Positives Of The Union

[The Modfather]

With lots of negative threads about what’s going on at the moment thought it might be interesting to hear positives of Scotland being in the union. Regardless of your views on independence it would be churlish to pretend there aren’t any positives to the union.

I just want to hear the positives, plenty of other threads to bring up the negatives. Hopefully we can at least make it past page 1 before the petty point scoring and thread being dragged off course.

So, I’ll open the floor to everyone, particularly keen to hear from our pro unionists.

[Bangkok Hibby]

Well what about....no wait, sorry cancel that

[Moulin Yarns]

Well there is all the subsidies 😉

[Jack]

MOD contracts to build ships.

[Bangkok Hibby]

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/what-staying-in-the-united-kingdom-means-for-scotland/what-staying-in-the-united-kingdom-means-for-scotland

This will keep you busy for a while. Few years out of date now though.


More businesses and jobs.
Many thousands of Scottish jobs are connected to trade with the rest of the United Kingdom. For example, 200,000 Scottish jobs are supported by banking, insurance and finance, and the industry itself estimates that nine out of ten customers live in the rest of the UK.

All the advantages of the pound
As part of the United Kingdom, Scotland has one of the oldest, strongest and most stable currencies in the world, backed up by 31 million taxpayers and the strength of the Bank of England. It would not be possible to recreate today’s currency arrangements across two separate states. Staying within the UK is the only way to keep the pound we have now.

Closest trading partners
The United Kingdom economy is set to recover faster than every other G7 nation. As two-thirds of Scottish exports go to England, Wales and Northern Ireland – more than the rest of the world combined – putting up an international border with the rest of the UK would slow growth just as our economy is starting to take off.

By staying in the United Kingdom, your money is safe and goes further.
A bigger economy that protects us all.
The United Kingdom economy is the sixth largest in the world. Our collective size, strength and diversity allow us to grow and succeed together, and help to protect jobs in difficult times. In 2008, for example, we were able to provide Scottish banks with support worth more than twice Scotland’s national income.

Cheaper bills.
The United Kingdom’s financial standing helps keep interest rates low. That means cheaper loans and mortgages for you and your family. And because the costs of investing in Scotland’s energy networks and renewables are shared across the whole of Great Britain, staying in the UK would keep future energy bills for Scottish households up to £189* a year lower. *Source: Scotland analysis: Energy, HM Government, May 2014

Safe savings and pensions.
With Scotland as part of the United Kingdom, your savings in any UK bank or building society are protected by a guarantee of up to £85,000. And State Pensions are more secure because costs are shared by 31 million taxpayers across the UK.

By staying in the United Kingdom, Scotland’s public services are more affordable.
Shared public institutions.
Scotland benefits from over 200 United Kingdom institutions and services, including: the BBC, the National Lottery, Her Majesty’s Passport Office, Research Councils UK and the DVLA. An independent Scotland would need to create new public institutions, which would be complex and expensive.

Lower taxes, higher public spending.
As part of the United Kingdom, Scotland’s finances are much stronger with lower taxes and higher public spending. The UK Government estimates that the long-term financial benefit of staying in the UK is worth £1,400* every year to each person living in Scotland. *Source: Scotland analysis: Fiscal policy and sustainability, HM Government, May 2014

More support for public services.
As part of the United Kingdom, Scotland benefits from public spending that is around 10% higher than the UK average. This helps fund vital public services like health, education and transport. By staying in the United Kingdom, Scotland’s public services are more affordable.

By staying in the United Kingdom, Scotland has a strong voice in the world.
An influential voice in important places.
The United Kingdom is a leading member of the UN and the only country in the world that is also a member of NATO, the EU, the Commonwealth, the G7, the G8 and the G20. As one of the EU’s ‘big four’ nations, the UK is more able to protect Scottish interests in areas like agriculture and fisheries.

Protecting our people and promoting our interests.
For centuries Scottish people have been at the heart of the United Kingdom’s armed forces, which keep us safe at home and abroad. You can rely on help from over 200 embassies and consulates around the world if you get into difficulty. Scottish businesses are supported around the world by the UK. This includes successfully promoting Scottish exports such as whisky.

Help for the world’s poorest.
The United Kingdom is the second largest aid donor in the world. Our collective influence and reach means that we are helping to end extreme poverty, saving lives during humanitarian crises and making vital contributions to international peacekeeping missions. In response to Typhoon Haiyan in the Philippines, the UK helped one million people by providing food, water, shelter and lifesaving medicine.

By staying in the United Kingdom, Scotland is stronger.
We all benefit from being together.
Collectively, the United Kingdom’s four nations contain more than 60 million people and nearly 5 million businesses. This larger community provides more opportunities to succeed and greater financial security.

A successful family of nations.
For over 300 years, Scotland has flourished as part of the United Kingdom. Together with England, Wales and Northern Ireland, Scotland has created one of the world’s most successful families of nations.

A strong Scottish Parliament.
Scotland already has its own Parliament that makes decisions about hospitals, schools, policing and other important matters. From next year, the Scottish Parliament will be getting even more powers to set tax rates and decide if and when to borrow money.



From the office of the Secretary of State for Scotland pre the 2014 referendum :faf:

[Bangkok Hibby]

What's so funny? Are any factually incorrect?

It's the equivalent of a SNP White Paper, remember that one? Now that was funny.

Seriously the original poster wanted to have a serious debate and your first and second posts have added nothing. Stay off unless you have an actual contribution to make.


I'll post wherever the **** I want thanks. Yes the poster asked for positives. Not propaganda from the office of Alistair Carmichael in the months leading up to an Independence referendum. That's why I laughed.

[James310]

I'll post wherever the **** I want thanks. Yes the poster asked for positives. Not propaganda from the office of Alistair Carmichael in the months leading up to an Independence referendum. That's why I laughed.
Enjoy your echo chamber.

[Bangkok Hibby]

Enjoy your echo chamber.


Nipped away for a cuppa there. Have a nice day

[Just Alf]

No genuine positives so far then?

There absolutely must be!

I've loads of English family and love 'em to bits but that wouldn't change with independence, I actually struggle to answer this question, any positives I think about would still be there if we were independent, even after independence we'd still have close links with our neighbours.

Maybe combined resources of governmental departments?



Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[Dalianwanda]

No hard border

[Hibernia&Alba]

The fact Scotland is a net beneficiary from the UK treasury must be a positive to being in the UK, plus the free access across the border. I would have said EU membership, but, of course, that's been made irrelevant, though it was the main reason I voted No to independence in the referendum. If there's another vote, I will be a Yes.

[Callum_62]

Why couldn't we use the pound again in a Indy Scotland?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Smartie]

The strange thing about being in favour of Scottish independence and a remainer is that you find yourself in a slightly hypocritical position, making an argument one way in one debate and the opposite in the other.

The main thing I can see as being in favour of the union is to have trade with our closest trading partners as frictionless as possible. It will never be in Scotland's interests to have England struggle and any issues with borders, currency etc will have an effect on our ability to trade with our closest trading partners whether we like it or not.

Is it enough of an argument to remain in the Union? Not for me.

[Callum_62]

The strange thing about being in favour of Scottish independence and a remainer is that you find yourself in a slightly hypocritical position, making an argument one way in one debate and the opposite in the other.

The main thing I can see as being in favour of the union is to have trade with our closest trading partners as frictionless as possible. It will never be in Scotland's interests to have England struggle and any issues with borders, currency etc will have an effect on our ability to trade with our closest trading partners whether we like it or not.

Is it enough of an argument to remain in the Union? Not for me.I don't see them as the same though, one is far more a political union than the other

Anyway positives definately be the border issue (although that could be easily resolved with technology it you believe the current UK Govt....)

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Hibbyradge]

No currency exchange charges.

[Ozyhibby]

It’s amazing that no country that ever gets independence from the UK ever wants to go back. What on earth are the Irish, Australians etc thinking?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Hibernia&Alba]

It’s amazing that no country that ever gets independence from the UK ever wants to go back. What on earth are the Irish, Australians etc thinking?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They are no longer classical colonies of an empire. Northern Ireland, as we know to tragic consequences, has over one million people who regard themselves as British; so that, even when Britain has contemplated cutting them loose, it is they who have demanded maintenance of the Union. This is different from all other examples of colonial rule, in which the colonised people didn't regard themselves as British. Australia and the other Commonwealth countries are independent in all but name, the British monarch being merely a figurehead, as here.

[James310]

It’s amazing that no country that ever gets independence from the UK ever wants to go back. What on earth are the Irish, Australians etc thinking?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do you think countries gaining Independence 100 years ago are relevant examples? Why?

What similarities exist between them and Scotland in 2019.

[James310]

Why couldn't we use the pound again in a Indy Scotland?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

We could, not in a formal currency union though.

Just like we will use the pound if we get Independence for an undetermined period of time. But we will have the BoE setting our interest rates and monetary policy etc. We will have no lender of the last resort, we will be powerless as an independent nation in the event of a financial crisis.

[SkintHibby]

Not one positive case for the Union on this thread yet.

Ask any Scottish yoon why we should stay together and its either "cause I support Ranjurs" or eh, eh, eh.

Independence does not end our friendship with England ffs.

[James310]

Not one positive case for the Union on this thread yet.

Ask any Scottish yoon why we should stay together and its either "cause I support Ranjurs" or eh, eh, eh.

Independence does not end our friendship with England ffs.

So 55% of Scotland are yoons and support Rangers? I, ok then.

What's the positive economic case for Independence?

[Callum_62]

So 55% of Scotland are yoons and support Rangers? I, ok then.

What's the positive economic case for Independence?A small oil rich nation? Disaster looming

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Hibbyradge]

Not one positive case for the Union on this thread yet.

Ask any Scottish yoon why we should stay together and its either "cause I support Ranjurs" or eh, eh, eh.

Independence does not end our friendship with England ffs.

The devil you know.

A lot of people just don't want to take the risk. Berating those people for that won't make them feel more secure or make them come on board the good ship Independence..

That's a plain and simple fact And no matter how many fjuk wits call them "yoons", say that they're traitors, or say that they hate Scotland, their fears will remain.

I hope Nicola has a better plan to get these folk on board than some of the posters I've been reading recently.

[Hibrandenburg]

No war between 2 countries that were at each others throats for centuries. Ok, we've been drawn into conflicts that an independent Scotland would never have been involved in and we have been perpetrators in some seriously oppressive wars of colonisation so I guess the bad will out weigh the good.

[Jack]

At a time when the pound is as weak as it's been against the Euro [in last 10 years] ... and falling, I'm surprised anyone is arguing for it.

With a post Brexit UK more dependent on overseas goods, after Boris has traded everything off, it will be worth less than a groat with a unicorns head on it!

[Mibbes Aye]

It’s amazing that no country that ever gets independence from the UK ever wants to go back. What on earth are the Irish, Australians etc thinking?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have seen this supposed point made a few times. It’s a shame it holds no water whatsoever.

You, and others before you have referenced countries that were colonised who then sought independence. Fair enough.

Scotland entered into a union. That’s very different.

Doesnt really bother me, I’ve made my position clear a few times. I have no love of the union and I despise the pettiness of nationalism even more.

But this nonsensical, facile point you’ve made and a few have made before you really has to stop. It is silly and misguidedly wrong, and obviously intentionally.

[Steve-O]

Why couldn't we use the pound again in a Indy Scotland?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

Because Better Together said so.

[Callum_62]

Scotland entered into a union. That’s very different.
I have no love of the union and I despise the pettiness of nationalism even more.
.

Would you be characterised as a nationalist for wanting your own country to decide whom we do or do not bomb?

"Uniting the kingdoms of Scotland and England had been proposed for a hundred years before it actually happened in 1707.

Suspicion and mistrust between the two countries had prevented the union throughout the 17th century. The Scots feared that they would simply become another region of England, being swallowed up as had happened to*Wales*some four hundred years earlier."

Who would ever refer to Scotland as a region and not a country? [emoji51]

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

Michelle Mone, moved to London. 😉

[ronaldo7]

Ex labour MPs can still wrap themselves in ermine, and call themselves, Lord of somewhere or other.

[RyeSloan]

Somewhat ironically against the Brexit backdrop the free movement of people, goods and services within the UK is a clear benefit to being in the Union.

Personally though I would say that from an economic perspective it’s the access to, and the free movement of, a very deep pool of capital that is of the most significant advantage.

Edit: I should also have added the ability of the UK Treasury to raise debt...having the backing of such a large economy undoubtedly protects Scotland from the vagaries of the international sov. Debt market.

And finally being part of a tax base that is substantially deeper and wider than what an Indy Scotland would have is also a significant benefit.

The trade off for both of course is the limited access of the oft mentioned ‘levers’.

[James310]

A small oil rich nation? Disaster looming

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

If in doubt shout oil.

Is this the oil that raised just £266M in 2016/17? What % of our budget would that have been and where would the rest of come from? Great for the Climate Emergency we are in as well?

Scotland has a declining number of tax payers so where will the shortfall come from to make up this declining revenue? Tax increases? Spending cuts?

The block grant also makes up a considerable % of our budget, what will this be replaced with?

Oil is not the answer to all of the above.

[Mon Dieu4]

If in doubt shout oil.

Is this the oil that raised just £266M in 2016/17? What % of our budget would that have been and where would the rest of come from?

Scotland has a declining number of tax payers so where will the shortfall come from to make up this declining revenue? Tax increases? Spending cuts?

The block grant also makes up a considerable % of our budget, what will this be replaced with?

Oil is not the answer to all of the above.

When you can decide your own laws then you can make changes, ideas like legalising weed, Colorado alone has a similar sized population to Scotland and has recently passed over a billion in tax revenue from it, add in the extra tourism because of this then you are on a money spinner :greengrin

[James310]

When you can decide your own laws then you can make changes, ideas like legalising weed, Colorado alone has a similar sized population to Scotland and has recently passed over a billion in tax revenue from it, add in the extra tourism because of this then you are on a money spinner :greengrin

So weed is the answer? Sometimes I do wonder if Nicola Sturgeon has been smoking something.

[Callum_62]

If in doubt shout oil.

Is this the oil that raised just £266M in 2016/17? What % of our budget would that have been and where would the rest of come from? Great for the Climate Emergency we are in as well?

Scotland has a declining number of tax payers so where will the shortfall come from to make up this declining revenue? Tax increases? Spending cuts?

The block grant also makes up a considerable % of our budget, what will this be replaced with?

Oil is not the answer to all of the above.Ah right I forgot. Our massive oil and gas reserves are a burden.

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[James310]

Ah right I forgot. Our massive oil and gas reserves are a burden.

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

They help, but are not the answer to everything. But would you like to answer the questions? Or not?

[Ozyhibby]

Somewhat ironically against the Brexit backdrop the free movement of people, goods and services within the UK is a clear benefit to being in the Union.

Personally though I would say that from an economic perspective it’s the access to, and the free movement of, a very deep pool of capital that is of the most significant advantage.

Edit: I should also have added the ability of the UK Treasury to raise debt...having the backing of such a large economy undoubtedly protects Scotland from the vagaries of the international sov. Debt market.

And finally being part of a tax base that is substantially deeper and wider than what an Indy Scotland would have is also a significant benefit.

The trade off for both of course is the limited access of the oft mentioned ‘levers’.

