to any professional bodies simply because you were part of the original company at one time.

I like Scotland, I like Scottish people but if you want independence it needs to be the full monty stand on your own feet have your own currency, armed forces, deal with your own state pensions etc. You can't cherry pick bits of the comfort blanket of being part of the United Kingdom otherwise its not true independence and therefore pointless breaking up the Union in the first place.

If I was Scottish I wouldn't know what to vote - I think I would want independence but would fear what happens when Mr Salmond has spent all the dosh and it all goes horribly wrong


----------



## DoodlesRule (Jul 7, 2011)

I know he is entitled to his opinion but does anyone else find it irritating when celebs stick their oar in - David Bowie he isn't Scottish and doesn't even live in the UK


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

DoodlesRule said:


> I know he is entitled to his opinion but does anyone else find it irritating when celebs stick their oar in - David Bowie he isn't Scottish and doesn't even live in the UK


...........,,???


----------



## Colliebarmy (Sep 27, 2012)

havoc said:


> I'm not deliberately ignoring anything. I never said Scotland would be left with nothing. I said resources can be shared, personnel cannot. Are you envisioning some sort of TUPE arrangement?


Tupe --- would it apply to a newly independent State of Scotland that wasnt in the EU, wasnt in NATO, had no currency?.........


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

I say yes if that's what Scotland wants. Who are we to tell them otherwise? But independence is something that should be taken seriously and thought out with care I think. It does sound a serious thing really.

I haven't really followed this on the news or on media sites apart from the whole British pound Scotland will still want if they go independent. I thought if you go independent then that means you have your own currency as that's what independence is all about? Sorry if I'm wrong.

What would be the pro's of Scotland going independent? What things would stop if you went independent? Could it be dangerous? There were many links in this thread so not sure if that was in one of them. So many.


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

Blackcats said:


> I thought if you go independent then that means you have your own currency as that's what independence is all about? Sorry if I'm wrong.
> 
> .


no, you are correct


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

Tails and Trails said:


> no, you are correct


So is it a case of still wanting it to keep them strong?

That's not independent. That reminds me of 'Have your cake and eat it'

I do agree we shouldn't let them have the pound if they want independence. Letting them have it isn't them being independent. It's wanting us for something and not anything else.


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

Blackcats said:


> So is it a case of still wanting it to keep them strong?
> 
> That's not independent. That reminds me of 'Have your cake and eat it'
> 
> I do agree we shouldn't let them have the pound if they want independence. Letting them have it isn't them being independent. It's wanting us for something and not anything else.


"have your cake and eat it" - spot on!

TBH, im surprised the independence movement arent pissed with salmond, they way he has represented the idea of independence


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

Tails and Trails said:


> "have your cake and eat it" - spot on!
> 
> TBH, im surprised the independence movement arent pissed with salmond, they way he has represented the idea of independence


Well, I really cannot say anymore on this as haven't really been watching on it but the argument to do with the pound.

Is this Salmond a jerk or something?

I think I'm going to have to have a nosey.


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

Blackcats said:


> Well, I really cannot say anymore on this as haven't really been watching on it but the argument to do with the pound.
> 
> Is this Salmond a jerk or something?
> 
> I think I'm going to have to have a nosey.


well, too cut a long story short he published a very long document outlining plans for independent scotland, these included:

1. keeping the british pound, but he never asked anyone first if he could do this

2. staying in the EU, as the EU will automatically give scotland a place via being members of EU via the UK. this was despite the fact that EU officials have been saying several times the last year the new country of scotland would have to apply to join afresh

3. he wants to ban nukes, therefore closing down the NATO faslane nuclear sub base. this against NATO membership policy. but at same time he said scotland can join NATO. (apparently he is now backtracking on that by saying NATO nuke subs - british, america, whatever - can dock in faslane as long as they dont say out loud they are carrying nukes!


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

Blackcats said:


> So is it a case of still wanting it to keep them strong?
> 
> That's not independent. That reminds me of 'Have your cake and eat it'
> 
> I do agree we shouldn't let them have the pound if they want independence. Letting them have it isn't them being independent. It's wanting us for something and not anything else.


The Scots had their own currency called the Pound Scottish ( also known as Pund Scottish) before the Treaty of Union in 1707. It had a different sterling (which comes from the quality of silver used) value to that of the English Pound. So the use of the term 'sterling' or 'pound' is not unique to England and so Scotland has a right to continue to use this as the name of their currency.

As Scotland has made contributions into the Bank of England since 1707, it will have a right to a portion of that back. It can not be a case of England raising the drawbridge and keeping everything to themselves from the 15th September 2014 should Scotland vote in favour of independence.

When Britain agreed to hand Hong Kong back to China, it took 13 years to come to fruition as this allowed time for all negotiations to go through and separation to be done properly and fairly. It will take just as long for Scotland and England to separate, if not even longer, because a joint relationship of 307 years cannot just be torn apart in a matter of days or weeks.

