Scottish Independence

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
eSOANEM
:D
Posts: 3652
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:39 pm UTC
Location: Grantabrycge

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby eSOANEM » Sat Sep 13, 2014 12:05 pm UTC

Do you have a source for scotland subsidising the rest of the UK for the last 300 years?

From what I can see, excluding oil (which was not a major industry 300 years ago) Scotland would be running at a substantial loss whilst including oil it's running at a slight profit for Westminster. Seeing as most of the UK's industry from that period was based in the north of England, I have a hard time believing it was true back then but if you have statistics will bow to them (it's annoyingly hard to find as they've been buried under people going over the current stats).

As for the fishing, losing that would damage many of the regional economies enormously, but losing Catalunya would damage the national economy even more (one of the main reasons the Catalans want independence is that they are subsidising most of the rest of Spain enormously). Madrid then has to make a judgement call on whether it's worth it definitely damaging their economy with the fishing to try and prevent greater damage later by discouraging Catalan independence or whether Catalan independence is an inevitability and they should try and cut their losses. I don't know which way they'll decide, and neither do you, but it's far from as clear cut as you seem to think it is.

I'm not sure what you mean about the tuition fees thing though. All other EU countries do, by following EU law, charge English citizens the same fees as locals (and, if they pay local's fees, do so for English citizens (and other EU citizens) as well). The only reason Scotland can currently get away with not paying for non-Scottish UK citizens' fees is, according to the european courts, because Scotland is part of the UK. This would no longer be the case with an independent Scotland and they'd have to start paying English people's fees for them.

As for westminster wanting out of the EU, I'm not sure that's the case. I don't think any of the senior leadership in any of the three currently major parties actually want out of the EU; all they've done is realise that much of England does now and so the conservatives, in particular, are trying to avoid losing votes to ukip by pandering to the euroskeptics.

As for UKIP, like you say, the bbc did give them time before the elections, but they already had at least one MEP at the time and polls were predicting them to increase on that. The bbc made a bad call and gave them more time than they should have had even going on the polls which led to them overperforming which is now being used to give them more time (although that's still disproportionate).
Last edited by eSOANEM on Thu Sep 18, 2014 9:59 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
my pronouns are they

Magnanimous wrote:(fuck the macrons)

User avatar
jestingrabbit
Factoids are just Datas that haven't grown up yet
Posts: 5967
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:50 pm UTC
Location: Sydney

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby jestingrabbit » Sat Sep 13, 2014 12:30 pm UTC

bigglesworth wrote:
Illiander wrote:How many countries got their independence from the British Empire, and then asked to be let back in?
Western Australia did. But they weren't allowed independence from Australia.


Do you mean the 1933 referendum? They didn't want to rejoin Britain as a colony, they wanted independence from Australia.
ameretrifle wrote:Magic space feudalism is therefore a viable idea.

User avatar
bigglesworth
I feel like Biggles should have a title
Posts: 7461
Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 9:29 pm UTC
Location: Airstrip One

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby bigglesworth » Sat Sep 13, 2014 12:32 pm UTC

I stand corrected.
Generation Y. I don't remember the First Gulf War, but do remember floppy disks.

BeerBottle
Posts: 221
Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 5:26 pm UTC

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby BeerBottle » Sat Sep 13, 2014 1:22 pm UTC

Illiander wrote: The currency is a settled question. Sterling is a fully tradeable currency, so Westminster can't stop *anyone* from trading in it. It's just nice that the people who have been going on about Salmond needing a "Plan B" have admitted that he doesn't need one. When your opponent says your right about something that they've been claiming you're wrong about for the last two years, I think we can take them at their word for it.
You're misunderstanding the issue here. Nothing will stop Scots using GBP to purchase something, as long as both parties agree. In the same way they could use USD, or sticks, or pebbles, or baseball cards. In this sense Scotland is free to use the GBP after independence. But that is not Salmond's Plan A. His Plan A is to have a formal currency union. The difference is that in the latter Scotland would have some formal agreement in how the GBP is run - i.e. when/how much GB to print, what the GBP interest rate is etc. Of course the rUK needs to agree to this Plan A. And all leading rUK politicians and the Bank of England say they won't. Of course you think Scotland will be in such a strong position they can force rUK (and Spain, and all EU countries...) to do whatever you like. Maybe. Maybe not.

So Plan B is use the GBP anyway without any formal agreement. Great, everything seems the same as usual, you go to the supermarket and pay using GBP just like before. But your monetary policy is now run by a foreign country, and the rUK will be making decisions based on its interest not that of Scotland. That's fine if the rUK and Scottish economies are broadly similar, but you've been telling us all how Scotland will bootstrap it's economy in a totally different direction. Now, what might be a sensible monetary policy for financial services led rUK may be very bad indeed for the Saudi of the North / renewable energy superpower Scotland. Who knows? One thing is for sure, Scots won't have a say in their own interest rates or when and how much money to print. So if rUK decides it needs to hike rates to cool a booming London housing market and that means half a million Scots default on their mortgages, that is not the problem of the rUK government.