Is being part of a large country an advantage? In Europe it seems like smaller countries have higher living standards? Can those countries not raise debt? I haven’t heard that? How does a country like Iceland get by? They have a population smaller than Edinburgh but appear to be a lot richer?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mon Dieu4]

So weed is the answer? Sometimes I do wonder if Nicola Sturgeon has been smoking something.

Its one of a few measures like getting rid of the cost of trident that we could use to boost our coffers

[Callum_62]

They help, but are not the answer to everything. But would you like to answer the questions? Or not?Well I'd like to know another small oil and natural gas rich country that is poor.

Venezuela? Possibly although the way they are run certainly raises questions on that

Why do you think we are so important in this "family of nations" although suddenly sidelined throughout the whole brexit campaign

What were the 17/18 oil and gas revenue figures?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Killiehibbie]

When you can decide your own laws then you can make changes, ideas like legalising weed, Colorado alone has a similar sized population to Scotland and has recently passed over a billion in tax revenue from it, add in the extra tourism because of this then you are on a money spinner :greengrin

You just have to look at the law change coming in October to see that this government will not be legalising any drugs. Those who fail the swab test will be prosecuted whether they are impaired or not.

[James310]

Its one of a few measures like getting rid of the cost of trident that we could use to boost our coffers

Getting rid of Trident would again help, but it's pretty small fry. It was Alex Salmond that said it would save about £166M a year.

In a budget of £33BN it would hardly make a dent.

[James310]

Well I'd like to know another small oil and natural gas rich country that is poor.

Venezuela? Possibly although the way they are run certainly raises questions on that

Why do you think we are so important in this "family of nations" although suddenly sidelined throughout the whole brexit campaign

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

Can you not answer the questions though? Why ignore my questions and ask me one?

While oil is always going to help it is not the answer to everything, and how does it fit in with the climate emergency? Oil revenues raised £266M in 2016/17, our budget over the same period was £33BN. So oil revenues made up a very small percentage of that.

Nigeria is oil rich, but still not exactly a high roller.

[Jack]

Would Norway not be a better oil comparison?

And If not why not?

[Mon Dieu4]

You just have to look at the law change coming in October to see that this government will not be legalising any drugs. Those who fail the swab test will be prosecuted whether they are impaired or not.

I thought that was purely for driving, if it is the new I have no issues with that

[Callum_62]

Would Norway not be a better oil comparison?

And If not why not?Coz they are very well off and that doesn't fit in

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Killiehibbie]

I thought that was purely for driving, if it is the new I have no issues with that

How can they say a driver is unfit days or even weeks after having a joint?

[James310]

Would Norway not be a better oil comparison?

And If not why not?

Because it's much cheaper to extract a barrel of oil in Norway than it is in Scotland?

[Ozyhibby]

Oil should not form any meaningful part of the independence case. There are plenty of poor countries that have oil like Venezuela or Saudi Arabia. And it’s a finite resource that we should be moving away from anyway.
Independence is about so much more than that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

Oil should not form any meaningful part of the independence case. There are plenty of poor countries that have oil like Venezuela or Saudi Arabia. And it’s a finite resource that we should be moving away from anyway.
Independence is about so much more than that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Clearly not for some on here, oil and Norway is the answer to pretty much everything.

[Ozyhibby]

Because it's much cheaper to extract a barrel of oil in Norway than it is in Scotland?

It’s the same for both countries? Although the UK treasury take a chunk of Scotland’s.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Clearly not for some on here, oil and Norway is the answer to pretty much everything.

And there are plenty on the unionist side that shout currency in answer to any question.[emoji6]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mon Dieu4]

How can they say a driver is unfit days or even weeks after having a joint?

Valid point, I naively thought it would be for people under the influence at the time, if it's residual in your system then that's another matter, every day is a school day, with fresh information people can learn and change their opinion on things, lots of folk on here could take something from that!!

[James310]

And there are plenty on the unionist side that shout currency in answer to any question.[emoji6]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

And everything else, like declining tax revenues (mentioned above) loss of the block grant (mentioned above as well) plus lots more.

Mock if you want, currency played a significant part in the 2014 referendum. It will continue to play a significant part when what has been selected is the preferred choice of 14%. The other 86% will need to be persuaded.

[Callum_62]

So a positive of the union is we don't need to concern ourselves too much with what to do with our oil revenue [emoji106]

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[James310]

So a positive of the union is we don't need to concern ourselves too much with what to do with our oil revenue [emoji106]

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

Correct, because we are big enough to absorb years when the revenue is so small it makes little impact to the overall much larger budget. In an Independent Scotland it would be a big shock, not so much when we are part of the UK.

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/gap-between-snp-s-2014-plans-and-north-sea-revenue-reaches-30bn-1-4800803

Glad you have come round.

[Killiehibbie]

Valid point, I naively thought it would be for people under the influence at the time, if it's residual in your system then that's another matter, every day is a school day, with fresh information people can learn and change their opinion on things, lots of folk on here could take something from that!!
Maybe it won't be as bad as it sounds but it certainly looks as though they're going for zero tolerance.

[Ozyhibby]

And everything else, like declining tax revenues (mentioned above) loss of the block grant (mentioned above as well) plus lots more.

Mock if you want, currency played a significant part in the 2014 referendum. It will continue to play a significant part when what has been selected is the preferred choice of 14%. The other 86% will need to be persuaded.

The block grant is a fraction of the tax revenues raised in Scotland that is sent back to Holyrood. With independence the money raised in Scotland will stay here and there will be no need for a block grant.
Tax revenues raised in Scotland were £60bn and the block grant was £33bn.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

So weed is the answer? Sometimes I do wonder if Nicola Sturgeon has been smoking something.

If weeds is the answer I'm a billionaire. I just need some help getting rid of them. Any offers? :wink:

[RyeSloan]

Is being part of a large country an advantage? In Europe it seems like smaller countries have higher living standards? Can those countries not raise debt? I haven’t heard that? How does a country like Iceland get by? They have a population smaller than Edinburgh but appear to be a lot richer?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Iceland is a unique case but considering its currency devalued by 50%, its stock market fell 95%, most businesses went bankrupt and mortgage costs doubled in 2008 defo not one that shows the resilience of smaller nations. Sure it has rebounded, based almost solely on tourism, but the huge pain of the bust is something that Scotland could and should never contemplate as wanting to be exposed to.

The comparison to the size of Edinburgh is interesting though. An independent Edinburgh state would undoubtedly be a rather rich state indeed.

My points stand though being part of the UK brings a stability to tax revenues and access to the things I have mentioned.

[James310]

The block grant is a fraction of the tax revenues raised in Scotland that is sent back to Holyrood. With independence the money raised in Scotland will stay here and there will be no need for a block grant.
Tax revenues raised in Scotland were £60bn and the block grant was £33bn.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Only...50% of our budget according to Scottish Government figures.

As I said Scotland has an ageing population with a declining number of taxpayers. That gap needs filled, so tax increases? Spending cuts?

https://www.gov.scot/publications/role-income-tax-scotlands-budget/pages/3/

2.1 How is Scotland’s funding changing?

Until recently, Scottish Government revenue came almost exclusively via a Block Grant from the UK Government i.e. a budget which was set by the UK Government and Parliament based on spending decisions for England and Wales, which the Scottish Parliament could decide how to spend. The devolution of some tax powers in the Scotland Act 2016 means that decisions made in Scotland now have greater influence over the size of the Scottish Budget. However even when the full set of tax powers agreed in the Scotland Act 2016 are devolved, the Block Grant set by the UK Government will still make up around 50% of our budget.

[RyeSloan]

The block grant is a fraction of the tax revenues raised in Scotland that is sent back to Holyrood. With independence the money raised in Scotland will stay here and there will be no need for a block grant.
Tax revenues raised in Scotland were £60bn and the block grant was £33bn.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We are in danger of disappearing down the rather complex rabbit hole of Scottish funding and spending but you need to factor in that recent changes have seen about 40% of tax raised in Scotland stays in Scotland.

However maybe the best view (and as we know GERS has many flaws but appears to be the best of a limited bunch) is the following:

https://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/13287

That clearly shows Scotland runs a very large deficit indeed.

The Guardian summarised it as thus:

The latest Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland (Gers) data for Scotland shows that for 2017-18 overall state spending hit £73.4bn compared to tax income of just under £60bn, including oil revenues. That left a deficit for the year of £13.4bn, compared with £13.5bn the year before. Scotland’s deficit was equivalent to 7.9% of GDP, while for the UK as a whole it was 1.9%.

[Smartie]

If in doubt shout oil.

Is this the oil that raised just £266M in 2016/17? What % of our budget would that have been and where would the rest of come from? Great for the Climate Emergency we are in as well?

Scotland has a declining number of tax payers so where will the shortfall come from to make up this declining revenue? Tax increases? Spending cuts?

The block grant also makes up a considerable % of our budget, what will this be replaced with?

Oil is not the answer to all of the above.

This is the greatest problem that the Scottish economy has at present, and it is not going to be improved after Brexit.

Don't you think a reasonable argument exists regarding Scotland having the relevant levers to alter immigration policy and address this very significant point, rather than have this policy directed by somewhere that has a very different set of immigration needs and wants?

Do you really find it preferable to have the strength and comfort of being part of a greater entity in order to deal with the problems this situation brings, rather than actually have the power to do something about it in the first place.

I think this is the strongest pro-independence argument that exists right now.

Also (and I have to say I don't really like this argument), could it be said that Scotland has a diminishing number of tax payers because it is so easy for our talented young Scots to go elsewhere in the UK, particularly London, where job prospects are much better? Stick a dirty great hard border between us and London (but not the rest of the EU) and might we be able to hang onto Scots who currently choose to live and work elsewhere in the UK and pay tax into the coffers of another geographical part of the UK?

[StevieC]

A big positive is obviously being part of a larger tax pool, that can provide financial assistance and stability in areas that would struggle to cope.

A bit like an insurance policy that can assist with repairs from a burst pipe based on the fact that it takes in payments from lots of people that currently don’t need assistance.

However, the problems occur when it is mid-managed. Paying out more than it can afford and running up a debt creates instability. Not providing equal support across its customer base creates unhappy customers. Refusing to pay out in certain cases has customers looking to go elsewhere.

Yes, the UK can provide assistance and stability due to its size. But when the “management” do not cater for the needs of ALL its customers then there is a problem. London upgrades, HS2, poverty in northern England.

There are lots of positive reasons that being part of a well run UK would benefit Scotland .. but if the system is broken, then it’s time to move elsewhere.

On the subject of oil .. I agree with those that have said you can’t counter it into a reason for leaving. It will at some point run out and my personal view is that it should be factored out of an economic plan and instead be used as an investment fund (eg renewables).

The Barnett formula was a Scottish benefit on the back of the oil revenues. There are already movements at Westminster to change/remove this, so I have no doubt it would be ditched the second the oil runs out. That would leave Scotland with a lower budget and rising costs, and of course lots of people blaming the Scottish Government for failing services.

The UK government has already stopped Scottish funding in renewable development projects, some might say that they don’t want to see us being successful.

[James310]

This is the greatest problem that the Scottish economy has at present, and it is not going to be improved after Brexit.

Don't you think a reasonable argument exists regarding Scotland having the relevant levers to alter immigration policy and address this very significant point, rather than have this policy directed by somewhere that has a very different set of immigration needs and wants?

Do you really find it preferable to have the strength and comfort of being part of a greater entity in order to deal with the problems this situation brings, rather than actually have the power to do something about it in the first place.

I think this is the strongest pro-independence argument that exists right now.

Also (and I have to say I don't really like this argument), could it be said that Scotland has a diminishing number of tax payers because it is so easy for our talented young Scots to go elsewhere in the UK, particularly London, where job prospects are much better? Stick a dirty great hard border between us and London (but not the rest of the EU) and might we be able to hang onto Scots who currently choose to live and work elsewhere in the UK and pay tax into the coffers of another geographical part of the UK?

If we want to attract more taxpayers to Scotland then we have 3 nation's next door to us that speak our language, share many of our values and beliefs and have no problem with freedom of movement restrictions. Why are we not doing something to attract the English, Welsh and Northern Irish to come and work in Scotland. That would go some way to addressing this problem.

[Jack]

Only...50% of our budget according to Scottish Government figures.

As I said Scotland has an ageing population with a declining number of taxpayers. That gap needs filled, so tax increases? Spending cuts?

https://www.gov.scot/publications/role-income-tax-scotlands-budget/pages/3/

2.1 How is Scotland’s funding changing?

Until recently, Scottish Government revenue came almost exclusively via a Block Grant from the UK Government i.e. a budget which was set by the UK Government and Parliament based on spending decisions for England and Wales, which the Scottish Parliament could decide how to spend. The devolution of some tax powers in the Scotland Act 2016 means that decisions made in Scotland now have greater influence over the size of the Scottish Budget. However even when the full set of tax powers agreed in the Scotland Act 2016 are devolved, the Block Grant set by the UK Government will still make up around 50% of our budget.

Scotland isn't alone in having an aging population however the recent spat in England, where considerably less is spent on their aging population proportionately, illustrates how Scotland benefits from making decisions for itself.

[Ozyhibby]

If we want to attract more taxpayers to Scotland then we have 3 nation's next door to us that speak our language, share many of our values and beliefs and have no problem with freedom of movement restrictions. Why are we not doing something to attract the English, Welsh and Northern Irish to come and work in Scotland. That would go some way to addressing this problem.

You don’t think we attract people from other parts of the uk to Scotland?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[StevieC]

If we want to attract more taxpayers to Scotland then we have 3 nation's next door to us that speak our language, share many of our values and beliefs and have no problem with freedom of movement restrictions. Why are we not doing something to attract the English, Welsh and Northern Irish to come and work in Scotland. That would go some way to addressing this problem.

Because many of the jobs would not be enticing enough to the majority of the people in these countries. Hospitality, farming, unskilled labour.. these are the areas that have the biggest employment problems .. there won’t be many of them filled by migration within the UK.

The English language is the second language of the vast majority of those that speak a second language in the EU, so I don’t think you can put up a language barrier.

[James310]

Scotland isn't alone in having an aging population however the recent spat in England, where considerably less is spent on their aging population proportionately, illustrates how Scotland benefits from making decisions for itself.

So Scotland is spending more on this ? Surely that's because we can choose a different path with the arrangements we have, we can choose to have free prescriptions, baby boxes, tuition fees, social care, free bus passes etc. We have these choices today and can choose a different path if we want? Your point proves this, we can do this today, nobody is stopping us.

Will all this be 'free' in an Independent Scotland?

[Ozyhibby]

This is the greatest problem that the Scottish economy has at present, and it is not going to be improved after Brexit.

Don't you think a reasonable argument exists regarding Scotland having the relevant levers to alter immigration policy and address this very significant point, rather than have this policy directed by somewhere that has a very different set of immigration needs and wants?

Do you really find it preferable to have the strength and comfort of being part of a greater entity in order to deal with the problems this situation brings, rather than actually have the power to do something about it in the first place.

I think this is the strongest pro-independence argument that exists right now.

Also (and I have to say I don't really like this argument), could it be said that Scotland has a diminishing number of tax payers because it is so easy for our talented young Scots to go elsewhere in the UK, particularly London, where job prospects are much better? Stick a dirty great hard border between us and London (but not the rest of the EU) and might we be able to hang onto Scots who currently choose to live and work elsewhere in the UK and pay tax into the coffers of another geographical part of the UK?