During that time, Scots of a certain age will still be entitled to UK pensions as most of them will have paid into the UK system during their lives. The changes will affect later generations whose tax payments, or a portion of, etc will be diverted to a Scottish pot in preparation for the day of full independence.

The attitude of some posters here with their 'Give them sod all, they don't deserve it' has been very enlightening. Along with the French thread a few weeks back, one has noticed exactly who carries a very narrow mind on their shoulders.


----------



## Blackcats (Apr 13, 2013)

MoggyBaby said:


> The Scots had their own currency called the Pound Scottish ( also known as Pund Scottish) before the Treaty of Union in 1707. It had a different sterling (which comes from the quality of silver used) value to that of the English Pound. So the use of the term 'sterling' or 'pound' is not unique to England and so Scotland has a right to continue to use this as the name of their currency.
> 
> As Scotland has made contributions into the Bank of England since 1707, it will have a right to a portion of that back. It can not be a case of England raising the drawbridge and keeping everything to themselves from the 15th September 2014 should Scotland vote in favour of independence.
> 
> ...


I don't think those are my words. They're yours.

So if Scotland goes independent then they still have the right to the British pound, regardless what we say? I just thought if Scotland have independence they are not associated with us in anyway like that and I thought independence meant economically too. Honestly, I'm all for someone telling me I'm wrong as I don't get it all tbh.

To me this isn't independence if Scotland still wants the UK pound, not because I think the Scots deserve feck all. Just thought if you want to go independent then you do it properly.


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

MoggyBaby said:


> The Scots had their own currency called the Pound Scottish ( also known as Pund Scottish) before the Treaty of Union in 1707. It had a different sterling (which comes from the quality of silver used) value to that of the English Pound. So the use of the term 'sterling' or 'pound' is not unique to England and so Scotland has a right to continue to use this as the name of their currency.
> 
> As Scotland has made contributions into the Bank of England since 1707, it will have a right to a portion of that back. It can not be a case of England raising the drawbridge and keeping everything to themselves from the 15th September 2014 should Scotland vote in favour of independence.
> 
> ...


Those arent the issue though. Its not about what Scotland _calls_ its currency, its about having it _own_ currency. When most countries campaign for independence from another, that usually means just that - so why would you want their money, parliament, police force, court system, so on so forth? Otherwise, why go independent?
So nothing wring with them inventing a currency called scottish pound. 
We have manx pound, after all.

And im not sure that anyone is arguing that if scotland wins independence their would not be any negotiations about all that stuff you mention. 
UK and scotland will ''owe each other different things.
That would obviously happen. Common sense.


----------



## DoodlesRule (Jul 7, 2011)

The Pound thing is more complex - don't like this bloke but this article explains it

BBC News - Has the Treasury killed Salmond?s sterling-zone?


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> What would be the pro's of Scotland going independent? What things would stop if you went independent?


The answers to those questions seem to depend on who you're listening to and what the politician with the microphone thinks you want to hear them spout at any given moment. There would be pros and cons for Scotland and the rest of the UK but sadly those who wish to influence the outcome don't appear to have particularly altruistic motives.


----------



## bearcub (Jul 19, 2011)

What confuses me is how is it determined who gets to vote? 

My OH's mum was born in Glasgow and has lived in SE London for 40 years. Her twin sister lives in Gourock. Is one more Scottish than the other and more entitled to vote? Is it just down to residency? 

If it just down to residency, are foreign people (as in Canadians or students for instance) who have lived in Scotland for a short time eligible? 

Don't quite understand this part of it.


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

bearcub said:


> What confuses me is how is it determined who gets to vote?
> 
> My OH's mum was born in Glasgow and has lived in SE London for 40 years. Her twin sister lives in Gourock. Is one more Scottish than the other and more entitled to vote? Is it just down to residency?
> 
> ...


From what I have been able to ascertain, the vote is for anyone resident in Scotland as they will be the ones affected.

Scots who are not resident are not entitled to vote

I think this is fair. Too many exiled Scots would vote yes from a sense of pride & passion and with little regard as to how the choice will actually impact on those living in the country.


----------



## DoodlesRule (Jul 7, 2011)

In my jaded view the original union was brokered by rich folk for their own ends, the same applies to the powers that be now - it suits some for independence, suits others to stay with the union all for their own pockets & power. The peasants just struggle on with the daily grind


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

bearcub said:


> What confuses me is how is it determined who gets to vote?



British citizens resident in Scotland.
Qualifying Commonwealth citizens resident in Scotland. This means Commonwealth citizens who either have leave to remain in the UK or do not require such leave, and are resident in Scotland.
Citizens of the Republic of Ireland and other EU countries resident in Scotland.
Members of the House of Lords resident in Scotland.
Service/Crown personnel serving in the UK or overseas in the Armed Forces or with Her Majesty's Government who are registered to vote in Scotland.

Which means I know of at least one German who gets to vote and a couple of Scottish people who don't.