Illiander
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 5:26 am UTC

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby Illiander » Sat Sep 13, 2014 3:08 pm UTC

Scotland subsidising the rest of the UK:
http://archive.today/5Swry
http://wingsoverscotland.com/the-historical-debt/

Ok, that's not all 300 years, but that's going back a good hundred.

You haven't noticed that *I don't care* if Scotland gets into the EU. There's *nothing* stopping us from joining the EFTA (I don't see Iceland or Norway objecting (the prez of Iceland has already made comments about this), and Switzerland and Lichenstien aren't likely to either), and I happen to think that that's the better option anyway.

You're overlooking the fact that English tuition fees are *rediculously* higher than all other EU countries tuition fees. Also, there's no reason that Scottish universities have to accept English students. It wouldn't be hard at all to limit the number of places available to them to stop the financial burden of every English student who doesn't want to be in debt for the rest of their life, but doesn't want to learn another language, from coming to Uni in Scotland (Which is the only reason that Scottish unis charge so much for English Students, they don't have the capacity for all of them)

Westminster are making a show of wanting to renegotiate their status within the EU, to get more opt-outs and more concessions. Yes, it's because UKIP are getting so much time on the BBC, so are pushing the discussion that way, but that's UKIPs whole purpose.

It's already been mentioned, that if the rUK decides to be daft about a currency union (because a currency union is in the rUK's best interests as well), then using the pound without a currency union is a short-term solution. There would be a move to an independent currency in the next ten years or so. Which would hurt Westminster immensly more than it would hurt Scotland (If Scotland goes to it's own free-floating currency, all the economists are saying that it would be one of the hardest currencies in the world, which means that Scots on holiday in England *appear* to have more money to spend, because of the exchange rate, which excagerrates any percived quality-of-life improvements that Scotland gets. All of which would make English votes ask some hard questions of Westminster about the "Austerity" agenda)

-----

I'll ask this again: What metric do people here use to judge countries/Governments?

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10336
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby addams » Sat Sep 13, 2014 4:00 pm UTC

How well the Nation and its Governement meets the Needs of its People.

How shall we define, "Needs."
I am a Lazy Thing.

The UN did That!
Find that Document.

How near to the Ideal does a Nation Fall?

Fairy Tail Time.
If I'm Foed, you will never see it.
It you get bored, it's easy to Scroll down to something more interesting.

Once upon a Time, in a Land not so far away;
There was an Idea.

It was Poetic and on the Lips of Many.
By the People, Of the People, For the People.

It was commonly believed, By Me and Me, alone,
At every moment of every day, We are in One State or Another.

What State are we in?
Well...If we are being Served, It's For us.
If we are Working, it's Of us.
If we are Contibuting, it is By us.

Loads of ways to Contribute.
Parades are a fun way to Contibute to your Nation.

Look at how much Good is done to the Nation and the World by Madie Gras.
Hobart Brown's Parade was Good for the Local Community, for the Nation and for The World.

Even if you do not work for the Government directly, Your Work either Builds your Nation or Not.
How do we Judge a Nation? .....How?

That is a Darned Good Question!
And! It needs an Ansswer!

UN Documents Welcome.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7605
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby Zamfir » Sat Sep 13, 2014 7:41 pm UTC

Of course you think Scotland will be in such a strong position they can force rUK (and Spain, and all EU countries...) to do whatever you like. Maybe. Maybe not.

Yeah, this. There's much to say for being a small country, but does it have its downsides. A very big one is that you don't have much bargaining power when dealing with larger countries. That's a price to accept.

If you start pissing people off by chasing away fishing fleets and not paying your debts, and you'll quickly discover that they can hurt you more than you can hurt them.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10336
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby addams » Sat Sep 13, 2014 8:15 pm UTC

Therefore, The People of the Neatherlands have some Coffee, smoke some Pot and OutThink them.
I think it is a Facinating Model.

Scotland Could Do That!
It would be Great!

No pesky sneeking your pot stash in when you Hike The HighLand Way.
You buy Fresh when you want it.

Those NetherLanders.
What will they think of Next?

Don't worry Scotland.
Dykes are not Requird.

Just because the NetherLander thought of it,
Does not mean You need it.

Do you need people that can Think?
If ya' do, Watch those guys.

It looks like they put some Thought into it.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

Illiander
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 5:26 am UTC

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby Illiander » Sat Sep 13, 2014 9:09 pm UTC

Zamfir wrote:
Of course you think Scotland will be in such a strong position they can force rUK (and Spain, and all EU countries...) to do whatever you like. Maybe. Maybe not.