The last paragraph is nonsense. There is no benefit from having any kind of border other than the softest of soft borders like we have just now. We can still be independent with a border that soft though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

You don’t think we attract people from other parts of the uk to Scotland?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Could we not do more?

[Ozyhibby]

Could we not do more?

Absolutely, but Scotland is not in full control of all the powers that may make Scotland a better place to live and work.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

Absolutely, but Scotland is not in full control of all the powers that may make Scotland a better place to live and work.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We have control of Health and Education which are consistently top of people's priorities if you were considering moving to another country to work, we have control of income tax so could incentivise people as well. We are in control of the things that matter.

[Ozyhibby]

We have control of Health and Education which are consistently top of people's priorities if you were considering moving to another country to work, we have control of income tax so could incentivise people as well. We are in control of the things that matter.

Business taxes? That might be the sort of thing that might draw some job creating investment if it were so desired.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

Business taxes? That might be the sort of thing that might draw some job creating investment if it were so desired.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We already have the lowest rate of corporation tax in any G7 country, and it's coming down again in 2020.

So would you reduce it even more to attract businesses to Scotland?

[Callum_62]

Too wee too poor end off
Every positive is really a negative and only works when we are part of UK.

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

We already have the lowest rate of corporation tax in any G7 country, and it's coming down again in 2020.

So would you reduce it even more to attract businesses to Scotland?

Possibly. It certainly works for Ireland. Is the G7 what it’s all about?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

Possibly. It certainly works for Ireland.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes but the EU want to end that ASAP.

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/business/ireland-under-fresh-attack-from-eu-on-corporation-tax-897813.html


I am sure some of your fellow nationalists would not be so accommodating to the likes of Apple, Google and Amazon using Scotland in the same way they use Ireland.

[Moulin Yarns]

Can I be the first person to point out that this thread has flipped to become about how to improve Scotland, either in or out of the union.

As a contribution, Scotland already attracts people from throughout the UK, within 1 mile of my postcode are the following properties https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/find.html?locationIdentifier=POSTCODE%5E663019&insId=1&radius=1.0&googleAnalyticsChannel=buying.


And this sold in less than a month.
https://search.savills.com/list?Tenure=GRS_T_B&Currency=GBP&Period=Week&ResidentialSizeUnit=SquareFeet&LandAreaUnit=Acre&SaleableAreaUnit=SquareFeet&AvailableSizeUnit=SquareFeet&Category=GRS_CAT_RES&LocationKey=scotland&Shapes=W3sidHlwZSI6IkNpcmNsZSIsImNvb3JkaW5hdGVzIjp bLTMuNzA3ODYzMyw1Ni43MTI0NDEzXSwicmFkaXVzIjoiMjAwM G0iLCJsb2NhdGlvbklkIjoibXlMb2NhdGlvbiJ9XQ


We are attractive to wealthy retired people. Or people looking for holiday homes, there is one across the road from the one that has been sold, £650,000 holiday home for a Hong-Kong based person.

[ronaldo7]

So Scotland is spending more on this ? Surely that's because we can choose a different path with the arrangements we have, we can choose to have free prescriptions, baby boxes, tuition fees, social care, free bus passes etc. We have these choices today and can choose a different path if we want? Your point proves this, we can do this today, nobody is stopping us.

Will all this be 'free' in an Independent Scotland?

111 Powers are currently being lined up to be grabbed from the Scottish Parliament, by the Tory Westminster government. These powers currently reside, and are looked after by our government in Edinburgh. The Westminster government have already stolen cash from the EU, destined for Scottish Hill farmers, and dispersed it throughout England and Wales.

This gives you a clear indication of how the Scottish Parliament is viewed from England.

They're positively ****ting in our back yard, all for the union.

[StevieC]

We already have the lowest rate of corporation tax in any G7 country, and it's coming down again in 2020.

Why do Amazon and Google base themselves elsewhere and pay their taxes there instead of in the UK????

[James310]

Why do Amazon and Google base themselves elsewhere and pay their taxes there instead of in the UK????

Because it's 12.5% corporation tax. But as pointed out the EU are looking to stop this. 40% of Irish Corporation tax comes from 10 companies, is that the basis to build a sustainable long term economy?

[Fife-Hibee]

Because it's 12.5% corporation tax. But as pointed out the EU are looking to stop this. 40% of Irish Corporation tax comes from 10 companies, is that the basis to build a sustainable long term economy?

If the 10 companies are sustainable and long term, then yes.

[James310]

If the 10 companies are sustainable and long term, then yes.

What is your definition of long term sustainable? In a rapidly moving world is anything? Blackberry 10 years ago was worth $60BN and would be welcomed by any country, now it's worth a fraction of that.

Big risk to rely on a small number of companies that could move to the next low tax country at the stroke of a pen, or the filling in of an online form.

Surprised this sudden support for businesses like Apple, Amazon and Google, thought they were evil. Now we want to attract them.

[Moulin Yarns]

Because it's 12.5% corporation tax. But as pointed out the EU are looking to stop this. 40% of Irish Corporation tax comes from 10 companies, is that the basis to build a sustainable long term economy?

Out of curiosity, who are the 10 companies and is there any reason why they have not moved from Ireland?

[Fife-Hibee]

What is your definition of long term sustainable? In a rapidly moving world is anything? Blackberry 10 years ago was worth $60BN and would be welcomed by any country, now it's worth a fraction of that.

Big risk to rely on a small number of companies that could move to the next low tax country at the stroke of a pen, or the filling in of an online form.

Surprised this sudden support for businesses like Apple, Amazon and Google, thought they were evil. Now we want to attract them.

Blackberry isn't worth what it once was, because other companies came along and took their place in the market. The 10 companies that make up 40% of the corporation tax intake in Ireland are not always the same 10 companies, it changes over time.

[James310]

Blackberry isn't worth what it once was, because other companies came along and took their place in the market. The 10 companies that make up 40% of the corporation tax intake in Ireland are not always the same 10 companies, it changes over time.

And what happens when another country offers a lower rate of corporation tax?

It's funny having arguments with nationalists about how low we can cut tax for big business and attract the likes of Apple, Amazon and Google. Strange days.

[Ozyhibby]

And what happens when another country offers a lower rate of corporation tax?

It's funny having arguments with nationalists about how low we can cut tax for big business and attract the likes of Apple, Amazon and Google. Strange days.

People who are pro independence can come from all walks of life. Who’s to say what direction a future Scottish govt might go. The important thing is it would be their choice good or bad.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

Out of curiosity, who are the 10 companies and is there any reason why they have not moved from Ireland?

Apple, Google, Facebook and Microsoft are 4. The rest are a mixture of other industries. Apple though is by far the largest by a considerable distance followed by Google.

Here is a good article explaining how volatile it can be relying on such a small base of companies for such a large % of your tax.

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2019/0509/1048408-revenue-commissioners-annual-report/


"The report also shows that the share of corporation tax paid by the top ten corporate taxpayers now accounts for 45% of all the corporation tax paid, up from 40% the year before.

Almost €1 in every €5 of tax collected by the Revenue Commissioners came from corporation tax last year - an extraordinarily high proportion by international standards.

The amount paid surged by 26%, underlining again the volatile nature of this tax head and how vulnerable the public finances have become to the risk of a sudden downturn in corporation tax payments"

Do you think that's a model we should adopt?

[Ozyhibby]

Apple, Google, Facebook and Microsoft are 4. The rest are a mixture of other industries. Apple though is by far the largest by a considerable distance followed by Google.

Here is a good article explaining how volatile it can be relying on such a small base of companies for such a large % of your tax.

https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2019/0509/1048408-revenue-commissioners-annual-report/


"The report also shows that the share of corporation tax paid by the top ten corporate taxpayers now accounts for 45% of all the corporation tax paid, up from 40% the year before.

Almost €1 in every €5 of tax collected by the Revenue Commissioners came from corporation tax last year - an extraordinarily high proportion by international standards.

The amount paid surged by 26%, underlining again the volatile nature of this tax head and how vulnerable the public finances have become to the risk of a sudden downturn in corporation tax payments"

Do you think that's a model we should adopt?

Ireland used to be poorer than Scotland, now it’s a lot richer. They must be doing something right. If those companies leave then what’s the worst that can happen? Ireland has to put their corporation tax up?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

Ireland used to be poorer than Scotland, now it’s a lot richer. They must be doing something right. If those companies leave then what’s the worst that can happen? Ireland has to put their corporation tax up?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The worst that could happen? Well as that article describes they would see a massive fall in tax revenues and therefore have to cut public spending significantly or increase taxes elsewhere.

If you think we should follow that model that's fine, but let's not pretend it comes without any risks. I would say they are quite significant and very volatile.

[jonty]

Any chance that this thread (and others in this forum) can be kept on topic.

And a reminder this is a first and foremost a forum for hibs fans where we like to see football and its like discussed. Its not a place just for political point-scoring.

[Bristolhibby]

I have seen this supposed point made a few times. It’s a shame it holds no water whatsoever.

You, and others before you have referenced countries that were colonised who then sought independence. Fair enough.

Scotland entered into a union. That’s very different.

Doesnt really bother me, I’ve made my position clear a few times. I have no love of the union and I despise the pettiness of nationalism even more.

But this nonsensical, facile point you’ve made and a few have made before you really has to stop. It is silly and misguidedly wrong, and obviously intentionally.

Entered into a Union then was culturally colonised. Assimilated if you will. The best and worst type of colonisation.

The British concept is English driven.

We share the same island, but for most of our history have been distinctly different and independent of each other.

J

[Fife-Hibee]

Any chance that this thread (and others in this forum) can be kept on topic.

And a reminder this is a first and foremost a forum for hibs fans where we like to see football and its like discussed. Its not a place just for political point-scoring.

This is the political sub forum. There is a main forum for the football. As for getting back on topic, we're on page 4 now and i've still yet to see anything highlighting these wonderful positives of remaining in the UK.

[MagicSwirlingShip]

Only...50% of our budget according to Scottish Government figures.

As I said Scotland has an ageing population with a declining number of taxpayers. That gap needs filled, so tax increases? Spending cuts?

https://www.gov.scot/publications/role-income-tax-scotlands-budget/pages/3/

2.1 How is Scotland’s funding changing?

Until recently, Scottish Government revenue came almost exclusively via a Block Grant from the UK Government i.e. a budget which was set by the UK Government and Parliament based on spending decisions for England and Wales, which the Scottish Parliament could decide how to spend. The devolution of some tax powers in the Scotland Act 2016 means that decisions made in Scotland now have greater influence over the size of the Scottish Budget. However even when the full set of tax powers agreed in the Scotland Act 2016 are devolved, the Block Grant set by the UK Government will still make up around 50% of our budget.

I’d suggest being able to control immigration and attract tax payers from other countries would be part of the plan.

[jonty]

This is the political sub forum. There is a main forum for the football. As for getting back on topic, we're on page 4 now and i've still yet to see anything highlighting these wonderful positives of remaining in the UK.

Wrong - there is no political sub forum.

This is a football fans site, not a political site. We expect football fans to be signing up to have a discussion, not users signing up solely to post on political threads. There are better placed sites to do that.

[James310]

I’d suggest being able to control immigration and attract tax payers from other countries would be part of the plan.

This would be worth £10BN a year? How many extra people would we need to create the extra revenues when you offset the extra cost of things like Education and Health care and all the other services that all these people will need? I appreciate they will be net contributors but how many, and how would you attract them to Scotland? Low taxes?

[Callum_62]

Wrong - there is no political sub forum.

This is a football fans site, not a political site. We expect football fans to be signing up to have a discussion, not users signing up solely to post on political threads. There are better placed sites to do that.Confused

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190623/27987ac6206a76921830004662106d78.jpg

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[MagicSwirlingShip]

This would be worth £10BN a year? How many extra people would we need to create the extra revenues when you offset the extra cost of things like Education and Health care and all the other services that all these people will need? I appreciate they will be net contributors but how many, and how would you attract them to Scotland? Low taxes?

I have no idea how much it would contribute per year, as I suppose neither do you. But it would definitely contribute.

Scotland is one of the best places to live and work on the planet. I believe people come to work here for the same reasons they have done for the past 100 odd years, opportunity, and the chance to create a better life for themselves and their families.

FWIW id happily see higher taxes introduced in an independent Scotland

[jonty]

Confused

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190623/27987ac6206a76921830004662106d78.jpg

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

As i said, its not a political sub forum. It s a sub-forum which is where political topics (amongst many others) are discussed.
Political sub-forum implies a forum solely for political threads.

The varied list of threads makes that pretty clear i would have thought.


Anyway. back on topic...…..

[James310]

I have no idea how much it would contribute per year, as I suppose neither do you. But it would definitely contribute.

Scotland is one of the best places to live and work on the planet. I believe people come to work here for the same reasons they have done for the past 100 odd years, opportunity, and the chance to create a better life for themselves and their families.

FWIW id happily see higher taxes introduced in an independent Scotland

If that's the plan though would it not make sense to understand the details, how it would work, what the actual impact would be.

We can all suggest lots of things but they don't mean much if you can't quantify them.

[MagicSwirlingShip]

If that's the plan though would it not make sense to understand the details, how it would work, what the actual impact would be.

We can all suggest lots of things but they don't mean much if you can't quantify them.

I said it would be part of the plan. Something you had not mentioned previously. I’m not going to pretend to be some armchair economist and make out I can plan Scotland’s immigration policy, and it’s inner workings.

I’m sure there are much more highly qualified people than some bored Sunday afternoon Hibs fans on an Internet forum who be able to do that.

[Moulin Yarns]

Wrong - there is no political sub forum.

This is a football fans site, not a political site. We expect football fans to be signing up to have a discussion, not users signing up solely to post on political threads. There are better placed sites to do that.

I'm also a bit confused. Are you saying that there are people posting on the Holy Ground, on political threads who are not engaged with the general football threads?


Anyway, back to the topic, Scotland gains the protection of a nuclear deterrent. 😉

https://theferret.scot/astral-climb-nuclear-bomb-convoy-exercise/

[cabbageandribs1875]

https://media0.giphy.com/media/fpXxIjftmkk9y/giphy.gif?cid=790b76115d0fa046744e5456673eef28&rid=giphy.gif

[cabbageandribs1875]

I'm also a bit confused. Are you saying that there are people posting on the Holy Ground, on political threads who are not engaged with the general football threads?


Anyway, back to the topic, Scotland gains the protection of a nuclear deterrent. 😉

https://theferret.scot/astral-climb-nuclear-bomb-convoy-exercise/



hopefully the first thing to go in a IS, and a huge clean-up bill sent to westminster

[Moulin Yarns]

hopefully the first thing to go in a IS, and a huge clean-up bill sent to westminster

Are you saying IS has nuclear weapons? 😉😁

[James310]

The main benefit so far seems to be we can run a deficit that would be unsustainable in an Independent Scotland, certainly unsustainable if we had any desire to join the EU. It is however manageable in the context of the larger UK. It allows us to take a different path if we so choose on things like tution fees, free prescriptions, baby boxes, social care etc while remaining in the UK. No guarantee these would remain 'free' in and independent Scotland.

So we can spend similar to a nation that has a low deficit as that deficit is low for the whole of the UK, but it's higher in Scotland but manageable in the UK context.