Another article Support for Scottish independence rises after London warns on pound | Reuters

The main problem is, as I see it, Scotland is supposed to vote on maybe's. It may be terms negotiated actually work in their favor but how strong is their negotiating hand? If the vote is yes, can independence be stopped even if things aren't going to work? I really don't know.


----------



## mollydog07 (May 26, 2012)

MoggyBaby said:


> From what I have been able to ascertain, the vote is for anyone resident in Scotland as they will be the ones affected.
> 
> Scots who are not resident are not entitled to vote
> 
> I think this is fair. Too many exiled Scots would vote yes from a sense of pride & passion and with little regard as to how the choice will actually impact on those living in the country.


Yes but surley David Bowie should get a vote?,he,s obviously a scot,so important this issue he gets his mate kate moss to mention it in his award speech!


----------



## bearcub (Jul 19, 2011)

MoggyBaby said:


> From what I have been able to ascertain, the vote is for anyone resident in Scotland as they will be the ones affected.
> 
> Scots who are not resident are not entitled to vote
> 
> I think this is fair. Too many exiled Scots would vote yes from a sense of pride & passion and with little regard as to how the choice will actually impact on those living in the country.





Goblin said:


> British citizens resident in Scotland.
> Qualifying Commonwealth citizens resident in Scotland. This means Commonwealth citizens who either have leave to remain in the UK or do not require such leave, and are resident in Scotland.
> Citizens of the Republic of Ireland and other EU countries resident in Scotland.
> Members of the House of Lords resident in Scotland.
> ...


Thank you both for explaining that 

It's odd to think that my OH's mum who I have always thought of as Scottish through and through could potentially end up a different nationality to her twin sister. Or perhaps that's not technically accurate.

My OH knows a lot more about it and understands better than I do. He was saying this morning that Spain wouldn't want Scotland to join the EU as it would set a precedent for Catalonia. I hope Scottish people, especially young adults, do fully have the opportunity to understand every factor of the decision and it's implications before the referendum, whether that be through the education system or more televised debates or whatever. As usual all we seem to be seeing at the moment is political point scoring.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> Another article Support for Scottish independence rises after London warns on pound | Reuters


So if the chance of Scotland keeping the pound is significantly reduced and the 'yes' vote for independence rises significantly as a result - doesn't this mean many Scots are *more* inclined to vote for independence if it means they get their own separate currency?


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

havoc said:


> So if the chance of Scotland keeping the pound is significantly reduced and the 'yes' vote for independence rises significantly as a result - doesn't this mean many Scots are *more* inclined to vote for independence if it means they get their own separate currency?


and thats the bit i cant get my head around

to me, its clear that own currency, leaving the EU, and maybe even leaving NATO are vote winners for the yes campaign.
so what n'the hell is Salmond up to?

is he really a secret agent for the no campaign???


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

Well Cameron is obviously a secret agent for the yes campaign as he knows the Scots will vote against whatever he says and he's saying stay  Politics hey!


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

MoggyBaby said:


> When Britain agreed to hand Hong Kong back to China, it took 13 years to come to fruition as this allowed time for all negotiations to go through and separation to be done properly and fairly.


From what I can gather from Scotland's Referendum 2014



> Planning for independence in March 2016 allows a realistic time to reach agreement in those discussions and to complete the legal processes to transfer power to the Scottish Parliament. The first parliamentary election in an independent Scotland will take place on 5 May 2016


That's only 18 months. To have a Scottish Parliament making decisions independently things have to be in place by that date, not "left open to negotiation indefinitely". Probably take that long to get the parties to agree to the shape of the table they should sit at.


----------



## soulful dog (Nov 6, 2011)

Too many points I want to reply to here, so excuse me if I don't individually quote them all!

Its immaterial whether you compare it to a marriage or a business partnership. The fact remains, both have put into the partnership/relationship, so just because it breaks up doesn't mean one half keeps everything and the other is just left with anything that is in their name. In a business partnership, money in the bank account, company cars etc, aren't simply owned and default to one partner, they are divided up after negotiation? And unless it works for both partners, after that negotiation is complete, you won't continue to share them.

Everything, who gets what, who is liable for what debts, who gets what from the assets etc. - it's all negotiated because it's been a partnership that has accrued those debts, and built up those assets. I really can't figure out what is difficult to comprehend here, and why instead people think one of the 'partners' is just looking for a comfort blanket or to cherry pick what they want?

This is why I keep comparing it to a divorce, it's like the husband takes the view that he is the dominant partner, he's the breadwinner, it's his name on the house, car etc, so if his wife wants to leave, not only will she fail miserably without his help, she is due nothing except for the clothes she wears, and if she tries to say part of the house (or whatever) is hers, she can think again!

As for the currency debate. When it comes down to it, Scotland can continue to use pound sterling if it wants (immaterial of what the Bank of England says about it), as has been pointed out in the news recently, there are countries in the world that do this with the US dollar, and Ireland did it at one point with the pound before using their own currency. There are plus points to it for the rest of the UK too, it would make it easier for them to continue to do business with Scotland, which is a significant part of their market. There are down sides to it too of course. The Sterling Zone Salmond talks about is different though, it's more of a partnership, and I'll be honest, as I've already stated, this was a surprise to me and I'm not sure it's a good thing anyway.

Its the same with pensions, just like the rest of the UK, Scots have paid into that pension pot, so there would have to be something worked out, as MoggyBaby has posted. So "have your cake and eat it", no that's not spot on at all, and it's pretty scary how prevalent a view that seems to be in this thread, because for the most part it appears to be based on very little knowledge.

And Tails and Trails, you keep posting opinion as fact. It's not fact, "some EU officials" is pretty much the same man stating the same opinion more than once. As has already been pointed out in this thread, there have been both positive and negative views expressed in regards to EU membership, there isn't any agreement either way, nor is there any precedent.

Incidentally, the person expressing the opinion is Spanish and seems concerned about the positive effect Scottish independence may have on Catalonia. Plus, he is comparing Scotland to Kosovo. The latter has never been part of the EU, Serbia has rejected Kosovo's declaration of independence from them, and in the meantime Kosovo are trying to get membership of the EU. The similarities between the two are practically non-existent.

Also, there are plenty of countries in Nato that don't have nuclear capabilities, it's not a pre-requisite to being a member. It might be a preference, but that is all. Incidentally, Salmond might be an egotistical tit who many people don't like, but he is far from an idiot.

As for the pros and cons for independence. For a lot of the nitty gritty stuff, who knows? But the basic desire behind it is I think, the possibility of self-determination, a more socially democratic culture, a more representative government. No longer feeling your views don't really matter, being told you are spongers and that you'll fail without our help.

_"If I was Scottish I wouldn't know what to vote - I think I would want independence but would fear what happens when Mr Salmond has spent all the dosh and it all goes horribly wrong._

_"The main problem is, as I see it, Scotland is supposed to vote on maybe's."_

I think quite a few people feel this way. In theory it could be a good thing, but no one really knows for definite - its the fear of the unknown that will probably mean the no vote will prevail. The problem is, there are no guarantees and there can be none. All the Yes campaign can do is make plans, and we all know that even the best laid plans don't always work.

The only definite is, if Scotland votes yes, it will be over a year after that before a new government is formed and Scotland actually becomes independent. There is absolutely no guarantee that Mr Salmond will be part of that new government, as many people might not vote for him.... I wonder what he'd do then!


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

soulful dog said:


> Too many points I want to reply to here, so excuse me if I don't individually quote them all!
> 
> Its immaterial whether you compare it to a marriage or a business partnership. The fact remains, both have put into the partnership/relationship, so just because it breaks up doesn't mean one half keeps everything and the other is just left with anything that is in their name. In a business partnership, money in the bank account, company cars etc, aren't simply owned and default to one partner, they are divided up after negotiation? And unless it works for both partners, after that negotiation is complete, you won't continue to share them.
> 
> ...


Just quick answer the bit in bold. You have made the same mistake as moggy, you misquoted Blackcat. When she referred to "have your cat and eat it", she never even brought up any of these topics you have just listed. She and I were only using that phrase in the context of if you want independence, just go for independence, dont then try and go round trying to keep hold of things from the country you are fighting for independence from, such as the British pound and the EU place. As when counties want to be independent, they want their own money, parliament, police, army, schools, tax system , so on so forth. As that is the definition of a country. Otherwise, what is the point of asking for independence? I think everyone understands this.

That was all we posted about re "have you cake and eat it", it was moggy that then posted all this other stuff about you would have to negotiate dividing things up - the things you just repeated. As blackcat said to moggy, those were his words, not hers. And i also agreed that it was obvious you would have to do that, common sense

The reason Barrosso bought up Kosovo was clearly explained. It is because Spain has broken with other European/EU countries in _not_ recognizing Kosovo's declaration of independence from Serbia, as Spain does not agree with such declarations on principle, as it sets a precedent for its own territories of Galicia and Catalonia and Basque. Therefore, logic dictates they would employ the same principle and policy n regards to Scotland. And all EU members have to approve Scottish application to join - whereas SNP seems to think Scotland wont have to leave, as somehow they can retain their UK membership of EU.

Im not actually anti independence, I havent made up my mind. I also think if that's what most Scots want, why not?
Although i dont think that's what _most_ Scots want, and i think that Salmond has actually fcked up the independence campaign, as, thru all these pronouncements about the British pound and British EU place, he hasn't actually campaigned for actual proper independence (that was the have your cake and eat it bit)


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

soulful dog said:


> Incidentally, the person expressing the opinion is Spanish and seems concerned about the positive effect Scottish independence may have on Catalonia.