Yeah, this. There's much to say for being a small country, but does it have its downsides. A very big one is that you don't have much bargaining power when dealing with larger countries. That's a price to accept.

If you start pissing people off by chasing away fishing fleets and not paying your debts, and you'll quickly discover that they can hurt you more than you can hurt them.


What debt? The UK Treasury has said publically, and to all the lenders, that Scotland wouldn't be taking on any of the current UK's debt, because the Westminster Treasury is, and will be, responsible for it (They're the one who took out the loan, after all). And as Scotland runs at a profit when not servicing the UK's debt, why would we need to take out any loans?

The fishing fleets are *only* there because Scotland is currently in the EU, otherwise they'd be stealing Scotlands fish. Look up "Exclusive Economic Zone" and international maritime agreements. (Also, Thatcher used fishing rights for Scottish waters as a barganing chip for some concessions she wanted from the EU, I believe the phrase used was "Scottish fisheries are expendable")

User avatar
eSOANEM
:D
Posts: 3652
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:39 pm UTC
Location: Grantabrycge

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby eSOANEM » Sat Sep 13, 2014 9:21 pm UTC

Scotland may currently run at a small profit, but that profit's contingent on oil prices which are variable. It also assumes no increase in expenditure.

In fact, seeing as Salmond has talked about increasing benefits and you're talking about bootstrapping entire new economies, expenditure will rise enormously. Revenue on the other hand will not change much without raising taxes (something Salmond hasn't ruled out, but certainly isn't doing as much to make people aware of its possibility as he should). There's a pretty good chance that, like most countries, Scotland will end up running at a slight deficit, it will just be able to get away with spending a bit more for the same deficit than the rUK.

Edit: on a related note, it may not be the bbx, but I've noticed that almost every single article on buzzfeed about the referendum (which seem to have pretty much all been by the buzzfeed staff and not community posts) has been obviously yes-leaning despite the polls putting the yes campaign only slightly ahead at the moment. Of course, unlike the bbc, buzzfeed are under no obligation of impartiality, but it would be nice if they weren't so obviously partisan.

Edit: Edit for further clarification: I'm talking primarily about the articles like "19 animals who are voting yes to independence" which appear to put forward a specific opinion and not the news articles which seem to be distributed more evenly but don't appear as often as the opinion-heavy ones.
my pronouns are they

Magnanimous wrote:(fuck the macrons)

Derek
Posts: 2181
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:15 am UTC

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby Derek » Sat Sep 13, 2014 10:26 pm UTC

Illiander wrote:What debt? The UK Treasury has said publically, and to all the lenders, that Scotland wouldn't be taking on any of the current UK's debt, because the Westminster Treasury is, and will be, responsible for it (They're the one who took out the loan, after all). And as Scotland runs at a profit when not servicing the UK's debt, why would we need to take out any loans?

It seems like you're intentionally misunderstanding here. It's already been explained that the deal would be that the UK retains it's current obligations, but Scotland would take on a debt towards the rUK to cover their share.

User avatar
Diadem
Posts: 5654
Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:03 am UTC
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby Diadem » Sun Sep 14, 2014 1:43 am UTC

It is only fair that Scotland would take over their share of the debt. You can discuss whether it should be in proportion to GDP or population, but they should definitely take over part of the debt. Honestly it seems entirely reasonable for rUK to demand that as a requirement before accepting Scottish independence.

As for Scotland being barred from the EU somehow: I don't see it happening. Spain may not like it, but Spain has very few convincing arguments here. "We don't want those damned Catalonians to get any funny ideas" may be their real reason for objecting, but it is obviously not one they can use publicly. It's not even clear whether Spain gets any say on the matter. Scotland after all is already part of the EU, and the regulations say nothing about them having to reapply in case of their independence (they also don't say they do not have to reapply. It's a legal grey area. Which means it'll be up to the diplomats). You can also be pretty damn sure that most other European countries will be very strongly in favour of Scotland joining.

Anyway, I personally think that dividing Europe into smaller regions within the European Union is the future. Give Scotland independence. Divide up Flanders and Wallonia. Let Catalonia and the Basque Region break away from Spain. Why not? These regions already have strong democratic traditions, and are embedded within the European legal frameworks, so there's no worry about civil rights abuses or anything like that. And small countries generally work a lot better than big ones. The only disadvantage of being a small country is not being able to twist any arms internationally - but the European Union neatly solves that problem.

