We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Why doesn't Cameron want Scottish Independence?
Comments
-
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »I'm quite happy to retain "Scotland", although I could argue that it was an English name.
It might not be your decision, though.
There are rumours that the SNP will want to make a complete break and go for a totally new name for the country.
The rumours also indicate that the Scots are so passionate about football, they may wish to incorporate this love into the name, and also recognise heroes like Ally McCoist and his classic hat trick in the 1983 Scottish Cup Final.
I don't like to 'leak' it, but I have inside information that the current working name is:
Supergaelicagilehattricksexpertallyshowsus0 -
The Romans called the inhabitants north of the wall Picti. The Scotii were the inhabitants of Ireland.
Scotland became Scotland when the Gaelic-speaking Kenneth Mac Alpin seized the throne in Perth from its English-speaking occupants. The place was called Scotland, in English, to indicate that it was now ruled by foreigners - like the Danelaw, or Normandy, or British Honduras.
Unfortunately the Picts and Gaels did not form the borders as we know them and is regarded as people who spoke the Pictish language as opposed to the Gaels (Both Scottish and Irish) who spoke versions of Gaelic
Whilst there seems to be some cross over from Scotland and Ireland, the Etymology of Scotland states: -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etymology_of_ScotlandThe name of Scotland is derived from the Latin Scoti, the term applied to Gaels. The origin of the word Scoti (or Scotti) is uncertain. It is found in Latin texts from the fourth century describing a tribe which sailed from Ireland to raid Roman Britain.[3] It came to be applied to all the Gaels. It is not believed that any Gaelic groups called themselves Scoti in ancient times, except when writing in Latin.[3] Oman derives it from Scuit, proposing a meaning of 'a man cut off', suggesting that a Scuit was not a Gael as such but one of a renagade band settled in the part of Ulster which became the kingdom of D!l Riata [4] but 'Scuit' only exists in Old Irish as 'buffoon/laughing-stock'[1]. The 19th century author Aonghas MacCoinnich of Glasgow proposed that Scoti was derived from a Gaelic ethnonym (proposed by MacCoinnich) Sgaothaich from sgaoth "swarm", plus the derivational suffix -ach (plural -aich)[5] However, this proposal to date has not appeared in mainstream place-name studies.
The Late Latin word Scotia (land of the Scot(t)i), although initially used to refer to Ireland, by the 11th century at the latest was being used to refer to (Gaelic-speaking) Scotland north of the river Forth. Some of the earliest surviving documents to mention the word Scotland include the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles of Abingdon, Worcester and Laud, written during the 11th Century, which state that prior to the Battle of Stamford Bridge in 1066, Earl Tostig had sought refuge in Scotland under the protection of Malcolm III, King of Scots.[6][7] 'Scotland' was employed alongside Albania or Albany, from the Gaelic Alba.[8] The use of the words Scots and Scotland to encompass all of what is now Scotland became common only in the Late Middle Ages.[9]:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
Loughton_Monkey wrote: »It might not be your decision, though.
There are rumours that the SNP will want to make a complete break and go for a totally new name for the country.
The rumours also indicate that the Scots are so passionate about football, they may wish to incorporate this love into the name, and also recognise heroes like Ally McCoist and his classic hat trick in the 1983 Scottish Cup Final.
I don't like to 'leak' it, but I have inside information that the current working name is:
Supergaelicagilehattricksexpertallyshowsus
Of course it's not my decision.
I like your humour, although your facts are horendously wrong.
1983 was a fantastic year in Scottish football with Aberdeen overcoming Bayern Munich in the quarter finals before beating Real Madrid in the final of the European Cup Winners Cup.
The smae team lead by Sir Alex Ferguson went on to win the Scttish cup beating the now deposed Rangers 1-0 in the final:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »I mean I would rather hear from politicians on what they are going to do and how they are funding it rather than negative campaigining
For me, when politicians start negative campaigining it's because they have nothing worthwhile to portray themselves.
If a poitician used their air time proactively, and concentrated on promoting their own positive agenda then they'd get much more respect from me.
If I were standing against a minister where there was a negative campaign ensuing, I would merely say something along the lines of "Ok, let's move on from said MP's change in stance, I'd like to discuss what we would like to deliver to the electorate"
The problem in this country is we like to focus on the negatives and not the positives as it apparently makes "better news"
This week it's Alec Salmond / Nicola Sturgeon.
Last week it was Andrew Mitchell
Before that David Wilshire
And Theresa May
George Osbourne
The two Ed's
Baroness Warsi
etc
etc
etc
Move on quickly from negative politics and emphasize positive politics for increased respect.
so positive campaigning is good - i agree.
but what happens when positive campaigning crosses over into lying. i.e. the SNP suggesting to the electorate that they have legal advice supporting their position that an independent scotland will be able to cherry pick the bits of the EU that it wants and could therefore joint the EU without adopting the Euro. this is pretty fundamental to the SNP's overarching position on indepedence and they have been fundamentally dishonest in a material particular.
i would say it's rather important for the other parties (and the press) to point this out and make sure the electorate understands it. what would you have them do? ignore it and instead just set out some positive reasons for retaining the union?
further, it's not like the SNP has avoided negative politics in the past is it!! creating a westminster bogeyman to scare the electorate with is hardly positive!
surely it is the job of the opposing parties (and the media) to point out that0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »....I like your humour, although your facts are horendously wrong.