We also benefit from a fiscal transfer of around £10BN a year, that again allows us to take a different path if we choose to. The Sustainable Growth Commission report does make reference to this, suggesting it will take around 25 years to replace.

[cabbageandribs1875]

Are you saying IS has nuclear weapons? 😉😁


they will if Corbyn gets in :wink:

[StevieC]

Because it's 12.5% corporation tax. But as pointed out the EU are looking to stop this. 40% of Irish Corporation tax comes from 10 companies, is that the basis to build a sustainable long term economy?

The question was why (when you stated the UK had the lowest corporation tax) did these companies base themselves in Ireland?

Your initial statement was alluding to “why should Scotland have control of corporation tax when it already had the lowest”. It obviously doesn’t have the lowest if businesses are ploughing money into the economy of another country.

The argument is not, as you are now trying to portray, about nationalists wanting to attract companies (in a race to the bottom) by reducing corporation tax .. but to have control of tax rates that best suit our economy.

You seem to have become very skilled in answering questions with another (often irrelevant to the discussion) question.

[StevieC]

The main benefit so far seems to be we can run a deficit.

Are you sure?

I thought it was Westminster that ran a deficit .. we just get a block grant based on THEIR spending?

[Fife-Hibee]

Are you sure?

I thought it was Westminster that ran a deficit .. we just get a block grant based on THEIR spending?

He seems to be under the impression that running up a deficit outside the UK is an unmitigated disaster but having the UK run one up on our behalf is a positive for remaining a part of it. :confused:

[James310]

Are you sure?

I thought it was Westminster that ran a deficit .. we just get a block grant based on THEIR spending?

Derek MacKay talks about the Scottish deficit, are you suggesting the Finance Minister does not know what he is talking about.

[James310]

The question was why (when you stated the UK had the lowest corporation tax) did these companies base themselves in Ireland?

Your initial statement was alluding to “why should Scotland have control of corporation tax when it already had the lowest”. It obviously doesn’t have the lowest if businesses are ploughing money into the economy of another country.

The argument is not, as you are now trying to portray, about nationalists wanting to attract companies (in a race to the bottom) by reducing corporation tax .. but to have control of tax rates that best suit our economy.

You seem to have become very skilled in answering questions with another (often irrelevant to the discussion) question.

As I am not the one proposing massive change then I am not the one having to defend it. If changes are being proposed questions will be asked.

Are you advocating we follow the Irish path, I asked a few times but never had a clear answer from anyone? So is that a Yes or a No? A very relevant question based on the discussion to date.

[The Modfather]

As I am not the one proposing massive change then I am not the one having to defend it. If changes are being proposed questions will be asked.

Are you advocating we follow the Irish path, I asked a few times but never had a clear answer from anyone? So is that a Yes or a No?

I’d understand your position around those proposing change and questions being asked if it was between change and the status quo. However, it’s either change through Scottish Independence or change through Brexit.

There are as many questions unanswered surrounding Brexit as there are what an Independent Scotland would look like. Two outcomes (Scottish Independence & Brexit) you are against, but you only ever ask questions about one of the issues. Why are you not all over Brexit and asking those that voted for it the same kind of questions?

[James310]

I’d understand your position around those proposing change and questions being asked if it was between change and the status quo. However, it’s either change through Scottish Independence or change through Brexit.

There are as many questions unanswered surrounding Brexit as there are what an Independent Scotland would look like. Two outcomes (Scottish Independence & Brexit) you are against, but you only ever ask questions about one of the issues. Why are you not all over Brexit and asking those that voted for it the same kind of questions?

Very few voted for it on here so there is very little debate, most are against it. I can start a separate thread about it if required.

[ronaldo7]

Lots of talk about plans on here today. I'm just glad those running the union have such a positive plan for the future, and are taking their own assessments into consideration, whilst driving towards the cliff edge.

2% hit, or 8% hit, what do you fancy, so many choices.

[Jack]

Wrong - there is no political sub forum.

This is a football fans site, not a political site. We expect football fans to be signing up to have a discussion, not users signing up solely to post on political threads. There are better placed sites to do that.

Good point.

I've thought now and again the parties, all parties, have people 'infiltrating' busy non political forums with their propaganda.

There are some people who just seem to have too much time on their hands and too well informed to be you're average football fan.

I'm retired now and can barely keep up with this thread!

[The Modfather]

Very few voted for it on here so there is very little debate, most are against it. I can start a separate thread about it if required.

It’s not for me to tell anyone what threads to start, if you feel inclined to start one go for it.

I just find it odd that for the massive change proposed through something like Brexit, and the amount of time you spend on the Holy Ground, only a fraction of your posts have been on the many threads discussing Brexit over the last year or so.

[StevieC]

Derek MacKay talks about the Scottish deficit, are you suggesting the Finance Minister does not know what he is talking about.

There’s the answering a question with a question again, to avoid answering a question. :)

I’m guessing that we may well run at a deficit (possibly around 10% of the UK deficit?) but as a lot of spending is not under control of the Scottish Government is it fair to say that the deficit levels are outwith the control of the Scottish Government?

You do understand what a block grant means though?

[StevieC]

Are you advocating we follow the Irish path, I asked a few times but never had a clear answer from anyone? So is that a Yes or a No? A very relevant question based on the discussion to date.

Given that you were the one that first mentioned Ireland’s economic policy, it’s a bit rich to call it a discussion. Do you think it prudent for a government to rule out any economic “paths” prior to having control of them?

[James310]

Given that you were the one that first mentioned Ireland’s economic policy, it’s a bit rich to call it a discussion. Do you think it prudent for a government to rule out any economic “paths” prior to having control of them?

It was Ozhibby who brought up Ireland in reference to Corporation tax as potential model to follow.

I don't think it's prudent to select a path where a country is so reliant on a small number of large taxpayers. I can also confidently rule out lots of other approaches or paths that other countries have taken, Venezuela for example.

It's clear this thread is pointless and it's another pile on again the Unionists. It's difficult to keep up now so I will bow out now happy I have made my points, although many will disagree but the facts speak for themselves.

[Slavers]

It was Ozhibby who brought up Ireland in reference to Corporation tax as potential model to follow.

I don't think it's prudent to select a path where a country is so reliant on a small number of large taxpayers. I can also confidently rule out lots of other approaches or paths that other countries have taken, Venezuela for example.

It's clear this thread is pointless and it's another pile on again the Unionists. It's difficult to keep up now so I will bow out now happy I have made my points, although many will disagree but the facts speak for themselves.

It's clear to see it's independence at any cost even if that means being at the mercy of a small number of global corporations, Oh what a future to paint for Indy Scotland.

The best plan is a union between the 4 home nations but with political reform, leaving the UK to join the EU is nonsense.

[Callum_62]

It's clear to see it's independence at any cost even if that means being at the mercy of a small number of global corporations, Oh what a future to paint for Indy Scotland.

The best plan is a union between the 4 home nations but with political reform, leaving the UK to join the EU is nonsense.What if the UK Gov goes no deal Brexit though

Then what?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Slavers]

What if the UK Gov goes no deal Brexit though

Then what?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

I don't think there any easy paths ahead but through the difficulties the home nations are best sticking together.

[Fife-Hibee]

I don't think there any easy paths ahead but through the difficulties the home nations are best sticking together.

Even if it's our fellow "home nations" who are directly responsible for the difficulties?

No thanks. They can take a hike.

[heretoday]

I don't think there any easy paths ahead but through the difficulties the home nations are best sticking together.

Hear hear. Why pile further disruption upon existing turmoil?

[Callum_62]

Hear hear. Why pile further disruption upon existing turmoil?I do find that thinking a bit odd

Basically come what may we can never leave a sinking ship....

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Just Alf]

Somewhat ironically against the Brexit backdrop the free movement of people, goods and services within the UK is a clear benefit to being in the Union.

Personally though I would say that from an economic perspective it’s the access to, and the free movement of, a very deep pool of capital that is of the most significant advantage.

Edit: I should also have added the ability of the UK Treasury to raise debt...having the backing of such a large economy undoubtedly protects Scotland from the vagaries of the international sov. Debt market.

And finally being part of a tax base that is substantially deeper and wider than what an Indy Scotland would have is also a significant benefit.

The trade off for both of course is the limited access of the oft mentioned ‘levers’.Agreed with your 1st para, even typed it out... Then deleted it, as you say its part and parcel of the EU so not a specific of the Union.

The financial point though, is very valid... And, for me at least, its the balance between gain/loss that will drive any (sensible) future discussions.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[Slavers]

I do find that thinking a bit odd

Basically come what may we can never leave a sinking ship....

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

Your whole point of view is based on the UK being a sinking ship. What if the EU sinks? You will stick with them but not UK?

What if the UK is a success out the EU?

We have the potential and people to be a succes without the EU.

[Callum_62]

Your whole point of view is based on the UK being a sinking ship. What if the EU sinks? You will stick with them but not UK?

What if the UK is a success out the EU?

We have the potential and people to be a succes with it without the EU.Well the UK Govts own analysis suggest that's exactly what we will be

It might be a smaller hole on the side or a gaping one depending what we eventually end up with

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Slavers]

Well the UK Govts own analysis suggest that's exactly what we will be

It might be a smaller hole on the side or a gaping one depending what we eventually end up with

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

The UK government would love us to be in the EU.

It's the people who don't want it.

[Callum_62]

The UK government would love us to be in the EU.

It's the people who don't want it.Well if they can't actually get on with governing in our interests then they are a sham government.

No deal is very real possibility now, and in that case would, quite rightly result in louder calls for indy ref 2

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Slavers]

Well if they can't actually get on with governing in our interests then they are a sham government.

No deal is very real possibility now, and in that case would, quite rightly result in louder calls for indy ref 2

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

I agree the whole thing is a sham from top to bottom and inside and out.

I'm not dead against Scottish independence but I don't see any point in leaving the UK to join the EU.

I'd rather be out the EU and remain in the UK than be out the UK and in the EU.

[Ozyhibby]

As I am not the one proposing massive change then I am not the one having to defend it. If changes are being proposed questions will be asked.

Are you advocating we follow the Irish path, I asked a few times but never had a clear answer from anyone? So is that a Yes or a No? A very relevant question based on the discussion to date.

You are proposing massive change as you are advocating Scotland leaving the EU. There is no status quo option on the table now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RyeSloan]

Agreed with your 1st para, even typed it out... Then deleted it, as you say its part and parcel of the EU so not a specific of the Union.

The financial point though, is very valid... And, for me at least, its the balance between gain/loss that will drive any (sensible) future discussions.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Thanks Alf for a reasoned reply...seems rather difficult to have such a discussion on these threads due to the volume of rhetoric that gets banded about. But maybe one day that sensible discussion may be had [emoji106]

[heretoday]

I do find that thinking a bit odd

Basically come what may we can never leave a sinking ship....

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

So assuming the referendum results in a YES win, it's going to be a smooth process leaving the UK? And easy enough joining the EU?

I tell ye we'll be mired in the courts for years, arguing about who owns what, how to manage the border and all the rest of it.

If these recent times have taught us anything surely it's that it's best to join things rather than cast off into unknown waters?

[Callum_62]

So assuming the referendum results in a YES win, it's going to be a smooth process leaving the UK? And easy enough joining the EU?

I tell ye we'll be mired in the courts for years, arguing about who owns what, how to manage the border and all the rest of it.

If these recent times have taught us anything surely it's that it's best to join things rather than cast off into unknown waters?Or casting off things on a sensible manner is Infinitely easier than ignoring what's actually on offer and making demands and red lines.

Removing the UK from the EU has been made massively more difficult by the UK Govts negotiating position

Again I don't get the thought process that because Brexit is a cluster **** then everything else must be too.... Only probably worse

We were sold an absolute unicorn with brexit - this is why it's impossible

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Hibrandenburg]

If that's the plan though would it not make sense to understand the details, how it would work, what the actual impact would be.

We can all suggest lots of things but they don't mean much if you can't quantify them.

An independent Scotland wouldn't be looking to change our world overnight. What we have now would be the status quo until we decide it needs changing, the operative word being WE, the people of Scotland.

[Hibrandenburg]

Derek MacKay talks about the Scottish deficit, are you suggesting the Finance Minister does not know what he is talking about.

The finance minister has recently gone on record saying the next UK Prime Minister couldn't balance the books in the whole UK without Scotland's input.

[Hibrandenburg]

Your whole point of view is based on the UK being a sinking ship. What if the EU sinks? You will stick with them but not UK?

What if the UK is a success out the EU?

We have the potential and people to be a succes without the EU.

This opinion has been busted by pretty much everyone who knows anything about economics, I'm surprised that there are still people who believe this at this stage.

[Ozyhibby]

So assuming the referendum results in a YES win, it's going to be a smooth process leaving the UK? And easy enough joining the EU?

I tell ye we'll be mired in the courts for years, arguing about who owns what, how to manage the border and all the rest of it.

If these recent times have taught us anything surely it's that it's best to join things rather than cast off into unknown waters?

The border issue will be determined by what happens with the NI border. There will be nothing to sort out by the time we vote.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Slavers]

This opinion has been busted by pretty much everyone who knows anything about economics, I'm surprised that there are still people who believe this at this stage.

Many experts have said the UK can be a success. It's who you choose to believe, your very much pro EU and pro Indy, I'm not surprised you think the way you do.

[Callum_62]

Many experts have said the UK can be a success. It's who you choose to believe, your very much pro EU and pro Indy, I'm not surprised you think the way you do.What experts have said this?

Even the govts own analysis shows a hit to our economy under all circumstances.

That certainly wasn't sold in 2016

It was JRM that said we might see some benefit in 50 years

I'd hardly call that a success.

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[NAE NOOKIE]

I seriously cant think of any actual positives if the context of the question is, what would Scotland absolutely not have that we absolutely must have if we were not part of the union? That's how to word the question for me and for the life of me I cant think of a single thing.

If we weren't part of the UK we would make every decision affecting people who live in Scotland, good or bad, ourselves and our domestic and foreign policy would be dictated by the attitudes of our population. That's what proper countries do and until that happens we are a proper country in the same way as Narnia or Middle Earth.

[neil7908]

The positives of the Union historically have been stability and prosperity.

Looks like both of those are out of the window now...

I'm not dogmatic on independence but I voted Yes to try and avoid the situation we are in now.

Johnson as our leader cause a chunk of elderly, white Tory voters in the South East of England chose him, ready to lead us kicking and screaming out of the EU on a wave of lies, bravado and racism.

[Smartie]

It's clear to see it's independence at any cost even if that means being at the mercy of a small number of global corporations, Oh what a future to paint for Indy Scotland.

The best plan is a union between the 4 home nations but with political reform, leaving the UK to join the EU is nonsense.

How many small independent nations have been taken down by the actions of global corporations in recent years?

[Slavers]

How many small independent nations have been taken down by the actions of global corporations in recent years?

They could make demands on the host nation in regards to tax, employment law and environmental issues.

[Callum_62]

Many experts have said the UK can be a success. It's who you choose to believe, your very much pro EU and pro Indy, I'm not surprised you think the way you do.Bank of England:

https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/report/2018/eu-withdrawal-scenarios-and-monetary-and-financial-stability

Now the 2008 banking crisis and following decade plus of austerity was a 2% drop

What would a 7-10% loss look like?