We don't live in the middle ages anymore. Countries are no longer the personal property of some king or emperor. What argument is there to deny a region its independence? National pride? Fuck that.
It's one of those irregular verbs, isn't it? I have an independent mind, you are an eccentric, he is round the twist
- Bernard Woolley in Yes, Prime Minister

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10336
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby addams » Sun Sep 14, 2014 2:33 am UTC

Goodness.
What an interesting post.

Loads of small Interdependent States.
Your post makes sense.

Large is good for Defence and Offence.
The Future may Not be one War after the other.

Nor a whole bunch of Wars all at the same time, like now.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

BattleMoose
Posts: 1993
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 8:42 am UTC

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby BattleMoose » Sun Sep 14, 2014 3:49 am UTC

Diadem wrote:Anyway, I personally think that dividing Europe into smaller regions within the European Union is the future. Give Scotland independence. Divide up Flanders and Wallonia. Let Catalonia and the Basque Region break away from Spain. Why not? These regions already have strong democratic traditions, and are embedded within the European legal frameworks, so there's no worry about civil rights abuses or anything like that. And small countries generally work a lot better than big ones. The only disadvantage of being a small country is not being able to twist any arms internationally - but the European Union neatly solves that problem.

We don't live in the middle ages anymore. Countries are no longer the personal property of some king or emperor. What argument is there to deny a region its independence? National pride? Fuck that.


I actually agree. One of the most compelling reasons not to be a small country was threat of invasion and ability to defend oneself. If you are embedded in Europe, that's really not a credible threat any more.

WilliamLehnsherr
Posts: 147
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2013 7:58 am UTC

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby WilliamLehnsherr » Sun Sep 14, 2014 4:20 am UTC

Would Scotland remaining in the EU as an independent State make Scottish Gaelic an official language of the EU (as opposed to a semi-official language)?

I just thought I'd throw that question out there.

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7605
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby Zamfir » Sun Sep 14, 2014 6:19 am UTC


What debt? The UK Treasury has said publically, and to all the lenders, that Scotland wouldn't be taking on any of the current UK's debt, because the Westminster Treasury is, and will be, responsible for it (They're the one who took out the loan, after all). And as Scotland runs at a profit when not servicing the UK's debt, why would we need to take out any loans?

The fishing fleets are *only* there because Scotland is currently in the EU, otherwise they'd be stealing Scotlands fish. Look up "Exclusive Economic Zone" and international maritime agreements. (Also, Thatcher used fishing rights for Scottish waters as a barganing chip for some concessions she wanted from the EU, I believe the phrase used was "Scottish fisheries are expendable")


This is exactly what I mean. Sure, you can enter negotiations this way. Debt, what debt, you mean your debt? Yeah ,we didn't feel like paying our share this year, because of something with kings in the 18th century.

But the people on the other side of the table will represent your 10 times more populous neighbour and dominant trade partner. They can take so many little and big actions that hurt your economy, you don't want to piss them off. Similar when you're talking to the EU, or the US.

It doesn't matter what you think is fair. If you want the world to act like you think is fair, don't become a small country. For smaller countries, the others decide what's fair, and at best you'll haggle a bit on the edges.

That can still be a good deal. It might be better to be represented by a Scottish government with little bargaining power, than by a UK that negotiates strongly but not on your behalf. Just don't expect that you can have both.

Illiander
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 5:26 am UTC

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby Illiander » Sun Sep 14, 2014 8:33 am UTC

Ok, "oil prices are volitile". But the general direction is up. Stick the profits from the extra-good years in a fund to cover the bad years, and you can run off the average (increacing) numbers. Norway did that, and their fund is currently sitting at over a mil per person (Scotland has more oil than Norway)

Scotland runs at a profit *without* the oil money, if we weren't servicing debt that Westminster ran up to fund projects in the south of England. We're solvent without it.

There have been academic studies proving that by the raw numbers (not even counting the little insinuations) the BBC is in no way impartial in this debate. They are *firmly* pro-Westminster. They're even a member of an organisation that registered with the Electoral Commission as a No Campaigning group.

We can fund all the healthcare, social security, etc... off of the funds we save by not paying our population share of Trident and the House of Lords. That leaves us plenty more money that Westminster isn't spending in the south of England to spend on restarting industries, starting new industries, and otherwise undoing the damage that Thatcher did. *Then* there's the oil money on top of that. Never mind the savings from not spending so much on the military as Westminster likes to, or other places we can save money (like removing some of the beaurocratic drain from the Social Security System)

Any deal that Scotland makes with the rUK for it's fair share of UK assets is just that. A deal. And I've already covered that I'd be perfectly happy with Westminster taking the hard line and no deal being reached, because that's fine for Scotland. (Not the *best* option, but a very close second, and certainly viable)

Zamfir wrote:This is exactly what I mean. Sure, you can enter negotiations this way. Debt, what debt, you mean your debt? Yeah ,we didn't feel like paying our share this year, because of something with kings in the 18th century.

