Totally agree with the decision made today, but unfortunately the jocks wont vote yes - its like turkeys voting for xmas.
However much the jocks don't like us, they know which side their bread is buttered. Without us they would be fooked.
But I really wish they do.............
No they won't. An independent Scotland wouldn't be "fooked" and neither would it be the land of milk and honey that Salmond promises.
However renaging on Scotlands share of the debt would be a disaster, beginning your economic independence by essentially defaulting on your biggest trading partner sounds utterly catastrophic.
It may very well be that one day there will be a compelling case for Scottish independence, I just don't think the SNP have conveyed it yet.
Of course they won't vote YES. Everyone knows that. That's why Salmond never mentions the opinion polls.
The gap between the yes and no votes has been closing according to opinion polls. If the momentum for the yes vote continues the Scots will leave the union.
Opinion polls mean nothing. Bit like the eighties when voting Tory was like wanking. Everyone did it but just wouldn't admit they were going to do it. Just ask Neil Kinnock - "we're all right"
Although more people voted for John Major's Tory party in the 1992 election than had ever voted Tory while the party was led by Margaret Thatcher ...
Actually 1992 was also the year of Neil Kinnock's Sheffield conference and the only Thatcher/Major election where the polls had suggested a Labour victory (although they were tied on polling day). I believe the polls were wrong in 1970 (Heath) however.
Currency unions are not consistent with independence as you don't get to set your own interest rates in accordance with the needs of your economy - hence the Euro. Wouldn't matter much to the English either way, because the Scottish economy is too small.
If they want a divorce, they can't go picking all the good bits. I'd love to see them put their money where their mouth is and vote yes. And then all those Scots down here (whilst telling us how wonderful Scotland is) will have to apply for a visa to carry on working in England.
If they want a divorce, they can't go picking all the good bits. I'd love to see them put their money where their mouth is and vote yes. And then all those Scots down here (whilst telling us how wonderful Scotland is) will have to apply for a visa to carry on working in England.
Not going to happen, there would be free movement as there is between the UK and Ireland.
I suspect Cameron knows that the pound would collapse without Scotland propping it up. In any case you can keep your currency, we provide most of the armed forces so if we do manage to free the shackles it'll be the best time in history to right the wrongs of Culloden and take whatever poooonds we want.
"with out Scotland propping it up" thats a LOL all day Halifax Bank of Scotland ---Royal Bank of Scotland how the feck does Scotland vast army of 5 million prop those banks up for the billions and billions of pounds they owe the 48 million English ?
When we (the English) bailed out the SCOTTISH banks the first thing RBS did was announce that they had 18 in loans available---- only thing was it was only for people in Scotland.
I hope we dont split but there is defo part of me that wants to tell the whinging tossers to "go home ward and think again" .
Still the Dundee chaps are down this weekend for a 50th birthday party and it will be great to have a few beers with em all.
There are some interesting things about Scottish banknotes.
First, they are not legal tender, anywhere, even in Scotland but are merely generally accepted.
Second, for each Scottish Note issued by the Scottish banks*, they must hold their equivalent value with The Bank of England in real English money.
So as things stand Scottish banknotes are quite pointless.
In the event of independence for Scotland and no monetary union with the rest of the UK presumably the Jocks would ask for their UK funds back from the BoE because they would want to provide their own "promise to pay" backing for their notes in circulation. Perhaps we would refuse to give it to them if they declined to pick up the tab for their share of UK debt?
*The three Scottish note-issuing banks are Clydesdale (owned by the National Bank Of Australia); Bank of Scotland (owned by Lloyds Banking Group) and Royal Bank of Scotland (81% owned by the UK Govt.) So it seems safe to say that independence for Scotland would mean some very interesting decisions would have to be made. Not least by the financial institutions that operate in Scotland. For example would you want to bank with NatWest knowing that it was owned by a foreign holding company (RBS in Edinburgh). Would you want to hold assets with Aberdeen Asset Management or buy an insurance policy from Scottish Widows? Or would these organisations be forced to move their HQs south of the border to continue to pick up the lucrative English & Welsh investment business?