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[heretoday]

The positives of the Union historically have been stability and prosperity.

Looks like both of those are out of the window now...

I'm not dogmatic on independence but I voted Yes to try and avoid the situation we are in now.

Johnson as our leader cause a chunk of elderly, white Tory voters in the South East of England chose him, ready to lead us kicking and screaming out of the EU on a wave of lies, bravado and racism.

Johnson won't be around for long assuming he's elected.
I'd give him 18 months.
With a different government things could get better.
Sorry to sound optimistic but I wouldn't panic yet. I certainly wouldn't listen to the opportunistic Sturgeon who's a fanatic nationalist hellbent on breaking up the UK.

[Smartie]

They could make demands on the host nation in regards to tax, employment law and environmental issues.

They could.

But how many actually have, in a way that isn't in the best interests of that nation?

[Hibrandenburg]

I certainly wouldn't listen to the opportunistic Sturgeon who's a fanatic nationalist hellbent on breaking up the UK.

You make that sound like a bad thing. :wink:

[Fife-Hibee]

Johnson won't be around for long assuming he's elected.
I'd give him 18 months.
With a different government things could get better.
Sorry to sound optimistic but I wouldn't panic yet. I certainly wouldn't listen to the opportunistic Sturgeon who's a fanatic nationalist hellbent on breaking up the UK.

"Things could get better".... but they may not. There are 2 certainties though. Scotland will never be the one's to make that decision in the UK and secondly, even if by some miracle things do get better, it's only a matter of time before a wave of toryism spreads over England again to undo any improvements.

Think i'll put my trust in the fanatic nationalist instead.

[JeMeSouviens]

I have seen this supposed point made a few times. It’s a shame it holds no water whatsoever.

You, and others before you have referenced countries that were colonised who then sought independence. Fair enough.

Scotland entered into a union. That’s very different.

Doesnt really bother me, I’ve made my position clear a few times. I have no love of the union and I despise the pettiness of nationalism even more.

But this nonsensical, facile point you’ve made and a few have made before you really has to stop. It is silly and misguidedly wrong, and obviously intentionally.

The 1707 union and Ireland’s 1801 union with GB aren’t so very different. Both made by aristocratic elites, in all likelihood against the wishes of the general population.

[G B Young]

For many of those who decisively voted in favour of the Union back in 2014, the positives of being part of the United Kingdom don't simply come down to something as clinical as a cost-benefit analysis. It's about more than than that. It's about identity and a wish not to have a fundamental part of that identity taken away from you by those (ie Scottish nationalists) who seem unable to understand why anyone else might see things differently to them - despite the fact that independence would likely be as big a leap in the dark as Brexit.

[Smartie]

For many of those who decisively voted in favour of the Union back in 2014, the positives of being part of the United Kingdom don't simply come down to something as clinical as a cost-benefit analysis. It's about more than than that. It's about identity and a wish not to have a fundamental part of that identity taken away from you by those (ie Scottish nationalists) who seem unable to understand why anyone else might see things differently to them - despite the fact that independence would likely be as big a leap in the dark as Brexit.

"Ah'd need tae get a new avatar".

[neil7908]

Johnson won't be around for long assuming he's elected.
I'd give him 18 months.
With a different government things could get better.
Sorry to sound optimistic but I wouldn't panic yet. I certainly wouldn't listen to the opportunistic Sturgeon who's a fanatic nationalist hellbent on breaking up the UK.

But the question is who comes after him? The way the country is going it could be Farage. We've sat through 3 years of Brexit chaos. Not sure how much more I can stomach. I'm not convinced that right wing Tory voters in England will change their priorities any time soon.

[allmodcons]

For many of those who decisively voted in favour of the Union back in 2014, the positives of being part of the United Kingdom don't simply come down to something as clinical as a cost-benefit analysis. It's about more than than that. It's about identity and a wish not to have a fundamental part of that identity taken away from you by those (ie Scottish nationalists) who seem unable to understand why anyone else might see things differently to them - despite the fact that independence would likely be as big a leap in the dark as Brexit.

Well, well the Union and identity Politics? What are you talking about here that us Scottish Nationalists don't understand?

As I argue the case for a confident, inclusive, outwardly looking Independent Scotland are you dreaming of the British Empire, World War Two and the UK Government's desire to retain the country's status as a 'world superpower'?

As the UK slowly drifts out to sea (mis)guided by the ugly face of English Nationalism just what is it that you identify with that I don't understand?

[Fife-Hibee]

For many of those who decisively voted in favour of the Union back in 2014, the positives of being part of the United Kingdom don't simply come down to something as clinical as a cost-benefit analysis. It's about more than than that. It's about identity and a wish not to have a fundamental part of that identity taken away from you by those (ie Scottish nationalists) who seem unable to understand why anyone else might see things differently to them - despite the fact that independence would likely be as big a leap in the dark as Brexit.

So what are the positives that come from a sense of British identity? Can we look back over British history and say that it's a proud one?

I'll never understand where this patriotic love of Britishness comes from and what serves as the basis for it.

[Mibbes Aye]

The 1707 union and Ireland’s 1801 union with GB aren’t so very different. Both made by aristocratic elites, in all likelihood against the wishes of the general population.

Oh I certainly agree with the premise that at any time in history there will be powerful groups with vested interests who seek to influence the politicking of their day. Although in 1707 I’m not sure the general population would have much of an inkling about what the Act Of Union was or meant or how it affected their day-to-day life.

In the spirit of non-partisanship, I think I referenced this before and will do so again - I’d heartily recommend the book ‘Britons’ by Linda Colley, which applies an academic approach to how the notion of ‘Britain’ and ‘Britishness’ came about, because in itself it is only a few hundred years old.

Her well-researched work identifies three key elements that shaped thinking from the 17th century through to the beginning of the 19th century, namely war, religion and trade.

War was the existential threat or perceived threat of invasion and sunbjugation mostly by the French. Religion was the impact of the Reformation, not unlinked to the threat of war with Catholic countries. And trade was the boom that Britain (and it was Britain) entered into, with machinisation, the Industrial Revolution and the British Empire and army and navy providing the capacity and security for massive profits. It’s no coincidence that the coastal west of Great Britain, from Bristol up to Paisley, has no shortage of outstanding 19th century architecture, built from trade profits, whether honest or immoral.

Anyway, not sure that’s a relevant argument for the union here and now :greengrin

[G B Young]

Well, well the Union and identity Politics? What are you talking about here that us Scottish Nationalists don't understand?

As I argue the case for a confident, inclusive, outwardly looking Independent Scotland are you dreaming of the British Empire, World War Two and the UK Government's desire to retain the country's status as a 'world superpower'?

As the UK slowly drifts out to sea (mis)guided by the ugly face of English Nationalism just what is it that you identify with that I don't understand?

I'm dreaming of none of those things, although when it comes to World War Two I was certainly moved by the recent Normandy landings commemoration services and proud that so many Scots were among those from all corners of the United Kingdom to have played their part. I don't see anything wrong with that.

I find nationalism in all its forms repellent and the perception by Scottish nationalists that theirs is a uniquely positive, optimistic version sticks in the craw when it's so dependent on driving home a perennial 'Scotland as victim' mentality. For Scottish nationalism to succeed the UK must fail and I find the relentless negativity of the SNP rhetoric wearying rather than uplifting. The implied message that anyone who doesn't 'get with the programme' must be in some way lacking in intellect or moral fibre is also insulting.

Granted, things are bad just now and it's hard to recall when our two main parties were so badly led and lacking in inspiration, but it doesn't automatically follow that independence must be better. Bearing in mind the shambles that Brexit has become, is a degree of caution when it comes to further potential constitutional upheaval really so wrong?

[Ozyhibby]

In about 4 weeks, Boris Johnson will be PM and Ross Thomson will be Scottish Secretary of State. Then we’ll really start to appreciate the Union. [emoji3]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Curried]

We are attractive to wealthy retired people. Or people looking for holiday homes, there is one across the road from the one that has been sold, £650,000 holiday home for a Hong-Kong based person.

https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/49921640.jpg

[ronaldo7]

I'm dreaming of none of those things, although when it comes to World War Two I was certainly moved by the recent Normandy landings commemoration services and proud that so many Scots were among those from all corners of the United Kingdom to have played their part. I don't see anything wrong with that.

I find nationalism in all its forms repellent and the perception by Scottish nationalists that theirs is a uniquely positive, optimistic version sticks in the craw when it's so dependent on driving home a perennial 'Scotland as victim' mentality. For Scottish nationalism to succeed the UK must fail and I find the relentless negativity of the SNP rhetoric wearying rather than uplifting. The implied message that anyone who doesn't 'get with the programme' must be in some way lacking in intellect or moral fibre is also insulting.

Granted, things are bad just now and it's hard to recall when our two main parties were so badly led and lacking in inspiration, but it doesn't automatically follow that independence must be better. Bearing in mind the shambles that Brexit has become, is a degree of caution when it comes to further potential constitutional upheaval really so wrong?

Your first paragraph.

Do you honestly believe, that had Scotland been independent during WW2, that no Scots would have fought the Nazis, alongside many other independent countries?

You were happy to have, Canadians, Americans, and many other nationalities helping to beat the Nazis.

I find unionism repellent, and the perception by unionists that the union is uniquely positive, whilst leaving their veterans to fend for themselves on the streets.

[G B Young]

Your first paragraph.

Do you honestly believe, that had Scotland been independent during WW2, that no Scots would have fought the Nazis, alongside many other independent countries?

You were happy to have, Canadians, Americans, and many other nationalities helping to beat the Nazis.

I find unionism repellent, and the perception by unionists that the union is uniquely positive, whilst leaving their veterans to fend for themselves on the streets.

I'm quite sure Scots would have fought against the Nazis, independent or not, but for anyone's pride in their efforts during World War 2 to be somehow diluted simply because we weren't an independent country is surely taking nationalism to extremes.

IMHO there's a big difference between stereotypical Rangers-supporting Scottish unionists and folk like myself who simply regard themselves as Scottish AND British and are happy to remain so.

[Curried]

I'm dreaming of none of those things, although when it comes to World War Two I was certainly moved by the recent Normandy landings commemoration services and proud that so many Scots were among those from all corners of the United Kingdom to have played their part. I don't see anything wrong with that.

I find nationalism in all its forms repellent and the perception by Scottish nationalists that theirs is a uniquely positive, optimistic version sticks in the craw when it's so dependent on driving home a perennial 'Scotland as victim' mentality. For Scottish nationalism to succeed the UK must fail and I find the relentless negativity of the SNP rhetoric wearying rather than uplifting. The implied message that anyone who doesn't 'get with the programme' must be in some way lacking in intellect or moral fibre is also insulting.

Granted, things are bad just now and it's hard to recall when our two main parties were so badly led and lacking in inspiration, but it doesn't automatically follow that independence must be better. Bearing in mind the shambles that Brexit has become, is a degree of caution when it comes to further potential constitutional upheaval really so wrong?

Yet you wave a Jack on your avatar.
A green-rinse Jack yes, but a Jack that is recognisable as such to anyone with eyes.

[NAE NOOKIE]

I'm dreaming of none of those things, although when it comes to World War Two I was certainly moved by the recent Normandy landings commemoration services and proud that so many Scots were among those from all corners of the United Kingdom to have played their part. I don't see anything wrong with that.

I find nationalism in all its forms repellent and the perception by Scottish nationalists that theirs is a uniquely positive, optimistic version sticks in the craw when it's so dependent on driving home a perennial 'Scotland as victim' mentality. For Scottish nationalism to succeed the UK must fail and I find the relentless negativity of the SNP rhetoric wearying rather than uplifting. The implied message that anyone who doesn't 'get with the programme' must be in some way lacking in intellect or moral fibre is also insulting.

Granted, things are bad just now and it's hard to recall when our two main parties were so badly led and lacking in inspiration, but it doesn't automatically follow that independence must be better. Bearing in mind the shambles that Brexit has become, is a degree of caution when it comes to further potential constitutional upheaval really so wrong?

I have never heard a Scottish nationalist refer to our version of nationalism as unique. We vigorously 'and rightly' defend ourselves against tired and lazy accusations that our nationalism is based on hatred of any other nation or nations or exceptionalism because for 99.9% of us it isn't no matter how much it suits defenders of the union to infer that it is.

As for the 'victim mentality' … Aye, its all England's fault .. where's the victim mentality going to be when Scotland is independent and we have to take responsibility for our own actions? There's the paradox for you, the movement British nationalists accuse of revelling in a victim mentality and enthusiastically blaming Westminster / the UK / England for all of Scotland's ills exists solely to remove itself from the ability to blame anybody but itself for its decisions and yet according to the folk accusing us of the former we are totally wrong to want the latter … some folk are never happy :greengrin

For my part the biggest lie in the whole debate is folk who enthusiastically defend the union refusing to identify themselves as British nationalists or nationalistic people and all the while using the word 'nationalist' when referring to us ( Scottish nationalists ) with that unspoken and sometimes spoken inference that our nationalism is no different from Hitler's nationalism or Karadzic's nationalism.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it is a duck. Unless you are a British nationalist of course :aok:

[ronaldo7]

I'm quite sure Scots would have fought against the Nazis, independent or not, but for anyone's pride in their efforts during World War 2 to be somehow diluted simply because we weren't an independent country is surely taking nationalism to extremes.

IMHO there's a big difference between stereotypical Rangers-supporting Scottish unionists and folk like myself who simply regard themselves as Scottish AND British and are happy to remain so.

I'm certainly not diluting your pride in the efforts of Scots within the fighting forces which defeated Nazism. I, and my family are proud of their efforts, with family members still lying in the fields of France. Those forces came from the whole world made up of Independent minded men and women, some didn't care a jot about their Britishness, they only wanted to defeat Fascism.

[Fife-Hibee]

I'm quite sure Scots would have fought against the Nazis, independent or not, but for anyone's pride in their efforts during World War 2 to be somehow diluted simply because we weren't an independent country is surely taking nationalism to extremes.

IMHO there's a big difference between stereotypical Rangers-supporting Scottish unionists and folk like myself who simply regard themselves as Scottish AND British and are happy to remain so.

Nobody is diluting their efforts. However, you appear to be using WW2 as a positive case for the union. As if we would have somehow been less proud had an independent Scotland participated in the war. It's hard to understand where that thinking comes from.

Saying you're happy to be Scottish AND British is all well and good. But it doesn't add anything of remote substance as to why Scotland should remain in the UK.

[Smartie]

Tin hat on here, but I think a case can be made for the Union in relation to the armed forces.

My brother is in the Navy - he is a devout Unionist, I am not.

Defence is his job, and he is convinced that Scottish independence would make defending the UK a greater challenge. It is easier to do with things how they are, and a change would involve a risk and it might be more difficult to defend the coastline of the UK if we had different countries within the UK with different political ideas doing the defending.

The armed forces already do a lot of good work overseas and their ability to do so might be compromised by independence - the current unity may well be greater than the individual parts.

Some of us like to think of the British armed forces being about wars of oil and imperialism and unwanted incursions into Ireland, but there are activities to help out with the migration issue in the Med, all sorts of stuff helping out in the Balkans (with Putin up to his nonsense) that we might not be able to play such an active role in with independence.

This is an unusual point for me to make as a believer in independence but it is the opinion of my brother and I believe it is an opinion that has some merit.