It's less "something with kings in the 18th century" (for some reason, the No Campaign like bringing up Mel Gibson's film "Braveheart" a lot, the Yes campaign don't tend to talk about farther back than about 50 years) and more "You've been pouring money down the drain gambling, giving everything to people with so much that they'll barely notice any more, and we have people starving in the streets. Fuck your rich bastards and gambling debts, we're feeding the starving, and then we're going to rebuild our industries (which you systematically destroyed) so they can keep feeding themselves"

See why I think you've been getting your info from *very* pro-Westminster sources?

User avatar
eSOANEM
:D
Posts: 3652
Joined: Sun Apr 12, 2009 9:39 pm UTC
Location: Grantabrycge

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby eSOANEM » Sun Sep 14, 2014 11:47 am UTC

Diadem wrote:As for Scotland being barred from the EU somehow: I don't see it happening. Spain may not like it, but Spain has very few convincing arguments here. "We don't want those damned Catalonians to get any funny ideas" may be their real reason for objecting, but it is obviously not one they can use publicly. It's not even clear whether Spain gets any say on the matter. Scotland after all is already part of the EU, and the regulations say nothing about them having to reapply in case of their independence (they also don't say they do not have to reapply. It's a legal grey area. Which means it'll be up to the diplomats). You can also be pretty damn sure that most other European countries will be very strongly in favour of Scotland joining.

Anyway, I personally think that dividing Europe into smaller regions within the European Union is the future. Give Scotland independence. Divide up Flanders and Wallonia. Let Catalonia and the Basque Region break away from Spain. Why not? These regions already have strong democratic traditions, and are embedded within the European legal frameworks, so there's no worry about civil rights abuses or anything like that. And small countries generally work a lot better than big ones. The only disadvantage of being a small country is not being able to twist any arms internationally - but the European Union neatly solves that problem.


There are plenty of reasons Spain could give publicly for not letting Scotland in. They could stop a fast-track by saying it was unfair on countries in Eastern Europe who might want to join and they could delay normal accession by asking questions about whether they should be required to join the ERM II and by claiming to have doubts of Scotland's economic stability when the pound is run solely in the interests of rUK.

I think you're right though that dividing up Europe seems like a broadly sensible long-term goal although, in a few cases its a bit more complicated than it seems; the Basque country for instance straddles the border with France so you'd probably need some sort of two-stage secession process.

WilliamLehnsherr wrote:Would Scotland remaining in the EU as an independent State make Scottish Gaelic an official language of the EU (as opposed to a semi-official language)?

I just thought I'd throw that question out there.


Probably. They'd probably do the same for Scots.

Illiander wrote:Scotland runs at a profit *without* the oil money, if we weren't servicing debt that Westminster ran up to fund projects in the south of England. We're solvent without it.


Citation very much needed.

The only sources I've seen claiming this are far more yes-biased than the bbc is no-biased but then, it might just be that I haven't been able to find them.
my pronouns are they

Magnanimous wrote:(fuck the macrons)

Illiander
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 5:26 am UTC

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby Illiander » Sun Sep 14, 2014 12:39 pm UTC

eSOANEM wrote:
Illiander wrote:Scotland runs at a profit *without* the oil money, if we weren't servicing debt that Westminster ran up to fund projects in the south of England. We're solvent without it.


Citation very much needed.

The only sources I've seen claiming this are far more yes-biased than the bbc is no-biased but then, it might just be that I haven't been able to find them.


I don't think you quite get how biased to No the BBC is. Wings and BfI may be pro-Yes, but they back up their stuff with citations, commonly enough citations from prominent No-supporting sources. The BBC lies to your face about what people say. (And I *can* back that up with evidence)

Look up the GERS figures, and do the maths yourself.

Or if you don't want to do that you could go here and argue with their numbers, I'm sure they'd appreciate people finding flaws in their maths.

We've had people saying "you can't do that" for so long, we've stopped listening to them. We've had a scare story or two every week for the last year (they had to start recycling them after a while because they ran out, mostly they relable parts of "too wee, too poor, too stupid"). Denmark has about as many people as us, almost no oil, and they seem to be doing better for themselves than the UK is. Same with Finland. Same with Panama. Same with the Netherlands. Norway has less oil than Scotland does and has national savings from that oil equivilent to a million Krona *per person*. What's so different about Scotland that means we *wouldn't* be able to go it alone? And if we're a net drain on the UK treasury, like Westminster is claiming, why aren't they wishing us on our way while they pocket the profits from not supporting us anymore?

Anyone have an answer for that?

Edit:
And just to put this in perspective, my metric for how successful a country is:
How well-off their worst-off are.

