Everyone Vote in Scotland Independance

[Silas Gull]

If this thing goes Salmond' s way, and then turns out to be a huge mistake, say, a decade down the line, with social divisions between Nationalists and Unionists, will there be sinister men rattling Scotaid tins in New York bars?

 

[gregmcateer]

Wow,
So unsurprisingly, there is a divergence of opinion even on this lil ole forum.
For me this kinda sums up the difficulty. None of us, (and I mean NO ONE, not just us forumites), seem to be able to agree on who 'subsidises' whom, or who provides more in terms of tax revenue, labour, etc, etc. There probably is some way of calculating all the ins and outs on purely financial terms, but it would be a pretty mammoth task. Once we get onto emotions, prejudices, history, etc, etc, I think we are on a non-starter.
I certainly don't know the answer.

Maybe we should go for a trial separation, perhaps sharing the Welsh on alternate weekends :lol: (Joke - just trying to lighten the mood! Hat, coat - I'm off to France....)

 

[themackay]

Taking up TheMackay's post on the BBC fearing the loss of £300m. I wonder what sort of programming the Scottish equivalent of the BBC will provide for £300m. I suspect that the viewers near the English border will be the lucky ones.

Any BBC programes worth watching can be bought for a reasonable fee

How so? Are you privy to the contractual terms of the programme makers?

It's not easy to find; the BBC don't want us to know, but RTE, the Irish national broadcaster isn't so shady. Their accounts from 2012 show that they spent around £21mn at current exchanges rates acquiring not just single programmes, but the complete output of BBC1, 2, 3 and 4. Now given that Ireland's population is around 4.6mn, fairly similar to Scotland's, it's fair to think we should get a similar deal.

Don't just take my word for it though:
http://static.rasset.ie/documents/about ... he-web.pdf

So, Scotland currently pays around £300mn in licence fees; BBC spends around £86mn in Scotland. I'll let you do the math but that should give us a healthy saving of nearing £200mn. Funny that the BBC support a No vote?! ;-)

 

[Walney Col]

Follow the money and more times than not you'll get straight to the heart of any problem.

 

[themackay]

Im not saying we should retaliate I find it dissapointing that you should be encouraging people to discriminate against Scottish goods, mind you that ties in with the totally negative better together campaign

It seems to me quite clear that you are for independence. I would be interested to understand why you say the better together campaign is totally negative. Examples please.

Wow! Where do I start! I could go on all night, but I'll limit myself to 10...

1. Say goodbye to the pandas; on Westminster official said: “No one has fully understood the ramifications for the pandas of any bid for Scottish independence.”

2. Mobile phone bills will rise, especially roaming; (although the EU already announced plans to abolish roaming charges)

3. Scotland would be at risk to attacks from space - Defence Secretary Philip Hammond!

4. Trident and Faslane would be annexed!

5. You'll need a passport to visit relatives in England - Theresa May, Home Secretary

6. Massive exaggeration of setup costs, as high as £2.7bn; shortly after rubbished by the man who wrote the report the figure was based on, Dr Patrick Dunleavy who said the Treasury had 'badly misrepresent[ed] LSE research' (he put the figure nearer £250mn)

7. The world will end! George Robertson said an Indy Scotland would be 'cataclysmic' for the West, threatening global stability and be welcomed by 'the forces of darkness'!

8. We'll never see Dr. Who or Eastenders ever again! Despite 75 countries around the world showing it, including our near neighbour and similarly populated Ireland, who pay around £21mn for full access to BBC1, 2, 3, and 4! Scotland currently pays around £300mn!

9. No Currency Union said all the big guns of the mainstream parties; then privately Westminster Government ministers admitted currency union makes econmic sense to maintain fiscal and monetary stability on both sides!

10. Scotland will have to drive on the right hand side - Andy Burnham, shadow Health Secretary! The Guardian even thought this so ridiculous they ran it as their April Fool's Day story this year!

So there you have it? You want more, just ask!

 

[Ali]

born and bred in the south of east of england so don't have a say in this matter, but desperately do not want the UK broken up.

Divorce from my experience is never pretty or cheap. Even if there was a successful independent Scotland it would take time and great sacrifices to make that happen - the current and next few generations would pay for it.

Having just about survived a brutal recession I don't want to wake up next Friday to more economic armageddon

 

[RogerS]

Oh dear, themackay. Have you never heard of 'tongue-in-cheek' comments which virtually all your examples are ?

 

[themackay]

Roger that was just a few examples of the nonsense from the No side.the amount of lies being told by the no campaign they dont deserve to win.