[jonty]

Tin hat on here, but I think a case can be made for the Union in relation to the armed forces.

My brother is in the Navy - he is a devout Unionist, I am not.

Defence is his job, and he is convinced that Scottish independence would make defencing the UK a greater challenge. It is easier to do with things how they are, and a change would involve a risk and it might be more difficult to defend the coastline of the UK if we had different countries within the UK with different political ideas doing the defending.

The armed forces already do a lot of good work overseas and their ability to do so might be compromised by independence - the current unity may well be greater than the individual parts.

Some of us like to think of the British armed forces being about wars of oil and imperialism and unwanted incursions into Ireland, but there are activities to help out with the migration issue in the Med, all sorts of stuff helping out in the Balkans (with Putin up to his nonsense) that we might not be able to play such an active role in with independence.

This is an unusual point for me to make as a believer in independence but it is the opinion of my brother and I believe that it is an opinion that has some merit.

Interesting and often overlooked.
How does this compare to the Brexit argument about a euro-army (even though its nothing of the sort)? The obvious is strength in numbers but the Brexiteers complain about being dragged into conflicts that are euro driven rather than UK driven (which I don't believe is the case) yet Scotland could argue it was dragged into conflicts that were Westminster drive. (and i know, hindsight is a wonderful thing).

Do the British Army do the good work mentioned above, off their own backs, or in conjunction with other nato/euro allies?

[Fife-Hibee]

Tin hat on here, but I think a case can be made for the Union in relation to the armed forces.

My brother is in the Navy - he is a devout Unionist, I am not.

Defence is his job, and he is convinced that Scottish independence would make defencing the UK a greater challenge. It is easier to do with things how they are, and a change would involve a risk and it might be more difficult to defend the coastline of the UK if we had different countries within the UK with different political ideas doing the defending.

The armed forces already do a lot of good work overseas and their ability to do so might be compromised by independence - the current unity may well be greater than the individual parts.

Some of us like to think of the British armed forces being about wars of oil and imperialism and unwanted incursions into Ireland, but there are activities to help out with the migration issue in the Med, all sorts of stuff helping out in the Balkans (with Putin up to his nonsense) that we might not be able to play such an active role in with independence.

This is an unusual point for me to make as a believer in independence but it is the opinion of my brother and I believe that it is an opinion that has some merit.

It has merit until it's pointed out that far larger islands than ours, divided up into many different countries don't appear to have any real issues regarding defence. Most of them just choose to keep their beaks out of international affairs. The forces along with the MOD would love us all to believe that all hell would befall us should Scotland dare to leave this political union. But the reality is quite different. There is nothing to suggest that the British isles would suddenly become an open target, just because Scotland decides to take full control over it's own affairs.

[Jack]

Tin hat on here, but I think a case can be made for the Union in relation to the armed forces.

My brother is in the Navy - he is a devout Unionist, I am not.

Defence is his job, and he is convinced that Scottish independence would make defencing the UK a greater challenge. It is easier to do with things how they are, and a change would involve a risk and it might be more difficult to defend the coastline of the UK if we had different countries within the UK with different political ideas doing the defending.

The armed forces already do a lot of good work overseas and their ability to do so might be compromised by independence - the current unity may well be greater than the individual parts.

Some of us like to think of the British armed forces being about wars of oil and imperialism and unwanted incursions into Ireland, but there are activities to help out with the migration issue in the Med, all sorts of stuff helping out in the Balkans (with Putin up to his nonsense) that we might not be able to play such an active role in with independence.

This is an unusual point for me to make as a believer in independence but it is the opinion of my brother and I believe that it is an opinion that has some merit.

I used to think a bit like that, not that I was ever in the Armed Forces.

Then you look around the world and there's joint exercises happening all over the place; pirates in various places, drugs in the Caribbean to name just two. Then there's NATO being a big huge joining of military might and there's ANZAC, still going strong for after 100+ years.

There's no shortage of collaboration.

[ronaldo7]

Tin hat on here, but I think a case can be made for the Union in relation to the armed forces.

My brother is in the Navy - he is a devout Unionist, I am not.

Defence is his job, and he is convinced that Scottish independence would make defencing the UK a greater challenge. It is easier to do with things how they are, and a change would involve a risk and it might be more difficult to defend the coastline of the UK if we had different countries within the UK with different political ideas doing the defending.

The armed forces already do a lot of good work overseas and their ability to do so might be compromised by independence - the current unity may well be greater than the individual parts.

Some of us like to think of the British armed forces being about wars of oil and imperialism and unwanted incursions into Ireland, but there are activities to help out with the migration issue in the Med, all sorts of stuff helping out in the Balkans (with Putin up to his nonsense) that we might not be able to play such an active role in with independence.

This is an unusual point for me to make as a believer in independence but it is the opinion of my brother and I believe that it is an opinion that has some merit.

The UK government have decided to leave the Scottish coastline open to incursion, and it takes a while for them to get their frigates up from Devonport/Pompey, so we're not really covered as it is under the UK umbrella. As has been mentioned, the Royal Navy work in concert with Nato these days, and the many exercises with other Independent states continue just off the Scottish coast.

We'd also take a percentage of the current defence budget into our own hands, and with it, the hardware to boot. This was the expectation as of 2007.

"The Scottish government’s independence white paper says that, on a population share, Scotland would be entitled to £7.8 billion of the United Kingdom’s £93 billion of defence assets (the 2007 figure). The white paper details what Edinburgh would ask for from each branch of the UK military in negotiations. From the Royal Navy, for instance, it would seek two frigates, four anti-mine boats, two offshore patrol vessels and between four and six patrol boats."

So their will still be a job for him in the future. Just under a different flag. :saltireflag

[marinello59]

The UK government have decided to leave the Scottish coastline open to incursion, and it takes a while for them to get their frigates up from Devonport/Pompey, so we're not really covered as it is under the UK umbrella. As has been mentioned, the Royal Navy work in concert with Nato these days, and the many exercises with other Independent states continue just off the Scottish coast.

We'd also take a percentage of the current defence budget into our own hands, and with it, the hardware to boot. This was the expectation as of 2007.

"The Scottish government’s independence white paper says that, on a population share, Scotland would be entitled to £7.8 billion of the United Kingdom’s £93 billion of defence assets (the 2007 figure). The white paper details what Edinburgh would ask for from each branch of the UK military in negotiations. From the Royal Navy, for instance, it would seek two frigates, four anti-mine boats, two offshore patrol vessels and between four and six patrol boats."

So their will still be a job for him in the future. Just under a different flag. :saltireflag

:agree:

The recognition that Scotland is a maritime nation and should be defended as such was a big plus in the white paper for me.

[Curried]

:agree:

The recognition that Scotland is a maritime nation and should be defended as such was a big plus in the white paper for me.


****er

[marinello59]

****er

I’m assuming that’s supposed to be funny?

[Curried]

I’m assuming that’s supposed to be funny?

No..

[lapsedhibee]

****er

Wtf?

[Curried]

wtf?

mmmmmm

[marinello59]

No..

We don’t tolerate personal abuse on here so would you like to withdraw your comment? If you had directed that at anybody else you wouldn’t be posting here again. If you have an issue feel free to PM me and we can try to resolve it.

[Fife-Hibee]

****er

Not sure what provoked such a response. But it's not acceptable on here.

[Curried]

In what way is "no" considers personal abuse? I stand accused!

[marinello59]

In what way is "no" considers personal abuse? I stand accused!

Your previous comment?

[NAE NOOKIE]

Tin hat on here, but I think a case can be made for the Union in relation to the armed forces.

My brother is in the Navy - he is a devout Unionist, I am not.

Defence is his job, and he is convinced that Scottish independence would make defending the UK a greater challenge. It is easier to do with things how they are, and a change would involve a risk and it might be more difficult to defend the coastline of the UK if we had different countries within the UK with different political ideas doing the defending.

The armed forces already do a lot of good work overseas and their ability to do so might be compromised by independence - the current unity may well be greater than the individual parts.

Some of us like to think of the British armed forces being about wars of oil and imperialism and unwanted incursions into Ireland, but there are activities to help out with the migration issue in the Med, all sorts of stuff helping out in the Balkans (with Putin up to his nonsense) that we might not be able to play such an active role in with independence.

This is an unusual point for me to make as a believer in independence but it is the opinion of my brother and I believe it is an opinion that has some merit.

In 1999 the UK government re drew the international boundary line between Scotland and England placing 6000 square miles of sea which had previously been on Scotland's side of the boundary into English waters and along with it a number of oil fields. According to experts in international maritime law that would never have been allowed if it had been a proper negotiation in an international law court between two independent countries.

It seems to me that the question isn't who is going to protect Scotland's coastline and waters from attack by foreign countries, but who is going to protect it from attack by the UK?

[Curried]

Your previous comment?

My apology's, I think i was talking about the ADMIN pulling my comments on a unionist thread...

[Moulin Yarns]

My apology's, I think i was talking about the ADMIN pulling my comments on a unionist thread...

Go back and look at the post you replied to with a swear word

[marinello59]

My apology's, I think i was talking about the ADMIN pulling my comments on a unionist thread...

You mean deleting the post where you resorted to personal abuse against another poster? If you have a problem with that PM me and we can discuss it. Any more abuse aimed at any poster today though is only going to end one way.

[Curried]

Not sure what provoked such a response. But it's not acceptable on here.

I like your posts, but don't tell me what's acceptable and whats not.

[ronaldo7]

In 1999 the UK government re drew the international boundary line between Scotland and England placing 6000 square miles of sea which had previously been on Scotland's side of the boundary into English waters and along with it a number of oil fields. According to experts in international maritime law that would never have been allowed if it had been a proper negotiation in an international law court between two independent countries.

It seems to me that the question isn't who is going to protect Scotland's coastline and waters from attack by foreign countries, but who is going to protect it from attack by the UK?

We'll be getting that back.

[James310]

I apologise for taking the bait and replying with the personal abuse, but as is evidence above I think people can maybe see why.

Off for that break now.

[Sylar]

I apologise for taking the bait and replying with the personal abuse, but as is evidence above I think people can maybe see why.

Off for that break now.

All the best on your time away James.

Illegitimi non carborundum.

[Fife-Hibee]

In 1999 the UK government re drew the international boundary line between Scotland and England placing 6000 square miles of sea which had previously been on Scotland's side of the boundary into English waters and along with it a number of oil fields. According to experts in international maritime law that would never have been allowed if it had been a proper negotiation in an international law court between two independent countries.

It seems to me that the question isn't who is going to protect Scotland's coastline and waters from attack by foreign countries, but who is going to protect it from attack by the UK?

:top marks

[Curried]

I apologise for taking the bait and replying with the personal abuse, but as is evidence above I think people can maybe see why.

Off for that break now.

I also have to apologise for facilitating the mounds of unionist crap that has been spewed out on this forum without proper administration.

[Fife-Hibee]

I also have to apologise for facilitating the mounds of unionist crap that has been spewed out on this forum without proper administration.

:faf:

[ronaldo7]

All the best on your time away James.

Illegitimi non carborundum.

Ah, a mock-latin aphorism. How very apt. An easy way to avoid the swear filter, and of course the admins. :wink:

[Curried]

You mean deleting the post where you resorted to personal abuse against another poster? If you have a problem with that PM me and we can discuss it. Any more abuse aimed at any poster today though is only going to end one way.

Can you intimate the specif abuse...as it's not clear to me what is the issue?

[marinello59]

Can you intimate the specif abuse...as it's not clear to me what is the issue?

You surely remember what you directed toward another poster? And just look up this thread to see what you directed at me.
This isn’t the place to carry on this discussion, as entertaining as it may be for others. If you want to continue this feel free to PM and I’ll try and answer any serious questions you have as to why your post was deleted.

[Hibbyradge]

Ah, a mock-latin aphorism. How very apt. An easy was to avoid the swear filter, and of course the admins. :wink:

It's only swearing if it's in English.

[ronaldo7]

It's only swearing if it's in English.

It's a big wide world out there, the translator doesn't lie.

[Hibbyradge]

It's a big wide world out there, the translator doesn't lie.

Merde! You got me.

[Moulin Yarns]

You surely remember what you directed toward another poster? And just look up this thread to see what you directed at me.
This isn’t the place to carry on this discussion, as entertaining as it may be for others. If you want to continue this feel free to PM and I’ll try and answer any serious questions you have as to why your post was deleted.


Spoilsport, I was just getting the popcorn 😉

[ronaldo7]

Merde! You got me.

Reported!

[Curried]

Spoilsport, I was just getting the popcorn 😉

Calling an SiU poster a "Fud" and the Admin a "******" is questionably offensive (and i do apologise), but it's no time for popcorn.....This union is under siege and we need to show restraint.:-0

[marinello59]

Calling an SiU poster a "Fud" and the Admin a "******" is questionably offensive (and i do apologise), but it's no time for popcorn.....This union is under siege and we need to show restraint.:-0

You really are just making yourself look foolish now. Perhaps you should go back and read the post I made that you responded to with personal abuse. Feel free to then come back here and apologise for the snidey wee accusation you are making here.

[allmodcons]

I have never heard a Scottish nationalist refer to our version of nationalism as unique. We vigorously 'and rightly' defend ourselves against tired and lazy accusations that our nationalism is based on hatred of any other nation or nations or exceptionalism because for 99.9% of us it isn't no matter how much it suits defenders of the union to infer that it is.

As for the 'victim mentality' … Aye, its all England's fault .. where's the victim mentality going to be when Scotland is independent and we have to take responsibility for our own actions? There's the paradox for you, the movement British nationalists accuse of revelling in a victim mentality and enthusiastically blaming Westminster / the UK / England for all of Scotland's ills exists solely to remove itself from the ability to blame anybody but itself for its decisions and yet according to the folk accusing us of the former we are totally wrong to want the latter … some folk are never happy :greengrin

For my part the biggest lie in the whole debate is folk who enthusiastically defend the union refusing to identify themselves as British nationalists or nationalistic people and all the while using the word 'nationalist' when referring to us ( Scottish nationalists ) with that unspoken and sometimes spoken inference that our nationalism is no different from Hitler's nationalism or Karadzic's nationalism.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it is a duck. Unless you are a British nationalist of course :aok:

Good post. Saves me replying.

[Sylar]

Ah, a mock-latin aphorism. How very apt. An easy way to avoid the swear filter, and of course the admins. :wink:

It's my life motto, passed on to me by my PhD supervisor. It's the only latin I can claim to know :greengrin

[Callum_62]

At the moment one of the positives seem to be the UK gov going all out to drive Scottish independence

With putting forward Bojo for PM and now withdrawing FCO support for our elected FM.....

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Hibrandenburg]

I have never heard a Scottish nationalist refer to our version of nationalism as unique. We vigorously 'and rightly' defend ourselves against tired and lazy accusations that our nationalism is based on hatred of any other nation or nations or exceptionalism because for 99.9% of us it isn't no matter how much it suits defenders of the union to infer that it is.