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6814
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby sardia » Sun Sep 14, 2014 3:23 pm UTC

When you compare currencies, be sure to convert them over for a fair analysis. A million krona is not roughly the same as pesos , pounds , euros, or dollars.

User avatar
omgryebread
Posts: 1393
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 3:03 am UTC

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby omgryebread » Sun Sep 14, 2014 3:58 pm UTC

Scotland is running a structural deficit now. In 2012, their deficit as % of GDP was greater than the UK's as a whole.

GDP is also a poor measure of Scotland's wealth. GDP measures the gross of all economic activity in the country, but since many of Scotland's industries are foreign-owned, it's worth it to look at Gross National Income. [url="http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/interactive/2014/may/29/scotland-standard-of-living-report"]This[/url] study by University of Glasgow economists argues just that, and shows that looking at the GNI produces a less rosy picture. The UK's biggest food and drink export is Scotch whiskey. The two biggest producers are of Scotch English and French. The largest Scottish oil field is Buzzard, owned and opererated by Nexen, a Canadian company (which is ultimately owned by China National Offshore Oil Corporation). The largest producer of Scottish Salmon is Norwegian.

All this adds up to the result that Scotland's wealth is not going to the Scottish people. Looking at that, it's increasingly hard to argue that Scotland is a stronger economy than the UK as a whole. It also means that fears over currency are real.
avatar from Nononono by Lynn Okamoto.

User avatar
kingofdreams
Posts: 437
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2008 4:31 pm UTC
Location: An avatar making factory

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby kingofdreams » Sun Sep 14, 2014 5:00 pm UTC

Illiander wrote:
Anyone have an answer for that?




Mayhaps rUK government isn't the strawman caricature the secessionist movement has built their political currency out of.
Picard- I shall appoint you my executive officer in charge of radishes

BattleMoose
Posts: 1993
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2007 8:42 am UTC

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby BattleMoose » Sun Sep 14, 2014 5:16 pm UTC

What I find very odd about this, is the confusion over whether or not Scotland is currently a net contributor to the UK economy or a net drainer. Should be very straightforward, taxes paid minus government spending in the Scotland region, is it a positive or negative number?

Why is there confusion about this?

icanus
Posts: 478
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 1:19 pm UTC
Location: in England now abed

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby icanus » Sun Sep 14, 2014 6:14 pm UTC

BattleMoose wrote:What I find very odd about this, is the confusion over whether or not Scotland is currently a net contributor to the UK economy or a net drainer. Should be very straightforward, taxes paid minus government spending in the Scotland region, is it a positive or negative number?

Why is there confusion about this?

Because some fairly significant revenue sources (notably oil) and expendiatures (defence, central gov admin costs etc.) are not regionally allocated but calculated nationally for the whole of the UK, so there's all sorts of wrangling over Scotland's fair share of them.

Illiander
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 5:26 am UTC

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby Illiander » Sun Sep 14, 2014 8:54 pm UTC

kingofdreams wrote:
Illiander wrote:Anyone have an answer for that?
Mayhaps rUK government isn't the strawman caricature the secessionist movement has built their political currency out of.


They're certainly trying pretty hard.

Edit: Also, the paragraph above that didn't mention Westminster once.

User avatar
kingofdreams
Posts: 437
Joined: Wed Dec 03, 2008 4:31 pm UTC
Location: An avatar making factory

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby kingofdreams » Sun Sep 14, 2014 10:40 pm UTC

Illiander wrote:And if we're a net drain on the UK treasury, like Westminster is claiming, why aren't they wishing us on our way while they pocket the profits from not supporting us anymore?

That would be the question being addressed, concerns other than profit seeking. No one is insisting that scotland will fail, what have been highlighted if we are to continue to focus on economic issues (a focus that is lamentable given the somewhat grander issues at stake) are the risks involved, given the handicap of a lack of fiscal sovereignty we would at the same time be taking on. Of the examples you mentioned, panama might be the most pertinent comparison given that it is a dollarized economy. If we're trying to build a more equitable society we should maybe refrain from pointing to it as an example, having as it does the worlds third most uneven income distribution.

As an aside an off topic comment the Netherlands has 3x the scottish population I wouldn't characterize it as a particularly small nation
Picard- I shall appoint you my executive officer in charge of radishes

User avatar
Adacore
Posts: 2755
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:35 pm UTC
Location: 한국 창원

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby Adacore » Sun Sep 14, 2014 11:38 pm UTC

omgryebread wrote:Possibly the party with the most to gain (aside from the SNP) from Scottish independence is UKIP.

In the long run, do the SNP actually gain from Scottish Independence? I'd think it would completely destroy their reason for existing as a party. Their main policy is 'independence' - I actually don't have much idea where they lie on the political spectrum after that, or how much of a party identity they'd have left without that main goal to work towards. Are they left or right of Labour / Lib Dems (I assume they're left of the Tories).