 

[ballibeg2]

I'm not overly political. In the last week I've had abuse shouted at me for refusing a Yes leaflet on the street. My kids have been verbally abused school for not supporting yes.

Demonstration enough independence is wrong.

Dave

 

[theartfulbodger]

That Salmond chappie seems to have incited a certain amount of racial hatred.

 

[deema]

In 2009-10, according to records which are the last I can find, although there may be more recent data that my search has not turned up, Scotland received £16.5 billion for the rest of the UK than it paid in taxes / contributions to the public purse. This represents a 10% higher public spend per person in Scotland than for anywhere else in England and Wales. This takes into account North Sea oil revenues.

To put the economic size of Scotland into perspective, the population is only 3/4 that of London. No one would suggest that London has sufficient financial might to go it alone and this one city is responsible for approximately 50% of the total GDP of the country. This goes some way I believe to explain why there is so much focus of MPs on this area of the country as it is the economic power house that provides so much for everyone else. Now that's a hard statement to make being a Yorkshire man living in Cheshire!

Scotland has a higher level of unemployment than the average of the UK and also has more chronic illness such as heart disease etc. these factors, primarily require a higher public spend / head if population than the rest if the UK. If we take this underlying need that cannot be turnaround quickly coupled with an immediate lower GDP as the subsidy enjoyed from the rest of the UK disappears the economic future for everyone in Scotland would be significantly worse.

I believe that the 'negativity' of the NO campaign is based on the very real prospect that Scotland will enter into a much deeper and longer recession than seen since 2008. The Scotish National debt will have to rise to support it's social needs, economic output will fall as company's fly south, and the damage to not just one, but multiple generations of Scott's will be palpable. Inevitably like Germany, a reunion will be necessary and desired by Scotland. The question will be whether the rest of the UK will accept the cost of the debt it will have to absorb to allow it to happen.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

"5. You'll need a passport to visit relatives in England - Theresa May, Home Secretary"

Some things like this Salmond just blusters his way through - why should this not be true? Scotland will be be a foreign, non eu country (and the Spanish and one or two others will veto their joining). We don't let Australians and New Zealanders in without a passport, and many of them have closer ties to England than many Scots have. But Salmond still bumbles along,... of course we won't need a passport, of course we'll keep the Queen as head of state, of course we'll keep the pound, of course we'll still have free prescriptions, of course we'll still have an NHS, of course we'll still have free university education, of course....I'm getting tired...

 

[themackay]

"5. You'll need a passport to visit relatives in England - Theresa May, Home Secretary"

Some things like this Salmond just blusters his way through - why should this not be true? Scotland will be be a foreign, non eu country (and the Spanish and one or two others will veto their joining). We don't let Australians and New Zealanders in without a passport, and many of them have closer ties to England than many Scots have. But Salmond still bumbles along,... of course we won't need a passport, of course we'll keep the Queen as head of state, of course we'll keep the pound, of course we'll still have free prescriptions, of course we'll still have an NHS, of course we'll still have free university education, of course....I'm getting tired...

None of these things are Issues majorty easily sorted out with a bit of common sense We may be more lilely than you to be members of the EU in a few years time if we are both in the Eu no need for passport. you dont there are no border controls at the southern Ireland border.

 

[RogerS]

.....
None of these things are Issues majorty easily sorted out with a bit of common sense We may be more lilely than you to be members of the EU in a few years time if we are both in the Eu no need for passport. you dont there are no border controls at the southern Ireland border.

So you're going to swap one 'remote' group (ie Westminster) making laws for you and deciding how things go ( a group over who you have at least a modicum of influence and control) for another even 'remoter' group (ie the EU) who will dictate to you what you can and can't do and over who you have even less control ?

What now for 'independence' ?

In the words of Spock..'that is not logical'.

 

[RogerS]

Deema...excellent post. Salmond has also stated that Scotland will be equivalent to Denmark and Hong Kong in terms of credibility in the worlds' money markets. Mmmmm...let's just look at that in more detail, shall we? Denmark has reserves equivalent to 26% of GDP. Hong Kong, 119% of GDP. To match either of those figures, Scotland would need reserves of £34 billion and £155 billion respectively. So far it has only about £15 billion. Wonder where the rest will come from? Methinks years and years and years of austerity.

OK..that's at the national level. Let's look closer to home, specifically people's homes and mortgages. Most are denominated in sterling. Very high probability that if Scotland wants to join the EU, it will have to adopt the Euro. Most likely have to devalue. Suddenly those mortgages are much more expensive.

Ah well, it's not all bad. North Korea thinks independence is a good idea. So that's all good then.

 

[kdampney]

My tuppence worth...