As for the 'victim mentality' … Aye, its all England's fault .. where's the victim mentality going to be when Scotland is independent and we have to take responsibility for our own actions? There's the paradox for you, the movement British nationalists accuse of revelling in a victim mentality and enthusiastically blaming Westminster / the UK / England for all of Scotland's ills exists solely to remove itself from the ability to blame anybody but itself for its decisions and yet according to the folk accusing us of the former we are totally wrong to want the latter … some folk are never happy :greengrin

For my part the biggest lie in the whole debate is folk who enthusiastically defend the union refusing to identify themselves as British nationalists or nationalistic people and all the while using the word 'nationalist' when referring to us ( Scottish nationalists ) with that unspoken and sometimes spoken inference that our nationalism is no different from Hitler's nationalism or Karadzic's nationalism.

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it is a duck. Unless you are a British nationalist of course :aok:

:applause:

[Hibrandenburg]

Tin hat on here, but I think a case can be made for the Union in relation to the armed forces.

My brother is in the Navy - he is a devout Unionist, I am not.

Defence is his job, and he is convinced that Scottish independence would make defending the UK a greater challenge. It is easier to do with things how they are, and a change would involve a risk and it might be more difficult to defend the coastline of the UK if we had different countries within the UK with different political ideas doing the defending.

The armed forces already do a lot of good work overseas and their ability to do so might be compromised by independence - the current unity may well be greater than the individual parts.

Some of us like to think of the British armed forces being about wars of oil and imperialism and unwanted incursions into Ireland, but there are activities to help out with the migration issue in the Med, all sorts of stuff helping out in the Balkans (with Putin up to his nonsense) that we might not be able to play such an active role in with independence.

This is an unusual point for me to make as a believer in independence but it is the opinion of my brother and I believe it is an opinion that has some merit.

Historically the British military have been caught napping on many occasions. Prior to WW1 and 2 it was years behind tactically and technically to Germany who had made massive improvements in its armed forces. If was just us against them then we would have lost badly. The world is changing and the threat is changing, no longer can we rely on our traditional allies, in fact they may even be a threat. The world is now divided into trading blocks rather than ethnic/cultural allegiances, we've just decided to leave the largest of these blocks who will have to organise their own strategy and defence when push comes to shove and history teaches us it will and that small countries without allegiances are fair game.

[Bristolhibby]

In 1999 the UK government re drew the international boundary line between Scotland and England placing 6000 square miles of sea which had previously been on Scotland's side of the boundary into English waters and along with it a number of oil fields. According to experts in international maritime law that would never have been allowed if it had been a proper negotiation in an international law court between two independent countries.

It seems to me that the question isn't who is going to protect Scotland's coastline and waters from attack by foreign countries, but who is going to protect it from attack by the UK?

I’m sure we will get it all back come Independence. International Maritime Law will be on our side.

J

[G B Young]

Nobody is diluting their efforts. However, you appear to be using WW2 as a positive case for the union. As if we would have somehow been less proud had an independent Scotland participated in the war. It's hard to understand where that thinking comes from.

Saying you're happy to be Scottish AND British is all well and good. But it doesn't add anything of remote substance as to why Scotland should remain in the UK.

It may not add anything of substance but it's a fundamental reason that many voted no in 2014 so it clearly carries significant weight - hard as it clearly is for Scottish nationalists to understand why a fellow Scot could feel that way.

[Fife-Hibee]

It may not add anything of substance but it's a fundamental reason that many voted no in 2014 so it clearly carries significant weight - hard as it clearly is for Scottish nationalists to understand why a fellow Scot could feel that way.

I get the "feeling". Why can't you understand why Scottish nationalists feel the way they do, without jumping to the assumption that it's some kind of inherent evil?

We don't need to hide behind feeling though. We have good solid logical arguments for wanting Scotland to leave the UK. Feeling alone will not save the UK. Even you must surely accept that it's only a matter of time.

[Bristolhibby]

Tin hat on here, but I think a case can be made for the Union in relation to the armed forces.

My brother is in the Navy - he is a devout Unionist, I am not.

Defence is his job, and he is convinced that Scottish independence would make defending the UK a greater challenge. It is easier to do with things how they are, and a change would involve a risk and it might be more difficult to defend the coastline of the UK if we had different countries within the UK with different political ideas doing the defending.

The armed forces already do a lot of good work overseas and their ability to do so might be compromised by independence - the current unity may well be greater than the individual parts.

Some of us like to think of the British armed forces being about wars of oil and imperialism and unwanted incursions into Ireland, but there are activities to help out with the migration issue in the Med, all sorts of stuff helping out in the Balkans (with Putin up to his nonsense) that we might not be able to play such an active role in with independence.

This is an unusual point for me to make as a believer in independence but it is the opinion of my brother and I believe it is an opinion that has some merit.

I’m sure Scotland will be able to defend herself come Independence. Like say for example Ireland defends herself.

I’d imagine being a key member of NATO would be part of our Defence strategy. The combined protection of other NATO allies (including the Rump of the U.K.) who would come to our aid if attacked.

Similarly bases like Faslane will be worth their weight in gold not just to the Scottish Defence Force but any friendly allies, a port in the North Atlantic.

The military are by definition Conservative. Their whole system is built on hierarchy and following (and giving) orders. I don’t mean this as any offence, but they naturally and literally defend the status quo.

J

[Bristolhibby]

It may not add anything of substance but it's a fundamental reason that many voted no in 2014 so it clearly carries significant weight - hard as it clearly is for Scottish nationalists to understand why a fellow Scot could feel that way.

It’s a funny one, this feeling.

I live and work in England. My wife is English and my kids half English.

I was born in England (Dad was in the Navy) yet in no way do I feel English.

I don’t really feel British. Although I know technically I am. I am Scottish and feel Scottish. I know I live and am from the Island of Great Britain, but I just don’t feel British. I have no British Patriotism, would never belt out “God Save the Queen”, and generally pretty aghast in the direction of travel.

It’s a weird one. But I find it difficult to empathise with this dual hat (Scottish & British) feeling. I know people have it, and as said, I’d imagine for a lot of people it was the overriding factor for voting no in 2014.

I wonder if this is eroding as younger people see what a Horlicks England is making of Britain. When that comfort blanket of feeling will eventually give way. Because the British Government in no way is giving consideration to what Scotland thinks.

For me having a Trump Card to play in the form of Independence is massive. Just need to have the feeling that it’s the right time to use it.

J

[JeMeSouviens]

It's my life motto, passed on to me by my PhD supervisor. It's the only latin I can claim to know :greengrin

Veni vidi vici (exuberantia)

[JeMeSouviens]

Oh I certainly agree with the premise that at any time in history there will be powerful groups with vested interests who seek to influence the politicking of their day. Although in 1707 I’m not sure the general population would have much of an inkling about what the Act Of Union was or meant or how it affected their day-to-day life.

In the spirit of non-partisanship, I think I referenced this before and will do so again - I’d heartily recommend the book ‘Britons’ by Linda Colley, which applies an academic approach to how the notion of ‘Britain’ and ‘Britishness’ came about, because in itself it is only a few hundred years old.

Her well-researched work identifies three key elements that shaped thinking from the 17th century through to the beginning of the 19th century, namely war, religion and trade.

War was the existential threat or perceived threat of invasion and sunbjugation mostly by the French. Religion was the impact of the Reformation, not unlinked to the threat of war with Catholic countries. And trade was the boom that Britain (and it was Britain) entered into, with machinisation, the Industrial Revolution and the British Empire and army and navy providing the capacity and security for massive profits. It’s no coincidence that the coastal west of Great Britain, from Bristol up to Paisley, has no shortage of outstanding 19th century architecture, built from trade profits, whether honest or immoral.

Anyway, not sure that’s a relevant argument for the union here and now :greengrin

It’s interesting because the contemporary accounts of the public reaction to the union in 1707 are all negative, rioting in the streets etc so the received wisdom is that it was deeply unpopular. But ... if you were compiling accounts of 2014, mass rallies in George sq etc you’d probably surmise that indy was a shoo in. (sob)

[The Modfather]

the positives of being part of the United Kingdom don't simply come down to something as clinical as a cost-benefit analysis. It's about more than than that. It's about identity



I find nationalism in all its forms repellent


Does the first quote not contradict the second quote, it very much sounds like you are describing nationalism, in this example British nationalism. As it is, I don't think there's anything wrong with nationalism/patriotism, be it Scottish or British. As long as it's not the toxic nationalism, which we've all seen examples of on both sides, and is inclusive.

As an aside, this is my first ever attempt at a multi-quote so here's hoping this Luddite has been brought into the digital age :greengrin

[JeMeSouviens]

The reasons for the union were:

- security for England’s northern border
- trade access to England (and the nascent empire) for Scotland
- an agreed protestant succession

The last is pretty irrelevant now (hopefully non-controversial!)

The other 2 have been superseded by nato and the eu, imo.

All that’s left holding the UK together are

- the UK’s need to save face (seems bizarre given Brexit but ...) and -
- desperation to continue as a nuclear power and hence the need to have somewhere to keep trident.
- Risk/reward consideration (financially) by Scots
- a certain amount of sentimental attachment to Britain, particularly among older people

It’s hard to see something coming that will reverse Scotland back up the slippery slope. It seems to me that Unionist strategy now is to hope for economic catastrophe and an emaciated Scotland too scared to go it alone.

[Mibbes Aye]

It’s interesting because the contemporary accounts of the public reaction to the union in 1707 are all negative, rioting in the streets etc so the received wisdom is that it was deeply unpopular. But ... if you were compiling accounts of 2014, mass rallies in George sq etc you’d probably surmise that indy was a shoo in. (sob)

The Act of Union was a long time coming and I’m fairly certain James Vi of Scotland (James I) promoted it as a means of securing Scottish interests but it was rejected twice by English Parliament?

Likewise, I think through the lead-up in the 17th century there was also resentment at times in Scotland, especially when it felt like England was opposing a customs union?

I think it’s safe to say it was a very complex process that was dealing with multiple dynamics that involved the relationship between constitutional power and monarchy; trade and business interests; factional power within the various power blocs in both countries, overshadowed or informed by the big, big factors - the existential threat of war with continental nations; the impact of the Reformation; and the growing realisation that vast profits could be made from easing trade barriers and having a strong army and navy to secure trading.

I’m in no doubt that public reaction was as susceptible to manipulation by polemic and rhetoric as it is now, and as it always has been. At the end of the day people generally got on with it and there wasn’t the kind of revolutionary activity that almost seems a natural consequence in other societies?

[Mibbes Aye]

Does the first quote not contradict the second quote, it very much sounds like you are describing nationalism, in this example British nationalism. As it is, I don't think there's anything wrong with nationalism/patriotism, be it Scottish or British. As long as it's not the toxic nationalism, which we've all seen examples of on both sides, and is inclusive.

As an aside, this is my first ever attempt at a multi-quote so here's hoping this Luddite has been brought into the digital age :greengrin

You did well on the multiquote :greengrin

I have made my views clear on nationalism and hopefully made clear that I’m no lover of unionism.

I don’t think you can call a unionist a British nationalist though.

We wouldn’t call an EU Remainer an EU nationalist, that would be sort of nonsensical.

I voted for remaining in the European Union. If that makes me a unionist I will have to suck it up I guess, but I’m fairly certain that doesn’t logically extend to me being a European nationalist (if nothing else because that feels ridiculous).

By the same token, folk who support the union in these isles can’t necessarily be described as British nationalists, that doesn’t follow.

[Mibbes Aye]

The reasons for the union were:

- security for England’s northern border
- trade access to England (and the nascent empire) for Scotland
- an agreed protestant succession

The last is pretty irrelevant now (hopefully non-controversial!)

The other 2 have been superseded by nato and the eu, imo.

All that’s left holding the UK together are

- the UK’s need to save face (seems bizarre given Brexit but ...) and -
- desperation to continue as a nuclear power and hence the need to have somewhere to keep trident.
- Risk/reward consideration (financially) by Scots
- a certain amount of sentimental attachment to Britain, particularly among older people

It’s hard to see something coming that will reverse Scotland back up the slippery slope. It seems to me that Unionist strategy now is to hope for economic catastrophe and an emaciated Scotland too scared to go it alone.

You know I respect you, but so much of that is very subjective and loaded.

Objective arguments will far more likely win over soft ‘no’s or indeed people like me who think either current alternative is **** but would vote pragmatically.

It is the route to getting your Yes vote.

[The Modfather]

You did well on the multiquote :greengrin

I have made my views clear on nationalism and hopefully made clear that I’m no lover of unionism.

I don’t think you can call a unionist a British nationalist though.

We wouldn’t call an EU Remainer an EU nationalist, that would be sort of nonsensical.

I voted for remaining in the European Union. If that makes me a unionist I will have to suck it up I guess, but I’m fairly certain that doesn’t logically extend to me being a European nationalist (if nothing else because that feels ridiculous).

By the same token, folk who support the union in these isles can’t necessarily be described as British nationalists, that doesn’t follow.

Fair points, particularly the EU nationalist bit as that does contradict my own thought process. However the the bit of the quote about “it being about identity” very much sounded like nationalism. Which I hopefully went on to counter that if it was nationalism I didn’t necessarily think it was a bad feeling to have.

[Mibbes Aye]

Fair points, particularly the EU nationalist bit as that does contradict my own thought process. However the the bit of the quote about “it being about identity” very much sounded like nationalism. Which I hopefully went on to counter that if it was nationalism I didn’t necessarily think it was a bad feeling to have.

Yeah, I get what you’re saying.

I think it all gets very complex when we start talking about words like identity and nation and so on, because everyone has their own, entirely valid stance about what it means to them and it shifts.

I know my sense of identity, as I would define it, has shifted a lot over my life and my political views have also shifted to some degree.

And you are right, identity can be conflated with nationalism very easily, and in the wrong hands identity can be subsumed into all sorts of agendas.

I vaguely remember a class exercise when I was at university, a long time ago now, where you had to write down the first twenty things that would follow on from you saying “I am a ......”.

Instinctively, and maybe best for the exercise though not best for self-awareness, everyone tended to go with nouns rather than adjective-nouns.

It was fascinating in recognising how you saw yourself and how others saw themselves.

[Smartie]

There is a lot of talk of nationalism these days. Those who tend to object to it the most are normally nationalists who simply prefer the nationalism of a different nation or union and are highly hypocritical.

I am, of course, a hypocrite myself in that I am simultaneously a nationalist and deeply suspicious of nationalism.

In fairness to Mibbes Aye, he has clearly stated his stance on nationalism on here before and it is reasonable, sensible and consistent. For starters, he doesn't have a national flag as his avatar, preaching about having his identity taken away whilst denouncing nationalism.

[G B Young]

I get the "feeling". Why can't you understand why Scottish nationalists feel the way they do, without jumping to the assumption that it's some kind of inherent evil?

We don't need to hide behind feeling though. We have good solid logical arguments for wanting Scotland to leave the UK. Feeling alone will not save the UK. Even you must surely accept that it's only a matter of time.

I accept and respect that the raison d'etre of the SNP and Scottish nationalists is to see Scotland become an independent nation. There's no assumption of inherent evil on my part, just a simple disagreement that theirs is Scotland's only authentic voice.

And no, I don't accept that independence is only a matter of time. Nobody can say that with any certainty. Pretty much the only thing any of us must accept is only a matter of time is our ultimate demise.

[Ozyhibby]

I accept and respect that the raison d'etre of the SNP and Scottish nationalists is to see Scotland become an independent nation. There's no assumption of inherent evil on my part, just a simple disagreement that theirs is Scotland's only authentic voice.