It is answers to questions like these that both sides need to be giving to the Scottish voters. At the moment they are being asked to vote without the full facts (or any facts really) and it will be interesting to see whether they ever actually get them.
Just spent 7 months living up there. The Sweats ain't stupid as I always thought anyway. Living on the West coast distorts any opinion poll as most are dependent on the base, they either work in there or are dependent on an industry associated with it. I met a couple of Mel "freedom" Gibson types but most know which side their bread is buttered and I am quite confident they will vote no. The other side of the country is a different kettle of fish though and that will even the fight. I suspect a high turn out, maybe 85%, unprecedented in this country. I predict a No vote of 58% and the yes vote will be 35%, 7% of them will be too pissed to find the polling station.
Not entirely sure about this but don't the Scots have quite a bit of oil in their territory? If independence happened, surely that oil would turn Glasgow into Dubai v.2?
Not entirely sure about this but don't the Scots have quite a bit of oil in their territory? If independence happened, surely that oil would turn Glasgow into Dubai v.2?
In thae same way as England wont let them use their currency, they wont let them have the oil either. Although Scotland will protest this decision and like other territories around the world it will spend years going through the courts while the English continue to reap the tax.
The only thing the Scots really have are themselves and as Mortimerician points out above, thats a vast amount of soldiers. So their best bet is win the referendum and then start a war. And in 50 years time when Scotland is still part of Britain the secret papers will be released that shows this was Salmonds plan all along.
@DRF surely its not a case of Britain 'letting' or not letting it happen, if independence is achieved, wouldn't the Brits have no legal foundation to claim the oil. The Scots will nationalize the oil so companies like BP etc are told to fark orf and the newly formed Scottish Govt will reap the benefits of their newly formed currency + oil acquisition? The two would surely go hand in hand to benefit no one but the Scots.
Like I said, I'm nowhere near well informed enough to know if any of this is true, but it seems like this could happen. IMO the Brits need to stop telling the Scots they need us, because its a bluff tactic that may not work. Plus the attitude that Cameron, Osborne and other party leaders are giving off seems almost arrogant, and if I were a Scot I'd vote Yes just to piss off the self righteous prats.
When it comes to countries, the idea of "legal foundation" becomes very complicated. As someone earlier pointed out, the rest of the UK could continue to drill the oil while the Scots took us to international court, which could take decades.
Even if they get the oil (and I expect that in the end, they'll take their share of the debt and the oil), they would be taking a big gamble on how much oil is left, because they don't have much else going for them. I don't think anybody knows how much is left in the North Sea, but when it runs out, they better hope they've spent the money they've got from it well - and not just on payouts to their population.
If they get independence then they should pay us back for the mistakes RBS made during the credit crunch.
And we should build a big wall to divide the countries.
We don't have to build a new one mate - just tart up Hadrian's wall a bit. Okay, it would mean ceding bits of Northumberland to Scotland. But they are pretty useless bits anyway and it would solve Berwick's problem of being English but playing in the Scottish league! And if Russia ever took seriously the story that Berwick was still at war with Russia and decided to invade, they'd only be invading Scotland. Sounds like a win-win situation to me.
I don't get to vote of course. Personally I love Scotland, and hope they vote to keep the Union. The emotional pull will be strong, and in the end it's up to them, but I don't feel anti-Scot in any way.
Independence .. same Queen, same currency, no border tariffs .. what is independent about this ? .. I suspect that independence in Scots terms is freedom to spend the income from Whiskey, Harris Tweed & N Sea oil and gas exclusively on Scots projects and people, whilst being propped up by the rest of the UK (in reality England) for everything else .. this is having yer haggis and scoffing it
@DRF surely its not a case of Britain 'letting' or not letting it happen, if independence is achieved, wouldn't the Brits have no legal foundation to claim the oil. The Scots will nationalize the oil so companies like BP etc are told to fark orf and the newly formed Scottish Govt will reap the benefits of their newly formed currency + oil acquisition? The two would surely go hand in hand to benefit no one but the Scots.
Like I said, I'm nowhere near well informed enough to know if any of this is true, but it seems like this could happen. IMO the Brits need to stop telling the Scots they need us, because its a bluff tactic that may not work. Plus the attitude that Cameron, Osborne and other party leaders are giving off seems almost arrogant, and if I were a Scot I'd vote Yes just to piss off the self righteous prats.
Who knoos wot'll appen
Of course they will have a legal claim. I described quite clearly what will happen to that legal claim. Just ask East Timor how easy it is to get the rights to your 'own' oil. How will they find the money to nationlise theo il companies and there's less chance of the big oil companies letting them get away with that than there is of the UK giving up their tax rights to it.
Anyone else on here lucky enough to visit Inverliever Lodge in Argyllshire when they were at school? The ILEA leased it and lots of London Comps like my school Crown Woods regularly went there. I had two visits there in 1978 and 1980. A most wonderful place, it was on a hill that looked over Loch Awe. I have not travelled the whole world but I find it hard to believe there are more beautiful places than the West Highlands of Scotland.
I heard yesterday evening OPEC have said north sea oil production will be down to 1970's level this year. Anyway I've always taken the view the the oil companys have the oil and the wealth we have a little taxation from it. Drippings off the nose. I couldn't give a toss what Scotland do, if they want to leave good on em if they dont I'm happy they know where their breads buttered. As long as they keep making dam good drink and selling it in Sainsbury's all will be ok with me.
I have no Scottish blood, but I hope they vote 'no'. This is partly because I love the place, but mainly because if Scotland goes the rest of us would be lumbered with Tories forever. I appreciate that that wouldn't be a problem for most people on here, but a bit of balance never hurt.
I have no Scottish blood, but I hope they vote 'no'. This is partly because I love the place, but mainly because if Scotland goes the rest of us would be lumbered with Tories forever. I appreciate that that wouldn't be a problem for most people on here, but a bit of balance never hurt.
You are correct Uboat. We would lose 41 labour M.P.s - 2 lib dems - and 1 conservatives if they voted for independence. I visited Holyrood on the day the independence date was debated. The Nats argue they are ruled by a foreign dysfunctional government (Westminster is greater in distance from Edinburgh than Brussels is from London) by a government that serve's the interests of London and the South East of England rather than Scotland. They are pro. E.E.C. and would vote to stay in Europe against what they view as an English debate to leave Europe driven by U.K.I.P and the Right wing of the Tory party. Nigel Ferage was chased out of Edinburgh where U.K.I.P. has little support. The Conservatives are now down to one Scottish M.P. at Westminster. I hope they remain in the union because if they left we would have English politics dominated by the Conservative's most probably out of Europe and become an insignificant country in the Atlantic ruled by King Charles and Queen Camilla. Dread the prospect.
Comments
However renaging on Scotlands share of the debt would be a disaster, beginning your economic independence by essentially defaulting on your biggest trading partner sounds utterly catastrophic.
It may very well be that one day there will be a compelling case for Scottish independence, I just don't think the SNP have conveyed it yet.
Actually 1992 was also the year of Neil Kinnock's Sheffield conference and the only Thatcher/Major election where the polls had suggested a Labour victory (although they were tied on polling day). I believe the polls were wrong in 1970 (Heath) however.
Currency unions are not consistent with independence as you don't get to set your own interest rates in accordance with the needs of your economy - hence the Euro. Wouldn't matter much to the English either way, because the Scottish economy is too small.
For gods sake why bother, the amount of stress it will put on everyone is ridiculous, when it comes to new currencies etc. It's absolutely pathetic.
When we (the English) bailed out the SCOTTISH banks the first thing RBS did was announce that they had 18 in loans available---- only thing was it was only for people in Scotland.
I hope we dont split but there is defo part of me that wants to tell the whinging tossers to "go home ward and think again" .