Ye Gods Man!!!!!
We're talking about Scotland here, land of the SNP, Ally Salmon, and the odious Nicola Sturgeon. As they well know, facts have nothing whatsoever to do with it!0 -
Loughton_Monkey wrote: »Ye Gods Man!!!!!
We're talking about Scotland here, land of the SNP, Ally Salmon, and the odious Nicola Sturgeon. As they well know, facts have nothing whatsoever to do with it!
Now listen here.
SNP, Alec Salmond, Nicola Sturgeon are one thing (you missed Kenny MacKaskill by the way who I particular have distrust with over the Al Megrahi release) but......
You try to suggest that Super Sally McCoist scored a hat trick in the Scottish Cup final in 1983, taking victory away from my beloved Aberdeen....... Now that takes the bisuit.
I'm almost at a point of slapping you across your face and asking you to a duel good sir.:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
chewmylegoff wrote: »so positive campaigning is good - i agree.
but what happens when positive campaigning crosses over into lying. i.e. the SNP suggesting to the electorate that they have legal advice supporting their position that an independent scotland will be able to cherry pick the bits of the EU that it wants and could therefore joint the EU without adopting the Euro. this is pretty fundamental to the SNP's overarching position on indepedence and they have been fundamentally dishonest in a material particular.
Personally, whether or not they sought legal advice is internal workings in my opinion and something that I'm not bothered with.
Similar to Kiss and tell stories, it's no news to me.
Frankly most politicians appear to be the same which is why I'm looking for someone to step out of the box and talk about what they have / can deliver.
If an MP does something illegal, then yes, prosecute them and throw the book at them.
I'm just not interested in internal workings and hate opposition angling to try and get a hook into negative politics.chewmylegoff wrote: »i would say it's rather important for the other parties (and the press) to point this out and make sure the electorate understands it. what would you have them do? ignore it and instead just set out some positive reasons for retaining the union?
That would be nice.
What are the positives for retaining the Union?chewmylegoff wrote: »further, it's not like the SNP has avoided negative politics in the past is it!! creating a westminster bogeyman to scare the electorate with is hardly positive!
I don;t think the SNP "created a westminster bogeyman" to scare the electorate.
They have been able to deliver on many promises since they bacome the major powerin Scotland.
Possibly they tried negative politics in the past to follow the lead of pointing out the other parties failures.
To be honest, there is a case of pointing out what was not delivered as promised and the party should have to be accountable / justify.
I wouldn't hold any grudge against historical negative campaigning by any party. I'm just reitterating that any MP from any party who was to focus on positive policy campaigning would gather my respect.chewmylegoff wrote: »surely it is the job of the opposing parties (and the media) to point out that
Like I said, negative campaigning is an attempt to derail others rather than show that you have a better track to ride on.
They're effectively saying that they cannot argue on better policies and win from that stance.:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »....I'm almost at a point of slapping you across your face and asking you to a duel good sir.
You're on.
Wet fish at dawn it is good sir. I suggest Salmon.0 -
Wouldn't it be better for the EU to 'remind' all countries and potential new states (as a result of secession included) what the rules are regarding joining the "EU club".
After all, they will have final say on the matter, not Mr Salmond or any of his colleagues.
Scottish voters (and English for that matter) might finally get vfm out of their MEPs, by getting them to explain this EU reminder.0 -
Wouldn't it be better for the EU to 'remind' all countries and potential new states (as a result of secession included) what the rules are regarding joining the "EU club"...
Good idea. In case they don't do it, here they are:- Net borrowing as % of GDP not to exceed 20% [special exceptions granted for minor variations up to 220%]
- Be in possession of a valid Visa Debit or Credit card (American Express not accepted).
- Currency fluctuation (against the €) to have stayed with a 5% tolerance every year over the last 5 years [or exception may be granted providing it is less than 500%]
- Be willing to sign 3,459 documents agreeing to various conventions such as the straightness of bananas, the variety of tomatoes grown, and the size/shape of the brake light on Honda Civics....
- Agree to be bound by decisions made in Brussels, Basle, the European Court of Human Rights, Strasbourg, or indeed anywhere within 24 hours tank drive from Berlin.
- Don't rock the European boat.
- P1$$ out of the tent, and not in it.
- Membership benefits (such as cheap loans) are subject to credit checks. Interest rates can go up or down. Benfits may be withdrawn at any time.
- For legal reasons, membership not available in Scotland.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards