Forum menu
Very clever, playing the man with a straw man. 🙂
Still not answered the question though...
After all, the bulk of this thread seems to be how little benefit there is going to be for Scotland in being independent.
I thought you learned negative chaps could provide some evidence of another country that used to be under the British umbrella where independence has failed so badly that they want to rescind their independence and come back under British rule.
It would be instructive.
[quote=epicyclo ]Still not answered the question though...
The completely irrelevant strawman question?
Oh go on then, if you really insist, I believe there are some people who think Zimbabwe was better before independence than it is now, though they're probably wrong.
After all, the bulk of this thread seems to be how little benefit there is going to be for Scotland in being independent.
Well if the nats have failed to make their case on this thread then that's really their fault and no one else's.
You can't expect to hold anyone else responsible for that.
I thought you learned negative chaps could provide some evidence of another country that used to be under the British umbrella where independence has failed so badly that they want to rescind their independence and come back under British rule.
That would be a great question IF any ex-colony was sufficiently democratic enough that its population could articulate a desire to return to colonial rule in response to postcolonial mismanagement AND the UK had been amenable to retaking control over former colonies AND if Scotland had been in a position even remotely comparable to any of the excolonies.
How many colonies had full representation at Westminster with their own locally elected politicians?
The overwhelming of the Scottish electorate by the English electorate is purely a numbers game.
In fact it's the same Prof Dunleavy who's figures the government completely misunderstood and inflated by 12 times to get their discredited estimate.
The same Patrick Dunleavy who said;
“Scotland’s voters can be relatively sure that total transition costs over a decade will lie in a restricted range, from 0.4 of one per cent of GDP (£600 million), up to a maximum of 1.1 per cent (£1,500 milion). This is a step forward in debate and I am grateful to Iain for helping to bring it out.”
Ignoring his obvious maths issues. Is it really such a step forward in the debate from the original position of the UK Government document which stated;
“…shows that the costs of institutional restructuring in the event of independence could range from 0.4 per cent to 1 per cent of the new country’s GDP. 1 per cent of Scottish GDP in 2012-13 is equivalent to £1.5 billion”
And
“Given these estimates, £1.5 billion is likely to be a favourable estimate of the total costs of setting up new institutions.”
Yep, he’s done a good job discrediting those figures!
piemonster - Member
How many colonies had full representation at Westminster with their own locally elected politicians?...
The question has nothing to do with what the current situation of Scotland in the UK govt.
It's about whether any country was prepared to give up its independence to return to UK rule.
konabunny - Member
That would be a great question IF any ex-colony was sufficiently democratic enough...
That's a joke, right? Perhaps an Australian, Canadian, Indian, or ****stani may like to comment if they would prefer Westminster to take over the running of their country.
But it does raise a point. Are there even underground popular movements in undemocratic former colonies to get them back under UK rule?
82 days to go...
It's about whether any country was prepared to give up its independence to return to UK rule.
I know you think that if you keep repeating it it will eventually become true but Scotland isn't ruled by the UK.
Neither is Greater Manchester, Cornwall, the West Midlands, Teesside, Yorkshire, or any other geographical region of the UK.
Scotland is a geographical region of the UK.
We know that making a comparison with former British colonies and talking about living "under the yoke" suits your agenda of suggesting that the people of Scotland live under UK tyranny, but your comparison is still false no matter how many times you make it.
You keep repeating your non-answer.
But let's bite. What tyranny? This is a referendum for independence with the terms agreed between the participants, not a patriotic war.
And whether you like it or not, Scotland is a country.
And you keep repeating your silly comparison.
It's about whether any country was prepared to give up its independence to return to UK rule.
Wrong question perhaps? We have a first here....
An (possibly new) independent country wanting to immediately return economic power to the "country/countries" that it has just gained independence from. Shouldn't we be asking how many precedents for this we can name?
That's some strong stuff being smoked up there. Forget Glastonbury, Holyrood is obviously the place to go to get off your head.
ernie_lynch - Member
And you keep repeating your silly comparison.
Well you keep repeating how bad independence is going to be for Scotland.
I was hoping you could come up with an example for me to examine so I could be enlightened as to how bad independence was.
I thought with your deep interest in politics you could at least come up with one country.
So let's broaden the scope.
Regardless of who the original ruling country was, in how many of the countries that have become independent since, say 1945, are the people seeking to return to control under their previous ruler?
We're all agog to see all these examples of failed independence.
Actually, the comparison with the colonies is an interesting one - because many of the colonies weren't called that at all, they were dominions. For example the Dominion of Canada had its own parliament with powers to make legislation, though it could be overruled by Westminster but that rarely happened. Sound familiar?
it is not the best worded question [ it is a false comparison] you will ever see but the point is , as far as I am aware that no former colony has asked to return after gaining independence...only the ex russian ones do that sort of thing 😉
Scotland is not dominated by the uk as it is part of the UK
The UK is dominated by england , who therefore dominate the other union members. Given it england is about 87% of the UK this is largely inevitable.
Regions of england are not like countries in the Union ,that is also a false comparison to make.
Its obvious, unless we have North korea or china style elections, that some areas wont get who they voted for. This happens in democracy. This does not negate the fact the england decides which govt the UK gets as the misleading map of the election result shows. Many people would consider another country deciding who your govt is to be undemocratic. some think this is not a good enough reason.
6k almost missed it
Well you keep repeating how bad independence is going to be for Scotland.
Do I ? Are you sure about that ?
I have done very little in suggesting that 'independence' would be bad for Scotland. My main focus has been in the lack of a compelling argument in favour of independence from the yes camp, and that whole case appears to rely on faith hope, and wishful thinking.
Are you confusing me with another poster ?
We're all agog to see all these examples of failed independence.
Many many pages ago on this thread I made it absolutely clear it is inconceivable that Scotland couldn't be independent, that it was perfectly feasible for Scotland to be independent, that in fact very little would change if Scotland became independent, most people wouldn't even notice - significant changes imo would only become apparent over time.
Again, are you confusing me with another poster ?
That's a joke, right? Perhaps an Australian, Canadian, Indian, or ****stani may like to comment if they would prefer Westminster to take over the running of their country.
You obviously didn't read the whole post.
Junkyard
it is not the best worded question [ it is a false comparison] you will ever see but the point is , as far as I am aware that no former colony has asked to return after gaining independence...
Exactly. It was difficult to come up with a perfect question because rather than addressing the specifics of the various posts I was querying the undercurrent, which basically boiled down to "independence bad, Scotland will regret it".
I couldn't think of any country that regretted it, so maybe someone else knew of one. No matter how bad things may have been in the various countries after independence, they have never been so bad that they want to return to the fold, so why would Scotland be different?
I couldn't think of any country that regretted it, so maybe someone else knew of one. No matter how bad things may have been in the various countries after independence, they have never been so bad that they want to return to the fold, so why would Scotland be different?
It's still a completely false premise. I don't think that anyone is arguing against independence as a political concept or for colonialism for that matter; I think that some people are arguing that[i] Scottish independence from the UK [/i] isn't worth it.
Equally, a person arguing that "most regions of most countries don't intend to go independent from their parent states, so this proves that Scotland will regret independence" would be just as wrongheaded as you are.
It's all completely irrelevant.
There is no sensible comparison.
[quote=epicyclo ]We're all agog to see all these examples of failed independence.
Well since you're ignoring the given example of a country where things are worse now than before independence, clearly not only is it an irrelevant question, but giving an answer is also pointless.
Good to see the DO living up to his name re the £200m costs in FM Questions. Even after the good prof clarifies that £200m is not the correct number to use, good old Alex still goes on.....
Dunleavy seems to be flapping round like a wet trout, flopping from one side to the other trying to retain the remotest degree of credibility as he sees his reputation sinking in front of him.
Even his peers at the LSE have begun ripping apart his figures:
£200 million, less than half a Holyrood.
Mind you, I reckon the HM figures are tosh too.
teamhurtmore - MemberGood to see the DO living up to his name
"Alex" means "defender/helper of men".
Just sayin'
Interesting to know NW. To which the reply was, if only.
Perhaps he simply misheard defender as deceiver?!?
