Will RoUK really give up some of its financial freedom to the independant Scots?

MFW_ASAP

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

It's taken a long time to get where we are and I fear that ironically, the people of Scotland will be too conservative for change.

Or they'll be too sensible, depending on which side of the fence you're stood.

Just because the Scots voted in Nationalists into a Scottish Parliament, it doesn't necessarily mean they agree with the Nationalist agenda.

In our area, people tend to vote Liberal Democrat in local elections, because they feel they run the local councils well. They certainly wouldn't vote for them in a national election because they feel it'd be ruinous to the country. I (and many others) voted Green several years ago as a protest vote, which worked because a lot of mainstream parties took note and added some environmentalist policies. I would have been appalled if the Greens got enough votes to form a government.

Graham_Devon

Well I voted lib dems in the last general election....

And got my just deserts!! Sadly!

IveSeenTheLight

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Well I voted lib dems in the last general election....

And got my just deserts!! Sadly!

Out of interest, would you be willing to share who you would vote for if there was an election tomorrow?

antrobus

adouglasmhor wrote: »

There were American Whigs as well, Lincoln was a Whig.

There was an American Whig Party. I think it split over the question of slavery. The anti-slavers including Mr Lincoln went on to form the Republican Party.

antrobus

MFW_ASAP wrote: »

I think you've missed my point (deliberately)?

The SNP moan that the Scots have a Conservative government 'forced' on them, even though they don't vote for them. Scotland represents between 4% and 8% of the UK population....

"Between 4% and 8%"? Is there some doubt about how many people there are in Scotland?

For the record I think it's more like 8%.:)

MFW_ASAP wrote: »

The Highlands and islands, by your account, represent 4.23% of Scotland, which is a similar enough percentage to make the comparison. If none of these vote for independence, they might have it forced on them by the weight of voters elsewhere in Scotland. It's no different to Scotland being forced to have a Conservative British government by the weight of voters elsewhere in Britain.......

See this recent report from the FT;

Seizing the opportunity presented by the plebiscite, Orkney council has joined with Shetland and the Western Isles to demand greater autonomy from both Edinburgh and London. ....“For us, Edinburgh, London, Brussels – they are all relatively remote,” says Mr Stockan. ...

Orkney Islands see Scottish referendum as chance of freedom
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1a0ae64c-0f0a-11e3-ae66-00144feabdc0.html

They don't apparently rule out the "thermonuclear option" of going independent.

IveSeenTheLight

antrobus wrote: »

"Between 4% and 8%"? Is there some doubt about how many people there are in Scotland?

For the record I think it's more like 8%.:)

Scotlands estimated population (mid 2012) = 5,313,600
UK's estimated population (Jul 2012) = 63,705,000

Therefore Scotland population is approx 8.34%

MFW_ASAP

antrobus wrote: »

"Between 4% and 8%"? Is there some doubt about how many people there are in Scotland?

For the record I think it's more like 8%.:)



See this recent report from the FT;

Seizing the opportunity presented by the plebiscite, Orkney council has joined with Shetland and the Western Isles to demand greater autonomy from both Edinburgh and London. ....“For us, Edinburgh, London, Brussels – they are all relatively remote,” says Mr Stockan. ...

Orkney Islands see Scottish referendum as chance of freedom
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1a0ae64c-0f0a-11e3-ae66-00144feabdc0.html

They don't apparently rule out the "thermonuclear option" of going independent.

I put between 4 & 8% because I knew it was in that ballpark and couldn't be bothered finding out as it wasn't important to the point I was making.

I mentioned the highlands and islands just as an example, I have no idea what they think of Independence. I decided they were geographically remote enough from Edinburgh & Glasgow to make the analogy between the distance between RoUK and Scotland.

zagubov

antrobus wrote: »

"Between 4% and 8%"? Is there some doubt about how many people there are in Scotland?

For the record I think it's more like 8%.:)



See this recent report from the FT;

Seizing the opportunity presented by the plebiscite, Orkney council has joined with Shetland and the Western Isles to demand greater autonomy from both Edinburgh and London. ....“For us, Edinburgh, London, Brussels – they are all relatively remote,” says Mr Stockan. ...

Orkney Islands see Scottish referendum as chance of freedom
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1a0ae64c-0f0a-11e3-ae66-00144feabdc0.html

They don't apparently rule out the "thermonuclear option" of going independent.

Mind if I just quote myself from an earlier thread?

zagubov wrote: »

Yep it's tired old zombie scare stories that resurface again and again no matter how many times they're torn to shreds. EU. Subsidy junkies. Shetland. The pound and the BoE. Yada yada yada.

Nothing new as none of it's true.:D

Thermonuclear option--- wonderful phrase thanks for reminding us that Scottish kids are human shields against a nuclear holocaust.

antrobus

MFW_ASAP wrote: »

...I mentioned the highlands and islands just as an example, I have no idea what they think of Independence. I decided they were geographically remote enough from Edinburgh & Glasgow to make the analogy between the distance between RoUK and Scotland.

Well, I think what they're trying to do over in the Orkneys is play off the respective Scottish and UK administrations in order to get a deal, and making vague noises about 'independence' or even going back to Norway.

IveSeenTheLight

Generali wrote: »

Sure.

As an example, the UK has a Permanent Seat on the UN Security Council. As a result the British Government can block most military action undertaken in the name of the UN.

I'm so sorry, but is this a serious suggestion.

To stop military action undertaken in the name of the UN.
When the UN didn;t sanction the war in Iraq, did that stop the UK or the American's going in?

I agree with having a United Nations, but don't really see that of great concern to the people of Scotland.

Were quite a friendly bunch you know

Generali wrote: »

If you want to walk through London waving a Saltire and playing bagpipes whilst eating a deep fried chocolate confection nobody will stop you.

I've done this in various countries around the world.
What does having a seat on the UN or not impact my ability to do so.
Would it grossly affect me if I could not do this? No

Generali wrote: »

It seems to me like the vote is all on the losing side with very little to gain.

Ok, I accept, Scotland will likely lose a seat on the UN, but I again compare with the Scandinavian countries that are showing to fare better on the GNI table and see that they neither have a seat on the UN permanent or non permanent members

Generali wrote: »

As I have maintained, the opinion polls suggest that Scots are bright enough to realise that there is little to gain from independence and much to lose so will vote No! rather than yes.

You are inferring that those who wish to become an independant nation are not bright and I again wonder whether your current location or understanding of the Scottish situation or appetite for change.

According to the Scotsman, The no campaign currently has only a 9 point lead.

Now I take poll's with a pinch of salt, but that's a lot of non-bright people you are slandering.

As with any election, the best thing everyone can do is have an open attitude and make as as best informed decision as they can with regards to what they believe will be the best long term solution.