Illiander wrote:Scotland has more oil than Norway

Is this true? Based on my knowledge of the North Sea oil industry, I'd say it may be true that Scotland now has more oil than Norway now, but it seems highly unlikely that Scotland now has anything like as much oil as Norway had when they started the sovereign wealth funds 20 years ago.

I've not done an extensive search, but the data I can find suggests that Norway always had more oil than the whole of the UK, has been producing more annually than the whole of the UK for years, and has a larger proportion of its initial reserves remaining than the UK has now. This report from the US EIA, for example, states that Norway is Europe's largest oil producer. Also, according to the UK DECC whole-UK offshore oil production has fallen from 62M tonnes per year to 37M tonnes per year in the last 4 years, down from a peak of 130M tonnes per year in 1999. That's a fairly stark decline.

Additionally, the Norwegian sovereign fund was built initially from the easy (and thus cheap) to extract reserves which presumably generated much higher profits than the remaining, considerably more technically difficult to extract, reserves. I admit I'm personally biased, in being anti-independence, but the '$1tn profit from oil' claims just seem like a gross overstatement. I think Scotland will be lucky if they get 10-20% of that.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10336
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby addams » Mon Sep 15, 2014 12:30 am UTC

Illiander wrote:(a chatty little post)
Edit:
And just to put this in perspective, my metric for how successful a country is:
How well-off their worst-off are.

That is a nice metric.
I am glad you came up with something so simple.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

Illiander
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 5:26 am UTC

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby Illiander » Mon Sep 15, 2014 7:42 am UTC

Adacore wrote:
omgryebread wrote:Possibly the party with the most to gain (aside from the SNP) from Scottish independence is UKIP.

In the long run, do the SNP actually gain from Scottish Independence? I'd think it would completely destroy their reason for existing as a party. Their main policy is 'independence' - I actually don't have much idea where they lie on the political spectrum after that, or how much of a party identity they'd have left without that main goal to work towards. Are they left or right of Labour / Lib Dems (I assume they're left of the Tories).


There are people saying that the SNP will disband after independence: Job done. I'm not sure how many people expect it to happen. I certainly expect them to at least run in 2016.

The SNP are significantly to the left of New Labour. Basically, what happened was Tony Blair created New Labour to win an election at Westminster. To do that, he threw away a lot of old Labour policies, in order to appeal to the voters in London and the South-East of England (that little corner of England has almost three times as many MPs as Scotland, and most of the swing seats, so if your goal is "Rule Westminster" it's a fair enough plan). The SNP have picked up most of the policies Labour threw away, which might go some way to explaining why New Labour *hate* the SNP so, so much.

And for the record, when asked, Thatcher said her greatest achievement was New Labour. (And we actually did have "Thatcher Death Parties" in Scotland, we even got "Ding Dong, The Witch is Dead" to first place in the Scottish charts for her (second in the UK charts (And the BBC still refused to air it)))

leady
Posts: 1592
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 12:28 pm UTC

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby leady » Mon Sep 15, 2014 8:54 am UTC

As a general rule I treat any view point from someone in the UK who rants about Thatcher as essentially a local equivalent of Godwin.

I fully support Scotlands right to turn itself into a socialist hell hole and watch as an entire generation does an Ireland

Illiander
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 5:26 am UTC

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby Illiander » Mon Sep 15, 2014 9:19 am UTC

Godwin's law was proven in the Scottish independence debate a *long* time ago. (By elected MPs and members of the House of Lords, no less)

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=alex+salmond+dictator+bingo

The fun one is Poe's Law for the No Campaign.

http://wingsoverscotland.com/by-their-w ... know-them/

User avatar
setzer777
Good questions sometimes get stupid answers
Posts: 2762
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2008 9:24 am UTC

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby setzer777 » Mon Sep 15, 2014 12:14 pm UTC

As a random piece of trivia, the word "Westminster" has been used 75 times in this thread so far (including quotes), even though the first use was on page 2.
Meaux_Pas wrote:We're here to go above and beyond.

Too infinity
of being an arsehole

Illiander
Posts: 29
Joined: Wed May 18, 2011 5:26 am UTC

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby Illiander » Mon Sep 15, 2014 12:31 pm UTC

Well, that's likely because of the question.

Does Scotland want to be ruled by Westminster?

All the talk of independence/seperation, currencies, oil revenue, Dr Who/Stricktly/GBBO, or whatever other scare story is being thrown about this week is just confusing the issue.

And given the choice between being ruled by Westminster, or by Hollyrood, it's pretty obvious which one has been doing a better job recently. (And which one Scottish voters can actually effect)

Then there's another question:
Given that you want to not be ruled from Westminster (Even the majority of England think that they're corrupt and need a clean out), when do you think the best time to get out from under it would be?