You're missing Hollande and France as well, not just Spain  When it comes down to it no politician who is pro EU will condone breaking up countries when the idea is to bring the countries closer together. As far as I can make out, the fact that legalities have no precedent means it will be based on negotiations.. Until a precedent is made, those negotiations are going to be heavily influenced by those politicians who are saying no. My opinion is that it will be hard negotiations and far from certain in regards to the EU membership and the main thing Scotland can offer to start with, without being established is image.. "Does the EU want to be seen as contributing to the possibility of Scotland failing"



> Incidentally, Salmond might be an egotistical tit who many people don't like, but he is far from an idiot.


That's why he's so frightening.


----------



## soulful dog (Nov 6, 2011)

The specific "have your cake and eat it" comment, was related to wanting to keep the pound. I know it wasn't a direct reply to any of those other issues, but similar sentiments have been expressed elsewhere in the thread. 

I've been trying to say for days about negotiations but people keep replying with other comments and I'm just trying to see if I can make it a little clearer.

It's not working though - maybe I'm not very good at trying to explain it, or maybe people don't really want to listen 

"dont then try and go round trying to keep hold of things from the country you are fighting for independence from, such as the British pound and the EU place"

The whole point is that Scotland is part of the UK, it's not just a bit tagged onto the top of England as an after-though. One that plays no part in the UK economy, or the UK army, the UK as a EU member state, or NATO or whatever. So why is that an independent Scotland just automatically loses all rights to any part of that because it wishes to be an independent country? 

Incidentally, I'm not arguing about whether Scotland should or shouldn't keep the UK pound, or be a EU member or not.

And Goblin, sorry wasn't aware Hollande had made any comment about it. But yes, no one knows for definite what will happen with the EU. Spanish officials have indicated that as long as the UK agree that Scotland should be independent if they vote yes, they will have nothing to say about it. Not sure that means they will back Scotland as staying a EU member or not. So many questions and so few answers.


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

soulful dog said:


> .
> 
> "dont then try and go round trying to keep hold of things from the country you are fighting for independence from, such as the British pound and the EU place"
> 
> ...


but we are agreed. im sure all the no campaign people would also argue scotland is not a tag on at the top, but an integral part of the UK thru the economy, EU, NATO, army. etc, just like you say

but thats the point - _part of the uk_.

SNP doesnt want be part of the UK. Thats their belief. so, yeh, of course you wont then have the UK money or UK army or UK EU or UK football team, as you aint the UK, you are a different country!

otherwise why be a different country???? following the salmond logic, why isnt he then going round saying we will be a different country, but we will have a joint football team with UK, joint police force with UK, etc, etc, etc.

that has nothing to do with and is not the same thing as saying a new breakaway country cannot negotiate with the 'old country' how you are gonna divide up all the property, such as bits of the army, bits of the debts and assets, so on so forth


----------



## porps (Jun 23, 2011)

if they wanna leave, let them leave- but if theyre gonna do it they should do it completely, not partially. For example, if they leave they can raise their own miltary, defend their own nation, create their own economy and have their own monarchs if they actually still want a monarchy.

I'm pretty sure if they do leave it will be a damn sight worse for them than it will be for the remaining UK (which they will no longer be a part of).


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

Isn't it sad how quickly a whole nation becomes 'they'? and that in anticipation of something that might not even happen. Bitter together. Someone posted several pages ago, a thought that has bothered me, namely the plight of Scottish residents who don't vote for independence but get stuck with the consequences were it to happen.


----------



## porps (Jun 23, 2011)

Satori said:


> Isn't it sad how quickly a whole nation becomes 'they'? and that in anticipation of something that might not even happen.


is there an alternative pronoun you'd prefer people used when referring to a group of people?

If people start taking offense at words such as they, we, i, he or she, we will soon find ourselves in a situation where communication is nigh impossible.



Satori said:


> Someone posted several pages ago, a thought that has bothered me, namely the plight of Scottish residents who don't vote for independence but get stuck with the consequences were it to happen.


I assume it will be the same as every other vote that doesnt have a 100% outcome one way or the other. democracy doesnt mean everyone gets what they (there's that word again) want, it's more like everyone gets what the majority wants. It's no different to people who didnt vote tory/libdem coalition into power (which was noone) but have to suffer the consequences.


----------



## havoc (Dec 8, 2008)

> All the Yes campaign can do is make plans, and we all know that even the best laid plans don't always work.


It is those plans which appear to be sorely lacking at the moment. Yes, there will be a division of property but even this is backward looking. A fair division involves looking back and I do understand the divorce analogy because each side would obviously be looking to ensure they get the best deal. Politicians on both sides will certainly be looking to tell us all that they did  It's what happens going forward which is surely the important issue for those who will be paying for those services.


----------



## DoodlesRule (Jul 7, 2011)

I don't fully understand it myself as it is quite complex (the treasury letter on the previous link I did does explain quite a bit though) but its not a case of the government saying up yours you are not having "our" pound and you can sort out your own pensions. 

Basically they are saying they will not form a currency union with an independant Scottish government because the risks are too great for the UK. Of course they can continue to use the pound but with no union they have no say on fiscal policies and will not be backed by the bank of england or the remaining UK tax payers.