Still the Dundee chaps are down this weekend for a 50th birthday party and it will be great to have a few beers with em all.
First, they are not legal tender, anywhere, even in Scotland but are merely generally accepted.
Second, for each Scottish Note issued by the Scottish banks*, they must hold their equivalent value with The Bank of England in real English money.
So as things stand Scottish banknotes are quite pointless.
In the event of independence for Scotland and no monetary union with the rest of the UK presumably the Jocks would ask for their UK funds back from the BoE because they would want to provide their own "promise to pay" backing for their notes in circulation. Perhaps we would refuse to give it to them if they declined to pick up the tab for their share of UK debt?
*The three Scottish note-issuing banks are Clydesdale (owned by the National Bank Of Australia); Bank of Scotland (owned by Lloyds Banking Group) and Royal Bank of Scotland (81% owned by the UK Govt.) So it seems safe to say that independence for Scotland would mean some very interesting decisions would have to be made. Not least by the financial institutions that operate in Scotland.
For example would you want to bank with NatWest knowing that it was owned by a foreign holding company (RBS in Edinburgh). Would you want to hold assets with Aberdeen Asset Management or buy an insurance policy from Scottish Widows? Or would these organisations be forced to move their HQs south of the border to continue to pick up the lucrative English & Welsh investment business?
It is answers to questions like these that both sides need to be giving to the Scottish voters. At the moment they are being asked to vote without the full facts (or any facts really) and it will be interesting to see whether they ever actually get them.
The only thing the Scots really have are themselves and as Mortimerician points out above, thats a vast amount of soldiers. So their best bet is win the referendum and then start a war. And in 50 years time when Scotland is still part of Britain the secret papers will be released that shows this was Salmonds plan all along.
If the oil is in international waters. How is it Scottish?
Like I said, I'm nowhere near well informed enough to know if any of this is true, but it seems like this could happen. IMO the Brits need to stop telling the Scots they need us, because its a bluff tactic that may not work. Plus the attitude that Cameron, Osborne and other party leaders are giving off seems almost arrogant, and if I were a Scot I'd vote Yes just to piss off the self righteous prats.
Who knoos wot'll appen
Even if they get the oil (and I expect that in the end, they'll take their share of the debt and the oil), they would be taking a big gamble on how much oil is left, because they don't have much else going for them. I don't think anybody knows how much is left in the North Sea, but when it runs out, they better hope they've spent the money they've got from it well - and not just on payouts to their population.
How will they find the money to nationlise theo il companies and there's less chance of the big oil companies letting them get away with that than there is of the UK giving up their tax rights to it.
Anyone else on here lucky enough to visit Inverliever Lodge in Argyllshire when they were at school? The ILEA leased it and lots of London Comps like my school Crown Woods regularly went there. I had two visits there in 1978 and 1980. A most wonderful place, it was on a hill that looked over Loch Awe. I have not travelled the whole world but I find it hard to believe there are more beautiful places than the West Highlands of Scotland.
Anyway I've always taken the view the the oil companys have the oil and the wealth we have a little taxation from it. Drippings off the nose.
I couldn't give a toss what Scotland do, if they want to leave good on em if they dont I'm happy they know where their breads buttered.
As long as they keep making dam good drink and selling it in Sainsbury's all will be ok with me.
I visited Holyrood on the day the independence date was debated.
The Nats argue they are ruled by a foreign dysfunctional government (Westminster is greater in distance from Edinburgh than Brussels is from London) by a government that serve's the interests of London and the South East of England rather than Scotland.
They are pro. E.E.C. and would vote to stay in Europe against what they view as an English debate to leave Europe driven by U.K.I.P and the Right wing of the Tory party. Nigel Ferage was chased out of Edinburgh where U.K.I.P. has little support.
The Conservatives are now down to one Scottish M.P. at Westminster.
I hope they remain in the union because if they left we would have English politics dominated by the Conservative's most probably out of Europe and become an insignificant country in the Atlantic ruled by King Charles and Queen Camilla.
Dread the prospect.