The normal answer to that is "30 years ago", and the pragmatic answer is "before they fuck up anything else".

User avatar
jestingrabbit
Factoids are just Datas that haven't grown up yet
Posts: 5967
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:50 pm UTC
Location: Sydney

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby jestingrabbit » Mon Sep 15, 2014 12:58 pm UTC

Illiander wrote:Well, that's likely because of the question.

Does Scotland want to be ruled by Westminster?


Which is the way that you, and no one else in this thread, formulates it. I mean, why not say "London"?

But hey, whatever floats your boat. You seem very passionate and invested in the outcome, and I hope that, whatever the result, the Scottish people do well. I wish I could muster some sort of opinion, but... its really a "devil you know" situation, and those are tricky.
ameretrifle wrote:Magic space feudalism is therefore a viable idea.

WilliamLehnsherr
Posts: 147
Joined: Tue Oct 01, 2013 7:58 am UTC

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby WilliamLehnsherr » Mon Sep 15, 2014 1:19 pm UTC

jestingrabbit wrote:
Illiander wrote:Well, that's likely because of the question.

Does Scotland want to be ruled by Westminster?


Which is the way that you, and no one else in this thread, formulates it. I mean, why not say "London"?


I'd say Westminster is commonly used to describe the UK government. Much more common than London. Kind of like how The Kremlin is used to mean the Russian government.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10336
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby addams » Mon Sep 15, 2014 1:47 pm UTC

Hell-o Independence Movement;
I was thinking of you affectionately.

I know the example of the American Indian has been used.
Did you explain it well?

Loads of Americans don't understand it.
Not all of it. And; It's none of our business.

That's kind of The Point.

I am a very fortunate person in some ways.
I will be driving through an American Indian Ranch, today.

Sometimes when I am There,
I think, This is Land is....not part of the park...not part of the prison...not mine..not yours...BIG!
This land is Big.

What does it look like?
It's Magical.

That is what Thinking will do.
In what way are American Indians sovereign?

I know I could figure it out with Wikipedia.
I might Still not understand it.

Is it simply an idea?
Ideas have no weight.
Ideas have no color.

Ideas are Not Real.
Until you Write them Down!

That is where some of the Indians and the White Guys parted intellectual ways.
Some of the Indians bought into The Delusion.

"Hey!!Look! Two-Dogs-Fucking, They read it out of a Book. It must be "The Word of God".

....I don't understand it.
I'm a White Guy.

I need a list.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

Derek
Posts: 2181
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:15 am UTC

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby Derek » Mon Sep 15, 2014 2:10 pm UTC

WilliamLehnsherr wrote:I'd say Westminster is commonly used to describe the UK government. Much more common than London. Kind of like how The Kremlin is used to mean the Russian government.

I don't think it sees much use in the US. Probably because Americans are less familiar with Westminster Palace, but everyone knows that London is the capital of the UK.

User avatar
jestingrabbit
Factoids are just Datas that haven't grown up yet
Posts: 5967
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 9:50 pm UTC
Location: Sydney

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby jestingrabbit » Mon Sep 15, 2014 2:19 pm UTC

Derek wrote:
WilliamLehnsherr wrote:I'd say Westminster is commonly used to describe the UK government. Much more common than London. Kind of like how The Kremlin is used to mean the Russian government.

I don't think it sees much use in the US. Probably because Americans are less familiar with Westminster Palace, but everyone knows that London is the capital of the UK.

Yeah, here in oz, its much more likely to be London as a substitute for "the UK parliament/government", but I take the point. I was just pointing out why, I expect, it was mentioned by setzer777.
ameretrifle wrote:Magic space feudalism is therefore a viable idea.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10550
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby CorruptUser » Mon Sep 15, 2014 2:29 pm UTC

So when is the vote? I've read countless stories about it but not when the vote takes place. That's like a foreigner being told about the US elections but never finding out when the elections occur. Sure, every American knows that it's the first Tuesday after Nov 1st, but not everyone outside knows that.

User avatar
ahammel
My Little Cabbage
Posts: 2135
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2012 12:46 am UTC
Location: Vancouver BC
Contact:

Re: Scottish Independence

Postby ahammel » Mon Sep 15, 2014 2:32 pm UTC

CorruptUser wrote:So when is the vote? I've read countless stories about it but not when the vote takes place. That's like a foreigner being told about the US elections but never finding out when the elections occur. Sure, every American knows that it's the first Tuesday after Nov 1st, but not everyone outside knows that.

This Thursday (September 18th).

Wikipedia.
He/Him/His/Alex
God damn these electric sex pants!


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: addams, Mutex and 19 guests