On State Pensions believe the idea is that Scotland get a pot of money which is supposedly the Scottish share of national insurance contributions and then have to invest/fund all the future Scottish pensions themselves with no backing from what remains of the UK.

Independence will mean Scotland becomes a foreign country and will have to negotiate with the UK as it would with any other foreign country. Mr Salmond doesn't seem to have done too well with his negotiations so far, making assumptions and demands isn't negotiating. Making threats of reneging on Scotlands share of the UK national debt would damage their standing in the international community and make things very difficult.

It all seems a mess and I do not envy the Scottish people being expected to vote on something so woolly - at the end of the day ordinary people want to know how it will affect them personally, at the moment it seems no one knows


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

porps said:


> is there an alternative pronoun you'd prefer people used when referring to a group of people?
> 
> If people start taking offense at words such as they, we, i, he or she, we will soon find ourselves in a situation where communication is nigh impossible.


Not offended, just reflecting on the tone of many of the posts. Whichever way the vote goes English / Scottish relationships will be the worse for all of this.

Edit..... unless perhaps there is a massive, conclusive 'no' vote. That would be the only good outcome, followed by a further devolution of powers done willingly by a UK government.


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

nice post

as i understand it, if a country wishes to adopt another countries currency, on its own merits, and not with a currency union (a'la Euro), and do this with or without permission of the government of the country that runs that currency, then the country that adopts that currency will have no say in decision made by the currency country in regards to their currency.

for example, el salvador adopted the US dollar as their own currency collapsed. However, when the Federal Reserve (american version of Bank of England) make decision regarding interest rates and so forth, they only do so based upon conditions in america, they dont spend much time thinking aobut el salvador. so a policy that might be good for conditions in america may be terrible for conditions in el salvador.

And their are only a couple of currencies in the world which countries can legally adopt, these are called convertible currencies, and as far as im aware, they are just british sterling, US dollar, Euro, NZ dollar, Australian dollar.


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

DoodlesRule said:


> I don't fully understand it myself as it is quite complex (the treasury letter on the previous link I did does explain quite a bit though) but its not a case of the government saying up yours you are not having "our" pound and you can sort out your own pensions.
> 
> Basically they are saying they will not form a currency union with an independant Scottish government because the risks are too great for the UK. Of course they can continue to use the pound but with no union they have no say on fiscal policies and will not be backed by the bank of england or the remaining UK tax payers.
> 
> ...


.....With the added nuance that, were an independent Scotland choose not to take a share of UK national debt, a likely outcome would be that the Scottish share of the National Insurance pot will be withheld.


----------



## Tails and Trails (Jan 9, 2014)

Satori said:


> Not offended, just reflecting on the tone of many of the posts. Whichever way the vote goes English / Scottish relationships will be the worse for all of this.
> 
> Edit..... unless perhaps there is a massive, conclusive 'no' vote. That would be the only good outcome, followed by a further devolution of powers done willingly by a UK government.


interestingly i think Westminster is already thinking in terms of more devo.
this weeks they allowed scotland to issue their own bonds


----------



## porps (Jun 23, 2011)

Satori said:


> Not offended, just reflecting on the tone of many of the posts. Whichever way the vote goes English / Scottish relationships will be the worse for all of this.
> 
> Edit..... unless perhaps there is a massive, conclusive 'no' vote. That would be the only good outcome, followed by a further devolution of powers done willingly by a UK government.


fair enough, but lets face it, it's not like the english and the scottish have historically been good friends is it? Most scots i've ever met pretty much hate the english. I do have family up in edinburgh and we get along well, so i wouldnt say _all _scots hate _all_ english but for the majority there doesnt seem to be an awful lot of love lost. Not that Scotland are alone in that of course.

I do agree that the best outcome for all concerned would be a no vote. Mainly because, given our history, i'd be worried that we'd end up warring again at some point. Even if that seems unlikely today, times do change and theres plenty of precedent for it.


----------



## DoodlesRule (Jul 7, 2011)

porps said:


> fair enough, but lets face it, it's not like the english and the scottish have historically been good friends is it? Most scots i've ever met pretty much hate the english. I do have family up in edinburgh and we get along well, so i wouldnt say _all _scots hate _all_ english but for the majority there doesnt seem to be an awful lot of love lost. Not that Scotland are alone in that of course.
> 
> I do agree that the best outcome for all concerned would be a no vote. Mainly because, given our history, i'd be worried that we'd end up warring again at some point. Even if that seems unlikely today, times do change and theres plenty of precedent for it.


Do the Scottish people hate the English people, or the English government?


----------



## porps (Jun 23, 2011)

DoodlesRule said:


> Do the Scottish people hate the English people, or the English government?


Both i guess. I mean im pretty sure that not every single scot who ever uttered the words "ya'english b**tard" only did so because they assumed they were talking to a government representative. You dont have to be scottish to hate the government and i wouldnt presume that just because someone is scottish they wouldnt hate this government just as much as everyone else does. So my guess would be both.