I don't want to see the Union broken up - I think it's great that we can have our own cultural identity (Highlands, Scottish, North Welsh, Cornish, Yorkshirian, rural-Herefordshire-Morris-Dancing, or whatever) yet still be in the same Nation of Nations. Politically we might disagree over exactly how much the rich ought to pay in taxes (45 or 50%?), or the needy receive in benefits, but there's far more that joins us than divides us. Gentle jibing during the 6 Nations, perhaps, but if we could export that to many parts of the world (Eastern Ukraine, Israel & Gaza, Iraq, etc.), we'd all be in a much better place (over-simplified I know).

If the Scots vote Yes, I think there will be economic uncertainty for both rUK and Scotland for 18 months to 5 years, but then I suspect it'll even itself out. The question is: will the end result be better or worse than now, and I'm not sure we'll know 'til we (all) get there. Basing your economy on oil looks like it'll add more uncertainty to me (suppose electric cars suddenly become popular in China, or peace breaks out in the Middle East, and the oil price collapses...).

I don't think boycotting Scottish goods shows Scots how much we appreciate them. But I accept the OP's willingness to try to make a practical difference in lieu of a vote.

Of course the biggest question is: would UK Workshop have to rename?

 

[Cheshirechappie]

It does seem that there are two approaches to the vote. Some are voting with their hearts, and some with their heads. Salmond is most definitely the former - listening to him, I seem to hear, "Wrap me in the Saltire, but don't bother me with details". Listening to Darling, I hear, "But what about the currency, Nato, the EU, defence, life after oil?". I can see why the former is attractive to some, but utterly baffles the more hard-headed. That maybe explains why one seems 'positive', and one 'negative'.

If Scotland votes No next Thursday, Scots will not cease to be Scots. Three hundred years of Union has not diminished Scottishness. If anything, it's enhanced it by providing stability and a modicum of wealth. Scots have never been second class citizens in the Union, they have always taken a full and active part in all parts of the government, business, military, academic and cultural life of the UK. Several Prime Ministers have been Scots, which seems a tad incompatible with the feeling of disconnection from Westminster - Scots are far from excluded.

If Scotland votes Yes, leaves the Union and joins the EU (assuming the EU allows it, which currently seems in some doubt), will Scots have more influence over government from Brussels and the management of the Euro, or less than they do over Westminster and the Pound? How much say will they have in Nato, how much access to academe and business in the remaining UK? More, or less?

I sort of understand the Hollywood "Braveheart, Rabbie Burns, the Saltire and we'll all live happily ever after" approach as a sort of vision, but can't understand why anyone would regard that as a depiction of reality after even a few moments hard-headed reflection. Real life ain't like the movies.

That said, whatever Scotland decides, the rest of us will have to get on with it. I read somewhere that the usual response of the level-headed to divorce is first grief, then a period of anger, then moving on. I suspect the rest of the UK, with it's far greater population, GDP, and established place in the world would be slightly diminished, but would move on. However, if things didn't work out for an independent small rocky country (if some of the 'details' Salmond is currently batting away in interwiews didn't work out for him), and they decided in a couple of decades to rejoin to Union, would the rest of us want them - in all probability with enhanced debts - back again?

So - the 'positve' movie vision, or the 'negative' hard-headed approach? It's not your future you're deciding, Scots voters. It's your children's future, and their children's. Scotland will always be in their hearts, but your vote could decide how much bread they have on their tables.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

A lot of this wouldn't have arisen if the UK wasn't so London centric - I remember some 15yrs ago talking to a Scottish guy about this, he said his grandfather had never been out of Scotland and was assumed to be pro independence, but when he broached the subject he was told that in no way did the old man want independence, he just wanted even handedness. He was just fed up with the whole country being governed to suit London and the S.E. That to me summed it up (although Scotland is far more socialist and subsidised now). Why, for instance is less money spent per capita on education in Cornwall than London? Of course the money is in London and the S.E. - but that's where the investment is. Which is why money is there. Which is why the investment is there...
Incidentally, it'll be good to see the Shetlanders get independence from Scotland - Salmond can't deny them, can he? Half the oilfields are in their waters.

 

[finneyb]

.....Incidentally, it'll be good to see the Shetlanders get independence from Scotland - Salmond can't deny them, can he? Half the oilfields are in their waters.

And the Shetlanders could then re-join the UK

Brian

 

[RogerS]

Interesting perspective from some Shetlanders I met last year on holiday. They kept on talking about this or that on the mainland and I assumed that they were referring to the large lump of Scotland attached to the rest of us. But they were, in fact, referring to their mainland. Or rather the largest of island of the Shetlands.