With all the major issues now dealt with (a long time ago) and mainly falsified I guess it will be more trivia and nonsense for the remaining days. The TV debate was pretty unedifying all round, but I fear this could get very dire.
Yeah - the trivia and nonsense for today includes a [url= http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/politics/update-angus-labour-candidate-resigns-after-hitler-youth-tweet-1.449806 ]Labour candidate resigning after comparing young Yes supporters to the Hitler Youth[/url] and [url= http://www.thecourier.co.uk/news/politics/nazi-swastika-daubed-on-snp-msp-s-arbroath-office-1.449448 ]a swastika being scrawled on a SNP MSP's office along with the UKOK slogan[/url].
Unpleasent at best.
Indicative of deepening divisions at worst.
Stupid undoubtably.
the trivia and nonsense for today includes
Here's a thought. How about not bothering with trivia and nonsense for a day and instead focusing on the arguments for and against Scotland separating from the rest of the UK......good idea or not ?
bencooper - MemberYeah - the trivia and nonsense for today includes a Labour candidate resigning after comparing young Yes supporters to the Hitler Youth and a swastika being scrawled on a SNP MSP's office along with the UKOK slogan.
As with the image of the Union Jack ablaze at Bannockburn which is doing the rounds on twitter, this too is deeply unpleasant. Some real idiots about.
Here's a thought. How about not bothering with trivia and nonsense for a day and instead focusing on the arguments for and against Scotland separating from the rest of the UK......good idea or not ?
I usually get called delusional or insane or something similar when that happens 😉
Well spend less time with separatists then ? 💡
I'm almost married to one, so that could be tricky.
FT poll today suggests that canny Scots remains an accurate description
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/238bf00a-0110-11e4-b94d-00144feab7de.html?siteedition=uk#axzz35mFY0HEK
Ernie, the "arguments" or lack of them were dealt with ages ago. When yS can't even be bothered to argue for independence then it's a bit hard on Ben and co. The rest of the debate will most likely roll along the gutter of trivia and nonsense eg the TV debate etc.....
Oh good grief. Utter pricks.
[img] http://www.arrse.co.uk/community/attachments/screenshot001-jpg.169271/ [/img]
Other people are a constant source of disappointment.
That could be the SRSM - they're fond of burning union flags, they've certainly done it before at Bannockburn.
There's really only three of them, and that's counting the dog 😉
I can't see what's particularly outrageous about burning a flag, or why anyone should be offended by it.
Obviously it's intended to be offensive but that's not a good enough reason to be offended imo.
If they pay for a flag then it's up to them if they decide to burn it.
Obviously it's intended to be offensive but that's not a good enough reason to be offended imo.
Which is why I defined them in the way I did.
Just because it's posted on STW doesn't mean you should automatically assume offence has been caused. I can't speak for Tightywighty however.
That could be the SRSM
Bloody communists.
Been at the Bannockburn re-enactment in the past when the black t-shirted goons of the SnG burnt the Union Flag on the hill.
That, alongside the drunken abuse & constant threats of violence against the 'English' army (many of whom were Scottish) made me decide there and then never to go back to that event. Travelling for hours & paying all my own costs for the weekend to put on a show & then being abused and threatened by drunken scum isn't my idea of an interesting weekend.
In fact, I don't really want to visit Scotland again to be honest & I certainly won't miss it when/if you vote Yes.
Sorry if that offends.
Just because it's posted on STW doesn't mean you should automatically assume offence has been caused.
If it's posted on STW it's reasonable to assume someone has been offended.
Sorry if that offends
It doesn't. I think you're being a little daft to make a decision about a whole country after one incident, but that's your choice. I've had anti-Scottish abuse when in England, but can recognise that it was just a tiny minority, and haven't let it change my opinion of England.
I assume they sneaked up and burnt the flag early morning? Cant see that happening during the middle of the reenactment.I have always pointed and laughed at folk that do that sort of thing,you know when you see somebody burning an effigy of the US pres,having spent time and money making it,go on then,fill your boots,you have totally owned the USA. Still,only on here is it more of an issue than the Hitler youth tweet.
If Scotland is so full of bellends, why is the UK so bothered about then buggering off?