But it's not like HATE hate, not like the kkk hates black people or whatever, it's more of a kind of a "fun" hate, the same way the english "hate" the french..

edit -- this is not sounding at all like i intended it to


----------



## Goblin (Jun 21, 2011)

porps said:


> edit -- this is not sounding at all like i intended it to


Try resent instead of hate


----------



## DoodlesRule (Jul 7, 2011)

Goblin said:


> Try resent instead of hate


I would imagine most of the people north of watford gap resent London ruling them


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

porps said:


> *Both i guess. I mean im pretty sure that not every single scot who ever uttered the words "ya'english b**tard" only did so because they assumed they were talking to a government representative.*


I regularly call Derek a miserable, mardy-ar$e, scrote-faced English b**stard.

Does that equate to a 'hate' comment?? :huh:

:lol: :lol:


----------



## porps (Jun 23, 2011)

MoggyBaby said:


> I regularly call Derek a miserable, mardy-ar$e, scrote-faced English b**stard.
> 
> Does that equate to a 'hate' comment?? :huh:
> 
> :lol: :lol:


dunno, it's so hard to tell if dour-faced jocks are joking or being serious :001_tt2: :001_tt2:


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

porps said:


> dunno, it's so hard to tell if dour-faced jocks are joking or being serious :001_tt2: :001_tt2:


And THAT is what makes it much more fun....!! :sneaky2:



.


----------



## porps (Jun 23, 2011)

off topic completely (sorry), but glad to see monty found a home  Such a good looking cat, i was sorely tempted.. clicked the link only to see that he's "just settling into his new home".. probably for the best, i suppose 3 is enough






...for now. ut:


----------



## MoggyBaby (Mar 8, 2011)

porps said:


> off topic completely (sorry), but glad to see monty found a home  Such a good looking cat, i was sorely tempted.. clicked the link only to see that he's "just settling into his new home".. probably for the best, i suppose 3 is enough
> 
> ...for now. ut:


*still off topic* - He is actually still with the rescue but he only arrived there late last week so needed a bit of time to 'settle' before he could be assessed for his op and then have it. 

It could be that he has more issues than just the (late) deformed leg. It is a day at a time for now - seeing if the removal of the leg helps to sort out his other health problems as it will be less stressful for him not having to drag its dead weight around. 

He is just such a sweetie though....

.


----------



## porps (Jun 23, 2011)

MoggyBaby said:


> *still off topic* - He is actually still with the rescue but he only arrived there late last week so needed a bit of time to 'settle' before he could be assessed for his op and then have it.
> 
> It could be that he has more issues than just the (late) deformed leg. It is a day at a time for now - seeing if the removal of the leg helps to sort out his other health problems as it will be less stressful for him not having to drag its dead weight around.
> 
> ...


aw im sad now :s i dunno if its just his eyes or maybe because he looks a lot like rumble, but i really want to adopt him... but then it probably wouldnt be fair to have a 3 legged cat in the same house as rumble- he's such a bully :S
will watch for updates, though i kinda wish i hadnt clicked it in the first place now.


----------



## Satori (Apr 7, 2013)

porps said:


> fair enough, but lets face it, it's not like the english and the scottish have historically been good friends is it? Most scots i've ever met pretty much hate the english. I do have family up in edinburgh and we get along well, so i wouldnt say _all _scots hate _all_ english but for the majority there doesnt seem to be an awful lot of love lost. Not that Scotland are alone in that of course.
> 
> I do agree that the best outcome for all concerned would be a no vote. Mainly because, given our history, i'd be worried that we'd end up warring again at some point. Even if that seems unlikely today, times do change and theres plenty of precedent for it.


You know that's something that I have thought about but not posted for fear of sounding like a looney but wars are fought over this stuff. It sounds unlikely this century but the war in Northern Ireland still continues and 70 people were killed in Kiev last night over an argument which is, in essence, over which states Ukraine forms it's union with.


----------



## soulful dog (Nov 6, 2011)

Ok last comment on this particular point for me because I feel as if I'm just repeating myself over and over again.

Royalty, the BBC, pensions, the navy whatever specific thing you want to look at, it's immaterial. Nothing belongs solely to the UK. They belong (in part) to every area and every person that makes up the UK. Everyone has contributed in some way through our shared history, physical effort, taxes (even the BBC licence fee). Just because one part of the UK wishes to be recognised as an independent country doesn't mean it disowns and has no right to anything that was formed under the 'banner' of the UK.

Yes an independent Scotland wouldn't have British armed forces defending it. It'd have Scottish armed forces, consisting of personnel, equipment & bases made up of their share of what was previously the British armed forces. Same with the BBC, under a different name, with a proportional share. In future they would then be solely funded by a Scottish government. How it would actually work, getting bogged down in the specifics, asking if there would be a TUPE agreement.... that is for the politicians (god help us) to hammer out when the negotiations start - IF Scotland were to actually vote for independence.



porps said:


> if they wanna leave, let them leave- but if theyre gonna do it they should do it completely, not partially.
> I'm pretty sure if they do leave it will be a damn sight worse for them than it will be for the remaining UK (which they will no longer be a part of).