And no, I don't accept that independence is only a matter of time. Nobody can say that with any certainty. Pretty much the only thing any of us must accept is only a matter of time is our ultimate demise.

There is no inevitability about independence but I do feel it’s the direction of travel.
There are lots of reasons for this and they are not all here in Scotland.
One of the big reasons for voting no last time was to avoid the risk, whether real or imagined, of change. People have houses and mortgages etc and worry about losing something more than the opportunity to gain something. It’s entirely understandable.
However, as time goes by, the generation coming up now won’t have as much to risk. They haven’t been able to buy houses now for 11 years. So far they are pretty calm about it but soon they will begin to resent it. And they will look for a way to protest. And if you have no equity, then you will have less to lose (I don’t believe there is a risk of loss) in voting for change.
It will happen in England as well. Who knows how it will manifest itself there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mibbes Aye]

There is no inevitability about independence but I do feel it’s the direction of travel.
There are lots of reasons for this and they are not all here in Scotland.
One of the big reasons for voting no last time was to avoid the risk, whether real or imagined, of change. People have houses and mortgages etc and worry about losing something more than the opportunity to gain something. It’s entirely understandable.
However, as time goes by, the generation coming up now won’t have as much to risk. They haven’t been able to buy houses now for 11 years. So far they are pretty calm about it but soon they will begin to resent it. And they will look for a way to protest. And if you have no equity, then you will have less to lose (I don’t believe there is a risk of loss) in voting for change.
It will happen in England as well. Who knows how it will manifest itself there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That’s an interesting point about generational attitude shift, food for thought.

[lord bunberry]

The positives are clear, we don’t have the means to make it on our own according to the man who makes a living on prostituting himself on the back of the death of his former employer :rolleyes:
https://twitter.com/robdunsmore/status/1143564382225481729?s=21

[Fife-Hibee]

I accept and respect that the raison d'etre of the SNP and Scottish nationalists is to see Scotland become an independent nation. There's no assumption of inherent evil on my part, just a simple disagreement that theirs is Scotland's only authentic voice.

And no, I don't accept that independence is only a matter of time. Nobody can say that with any certainty. Pretty much the only thing any of us must accept is only a matter of time is our ultimate demise.

If the only remaining argument for unionism in Scotland is a sense of feeling or identity, that's not going to mean much to very many people when they start feeling the hit in their pockets.

Identity comes at a price and if that price becomes too much to bare, people will happily take on a new sense of identity.

[Slavers]

If the only remaining argument for unionism in Scotland is a sense of feeling or identity, that's not going to mean much to very many people when they start feeling the hit in their pockets.

Identity comes at a price and if that price becomes too much to bare, people will happily take on a new sense of identity.

These are wild delusional slavers!

So what price will you start identifying as an Englishman?

[Fife-Hibee]

These are wild delusional slavers!

So what price will you start identifying as an Englishman?

Not at any price. The real question is, at what price will certain people in Scotland stop falsley identifying themselves as Englishman? :wink:

[Slavers]

Not at any price. The real question is, at what price will certain people in Scotland stop falsley identifying themselves as Englishman? :wink:

If identity comes at a price, what makes you any different?

If things get really tough on your pocket post Indy Scotland then there will come a time when you think times are so tough the Irn Bru no longer tastes so sweet! Sod this being Scottish lark it's too darn tough, I'm now self-identifying as a Englishman from Yorkshire, now where is my tea and how look big my hands are! I'm a proper Yorkshire man now bygum!!

All it will take is a certain level of hardship and you will turn your back on your Scottish national identity and will referring to your old self as a sweaty sock!

[Fife-Hibee]

If identity comes at a price, what makes you any different?

If things get really tough on your pocket post Indy Scotland then there will come a time when you think times are so tough the Irn Bru no longer tastes so sweet! Sod this being Scottish lark it's too darn tough, I'm now self-identifying as a Englishman from Yorkshire, now where is my tea and how look big my hands are! I'm a proper Yorkshire man now bygum!!

All it will take is a certain level of hardship and you will turn your back on your Scottish national identity and will referring to your old self as a sweaty sock!

Irn Bru doesn't taste so sweet anymore, it tastes like chemicals now and that's with Scotland in the UK. :wink:

That may well turn out to be the case. But we'll never know one way or another unless we actually try? Why stick with a broken system out of the fear of a different system being broken, but with the possibility of it being better?

[Slavers]

Irn Bru doesn't taste so sweet anymore, it tastes like chemicals now and that's with Scotland in the UK. :wink:

That may well turn out to be the case. But we'll never know one way or another unless we actually try? Why stick with a broken system out of the fear of a different system being broken, but with the possibility of it being better?

Simply because for most the UK brings a good quality of life and people many people feel they are british at heart.

You need to sell a vision of what independent Scotland looks like and how much better it will be than the current arrangement we have.

Saying we won't know until we Give it a try just doesn't sell the dream.

If all the new Indy Scotland has to offer is a bigger welfare state then that's not going to change people's minds.

The greviences and victimhood of the SNP only have so much traction.

[Fife-Hibee]

Simply because for most the UK brings a good quality of life and people many people feel they are british at heart.

You need to sell a vision of what independent Scotland looks like and how much better it will be than the current arrangement we have.

Saying we won't know until we Give it a try just doesn't sell the dream.

If all the new Indy Scotland has to offer is a bigger welfare state then that's not going to change people's minds.

The greviences and victimhood of the SNP only have so much traction.

You want a vision of what an independent Scotland will look like. But are happy to remain in a UK with no clear vision of what it's future is going to look like out of the EU with dodgy trade deals with the US putting our NHS and food standards at risk.

Surely the vision of having control over our own affairs is enough at this point? Considering the decisions being made on our behalf by a UK Government Scotland doesn't elect aren't very good ones.

[Slavers]

You want a vision of what an independent Scotland will look like. But are happy to remain in a UK with no clear vision of what it's future is going to look like out of the EU with dodgy trade deals with the US putting our NHS and food standards at risk.

Surely the vision of having control over our own affairs is enough at this point? Considering the decisions being made on our behalf by a UK Government Scotland doesn't elect aren't very good ones.

Yes I do! If you can continually paint a picture of bleak dark times ahead for the UK then I'm sure you can come up with some ideas for an independent Scotland.

Try leaving out the negativity and grievance towards the UK in your vision.

[Fife-Hibee]

Yes I do! If you can continually paint a picture of bleak dark times ahead for the UK then I'm sure you can come up with some ideas for an independent Scotland.

Try leaving out the negativity and grievance towards the UK in your vision.

Well here's one for you. Protecting our NHS, public services, food standards and our relationship with our European friends. Not accepting dodgy trade deals with Trump. A man who said every deal he would make, would be to serve American interests.

I'm not "painting a picture" either. The paint is already bone dry on the canvas. The UK is selling out to US interests out of sheer desperation. It's not an if, but or maybe. It's actually happening right now.

[Slavers]

Well here's one for you. Protecting our NHS, public services, food standards and our relationship with our European friends. Not accepting dodgy trade deals with Trump. A man who said every deal he would make, would be to serve American interests.

I'm not "painting a picture" either. The paint is already bone dry on the canvas. The UK is selling out to US interests out of sheer desperation. It's not an if, but or maybe. It's actually happening right now.

How does austerity caused by independence help protect the NHS?

What about the friendship between our closest allies and friends in the UK, do you not think that relationship will be damaged by breaking up the UK? Do you care?

Trump is short term and independence is long term why conflate the two! What if the next US leader is more agreeable?

As I said to most people the UK treats them well and provides opportunities, you see it as the eternal hell.

[G B Young]

How does austerity caused by independence help protect the NHS?

What about the friendship between our closest allies and friends in the UK, do you not think that relationship will be damaged by breaking up the UK? Do you care?

Trump is short term and independence is long term why conflate the two! What if the next US leader is more agreeable?

As I said to most people the UK treats them well and provides opportunities, you see it as the eternal hell.

Indeed. You could say the same about Boris Johnson should he become PM.

I agree that the way the SNP portrays being part of the UK as some sort tyrannical oppression or Westminster dictatorship is way off how a great many Scots see it. With our heavily devolved parliament (one that was brought into being on a wave of goodwill as opposed to the ongoing legacy of bitterness which surrounded the 2014 referendum) I've never really understood the rage of those who feel Scotland's voice isn't heard.

[G B Young]

If the only remaining argument for unionism in Scotland is a sense of feeling or identity, that's not going to mean much to very many people when they start feeling the hit in their pockets.

Identity comes at a price and if that price becomes too much to bare, people will happily take on a new sense of identity.

I can't agree that identity is a commodity that can be bought and sold and I certainly wouldn't 'happily' take a new one on should we ever leave the union. Identity is innate and heartfelt. For example, had Mercer's takeover succeeded nearly 30 years ago, the absence of Hibs in my life might have saved me a lot of money (not to mention reduced my stress levels!) but I can't imagine I'd have happily embraced another team.

In saying that, while I would leave the union against my will, I would accept it should such a thing come to pass in a democratic manner - as I would have had the result gone the other way in 2014. While I never expected the SNP to simply shrug and say 'ach well we lost, that's us stuck with the union forever', their graceless determination to present that result as somehow wrong is what riles so many who voted no. The fact the Scottish people made a clear determination about their future does not seem to count. They come across like a golfer who demands a mulligan every time they duff their tee shot. How much credence, I've often wondered, would the SNP accord to no voters had they kept demanding a new referendum to rejoin the union had the yes vote held sway five years ago? Probably about as much credence as they accord the million plus Scots (including a significant number of SNP voters) who voted in favour of Brexit. They're very selective about which minorities deserve their acknowledgement (and I say that as a remain voter).

[The Modfather]

I can't agree that identity is a commodity that can be bought and sold and I certainly wouldn't 'happily' take a new one on should we ever leave the union. Identity is innate and heartfelt. For example, had Mercer's takeover succeeded nearly 30 years ago, the absence of Hibs in my life might have saved me a lot of money (not to mention reduced my stress levels!) but I can't imagine I'd have happily embraced another team.

In saying that, while I would leave the union against my will, I would accept it should such a thing come to pass in a democratic manner - as I would have had the result gone the other way in 2014. While I never expected the SNP to simply shrug and say 'ach well we lost, that's us stuck with the union forever', their graceless determination to present that result as somehow wrong is what riles so many who voted no. The fact the Scottish people made a clear determination about their future does not seem to count. They come across like a golfer who demands a mulligan every time they duff their tee shot. How much credence, I've often wondered, would the SNP accord to no voters had they kept demanding a new referendum to rejoin the union had the yes vote held sway five years ago? Probably about as much credence as they accord the million plus Scots (including a significant number of SNP voters) who voted in favour of Brexit. They're very selective about which minorities deserve their acknowledgement (and I say that as a remain voter).

You do realise that the SNP have to be voted in to power and that Independence and the SNP are not the same thing. So if Scotland was to become independent and a pro union party campaigning on a referendum to re-join the union was voted in we would then be debating about re-joining the union

[Hibbyradge]

Well here's one for you. Protecting our NHS, public services, food standards and our relationship with our European friends. Not accepting dodgy trade deals with Trump. A man who said every deal he would make, would be to serve American interests.

I'm not "painting a picture" either. The paint is already bone dry on the canvas. The UK is selling out to US interests out of sheer desperation. It's not an if, but or maybe. It's actually happening right now.

You sound like Tornadoes70.

Mon Labour.

[G B Young]

You do realise that the SNP have to be voted in to power and that Independence and the SNP are not the same thing. So if Scotland was to become independent and a pro union party campaigning on a referendum to re-join the union was voted in we would then be debating about re-joining the union

Wouldn't that be fun? :wink:

Given how long it would likely take to implement independence and then, in the scenario you suggest, start the process of un-implementing it I think we'd have all lost the will to live. The fallout from the 2014 and 2016 referendums has been enough to last anyone a lifetime...

I must admit, though, that there's a certain irony in my stance on the union given that I suspect a more moderate yet modern-thinking Scottish Conservative party led by Ruth Davidson might actually fare rather well in an independent Scotland. I'd hope they wouldn't simply emulate the SNP's relentless foot-stomping approach by immediately agitating for a fresh referendum to take us back into the union.

Where would it all leave the Labour party in Scotland? A spent force I suspect (which they arguably are already).

[StevieC]

As I said to most people the UK treats them well and provides opportunities.

What makes you think this would change if Scotland became Independent?

The rhetoric for Brexit has been that we will still get all the trade benefits

[Moulin Yarns]

Wouldn't that be fun? :wink:

Given how long it would likely take to implement independence and then, in the scenario you suggest, start the process of un-implementing it I think we'd have all lost the will to live. The fallout from the 2014 and 2016 referendums has been enough to last anyone a lifetime...

I must admit, though, that there's a certain irony in my stance on the union given that I suspect a more moderate yet modern-thinking Scottish Conservative party led by Ruth Davidson might actually fare rather well in an independent Scotland. I'd hope they wouldn't simply emulate the SNP's relentless foot-stomping approach by immediately agitating for a fresh referendum to take us back into the union.

Where would it all leave the Labour party in Scotland? A spent force I suspect (which they arguably are already).

A Ruth led 'Scottish' Conservative party would probably find they have more power than if it was a bit part of the Boris led party and could be the largest party in Holyrood.

[Jack]

A Ruth led 'Scottish' Conservative party would probably find they have more power than if it was a bit part of the Boris led party and could be the largest party in Holyrood.

Yeah, they might find themselves a day job rather than just reading out memos from London.

[Ozyhibby]

The hardest thing about brexit is the future trade relationship.
Brexit will tell us exactly what we need to know about the future trade relationship with the rest of the uk. Whatever happens with NI is what will happen with Scotland. All the rest is fairly straightforward.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JeMeSouviens]

The hardest thing about brexit is the future trade relationship.
Brexit will tell us exactly what we need to know about the future trade relationship with the rest of the uk. Whatever happens with NI is what will happen with Scotland. All the rest is fairly straightforward.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

RoI ?

[Ozyhibby]

RoI ?

Yes, sorry, I meant whatever happens with that border is what the future trading relationship an independent Scotland in the EU will have.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fife-Hibee]

The fact the Scottish people made a clear determination about their future does not seem to count.

Well clearly it does count, because we're still in the UK. Unless i've missed something? :confused:

The problem here is that people who were told what they could expect in 2014 if they voted NO are getting something completely different now. (Even although many are pretending like they expected this) So even although the vote in 2014 DID count, as we're still in the UK. The SNPs push for a 2nd independence referendum is hardly misplaced.

Unless of course you think blatant lying and false promises are fair game in this equal family of nations of ours?

[Slavers]

Well clearly it does count, because we're still in the UK. Unless i've missed something? :confused:

The problem here is that people who were told what they could expect in 2014 if they voted NO are getting something completely different now. (Even although many are pretending like they expected this) So even although the vote in 2014 DID count, as we're still in the UK. The SNPs push for a 2nd independence referendum is hardly misplaced.

Unless of course you think blatant lying and false promises are fair game in this equal family of nations of ours?

Sorry to chime in here but the SNP done the very same thing, they told all that oil would trade at $133 a barrel and everything would be rosey!

It traded at less than half that price and Scotland's economy would have been devastated by it. Granted we could survive but severe cuts would have been made to public spending but that's ok in your book, everyone else are big fat liars deceiving the public but definitely not the SNP.