Completely independent..... that is the whole idea of independence, if there wasn't a desire for that, everyone would just be happy with devolution?!

An independent Scotland would have it's own economy, it's own army etc, it would be entirely it's own country, and we'd stand or fall on our own. I'm not sure if it's arrogance (not necessarily intended) that a lot of people seem to think an independent Scotland would need or expect the rest of the UK to bail them out if they hit difficulties, or would be instantly worse off in some way? The idea of the currency union has possibly brought that to the fore, but that kind of view already seems pretty prevalent in a lot of people south of the border and the prospect of a currency union has just rekindled it.



DoodlesRule said:


> It all seems a mess and I do not envy the Scottish people being expected to vote on something so woolly - at the end of the day ordinary people want to know how it will affect them personally, at the moment it seems no one knows.


Exactly why it'll probably end up being a no vote. In theory, I'm quite attracted to the idea of Scotland being an independent country, and I think most sensible Scots realise there are possible pitfalls and happy to accept them. Just what will happen and how it will affect each individual is a bit of a shot in the dark though, so a pretty daunting thought.



Satori said:


> .....With the added nuance that, were an independent Scotland choose not to take a share of UK national debt, a likely outcome would be that the Scottish share of the National Insurance pot will be withheld.


The only reason this has been suggested is in response to scaremongering comments from the 'Better Together' campaign, it's not an actual proposal! Which leads onto the idea that Salmond isn't doing a good job with the negotiations. It's mainly just political sparring, and point scoring. 

One further thing to add is I forgot the possible pros of Scots voting to stay. As alluded too, possibly more devolution powers, having a world voice as part of the UK, and just the belief that being part of a team makes you stronger and better.... so better together? Just as the pros of voting yes for independence, all a bit woolly and idealistic, nothing really concrete, or is there?



porps said:


> fair enough, but lets face it, it's not like the english and the scottish have historically been good friends is it? Most scots i've ever met pretty much hate the english. I do have family up in edinburgh and we get along well, so i wouldnt say _all _scots hate _all_ english but for the majority there doesnt seem to be an awful lot of love lost. Not that Scotland are alone in that of course.


Hate? Not in a million years. As Goblin says, resent is maybe more like it. Just as you will get some English saying they hate Scots, and vice versa, its a small minority. For the most part, reserved to daft sporting rivalry and little more than that. Dislike the way English people often seem to look down on Scots (your comment earlier in the thread about "it will be a damn sight worse for them than it will be for the remaining UK" is a typical example), harbour some resentment for that and continually having to fight to make your voice heard. Yes probably. For the majority, despite any differences there might be between our countries, and things we may not exactly love about England as nation, you are our neighbours, our fellow Brits (even if we aren't always proud of that!), and not actually that different. What is to hate?

Think about how the English feel about the French. English people don't really hate them, but nor do they love them, right? How different would you feel about them if hundreds of years ago France had invaded England, the English managed to hold them off but eventually formed a Union with France. You were still English but now part of the United West Kindgom and that was your nationality. As France was the bigger country with more people the government was based there, they eventually devolved some local powers to England, but it's clear the French felt they were the bigger, better half of the union. As time went on the English nationality was eroded somewhat, when people talked of France they meant the United West Kingdom. Most people just thought England was just a part of France, and island off the coast of France. Do you think an English person might feel a little different about the French in that case?


----------



## porps (Jun 23, 2011)

soulful dog said:


> Ok last comment on this particular point for me because I feel as if I'm just repeating myself over and over again.
> 
> Royalty, the BBC, pensions, the navy whatever specific thing you want to look at, it's immaterial. Nothing belongs solely to the UK. They belong (in part) to every area and every person that makes up the UK. Everyone has contributed in some way through our shared history, physical effort, taxes (even the BBC licence fee). Just because one part of the UK wishes to be recognised as an independent country doesn't mean it disowns and has no right to anything that was formed under the 'banner' of the UK.
> 
> ...


i have no idea how i would feel about it since if that had happened hundreds of years ago my whole life and therefore outlook would most likely be different. I might feel french for all we know. I mean i've never really understood the point of being bitter about things that happened hundreds of years ago, nor do i see any reason to resent people for the actions their long dead ancestors carried out.

saying that it will be worse for scotland isnt me looking down on the scots, i just think that setting up there own currency is going to be a lot more difficult than simply keeping an old well established currency. S'pose they could just take the euro. I'm the first to admit that i'm not knowledgable about economics -thats just my "gut feeling" but i think it's logical to expect setting up a new currency will be harder than not setting up a new currency.

I thought i was clear about my hate post not quite coming out the way i wanted it to. Yes hate was too strong a word to use.


----------

