Forum menu
Well, apparently you still wish to stake a claim on 9% of the Bank of England... where is that situated geographically?
Sorry, I forgot that [b]everything[/b] only means what you want it to mean to suit your argument at that particular moment in time!
The pound isn't geographically distributed. And of course it's not the pound we're talking about really, it's a currency union. We'll use the pound, that's certain, what's not certain is whether we'll do it with a CU.
Sorry, I had already edited it to make my point clearer, that the Bank of England is situated where?
And lets remember that sterling is a millstone round Scotland's neck
Plus we're still stuck on that 'everything' word...
Sorry, I had already edited it to make my point clearer, that the Bank of England is situated where?
Okay, by that argument the nuclear subs are ours.
No, the empty harbour is
the Submarines are located far away hidden under the ocean remember 😆
One of them is, others are tied up, and we have a mountain full of warheads. We could always eBay those if the oil runs out early.
This is daft. Scotland doesn't want to steal anything from the rest of the UK, we just want a fair share of things we've spent our taxes building up.
Oh look what a surprise. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-23681061
Well I think all the big highland estates should be compulsorily purchased and given to the nation or local communities. But that's a different issue.
I'd really like to see this happen. The land inequality in Scotland is fairly extreme. It will always be somewhat distorted due to the nature of the land in question. But the current situation seems closer to a sporting theme park rather than an inhabited environment.
And the Queen, to me at least. Is an utter irrelevance, or at least should be.
Well, Ben since most of the exploration was done and pipelines were built back in the seventies, when BP was majority state owned, I think that you'll find it was [b]our[/b] taxes that were spent building up the North Sea oil industry 8)
Oh look what a surprise. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-north-east-orkney-shetland-23681061
analysts believe oil produced there could see the Atlantic overtake the North Sea as the UK's biggest oil-producing region.
If I was an Orcadian I would be looking for independence.
After all, why should they be governed by a Parliament elected by the Central Belt, who are simply sucking up all their oil wealth?
Would Scotland be trying for Independence without the oil?
Would Scotland be trying for Independence without the oil?
Of course we would. I'm a Green, I'd much prefer the oil to stay where it is.
I'm a Green
So, do you support their manifesto in part or in whole - on the original subject of this thread, they support a separate Scottish Currency.
In the long run a separate currency probably makes the most sense, however for a transition period using the pound is sensible.
Would Scotland be trying for Independence without the oil?Of course we would. I'm a Green, I'd much prefer the oil to stay where it is.
But then none of the finances work. People in Scotland would be significantly worse off after Independence.
The reason for the question is who is going to gain from Independence. Who is going to have 'more'? For the vast majority of Scot's there will be very little difference - except that they will not be able to blame Westminster for laws, taxes, etc. So who is going to benefit?
The political class will do better since they will be in charge of a country, rather than with devolved powers. Some large companies may do better since the intention is to reduce tax rates. For an individual is it just a sense of 'my country'?
I suspect that one group that is hoping to better is the poor, since the SNP (and Scottish Labour) are left wing and will have a policy of income redistribution. Those of benefits, including the ill, are likely to expect to do better. Pensioners are expecting to do better, since there is a commitment to increase pensions and stop the increase in pension ages.
However all of these need to be funded by taxation. So who in the tax paying class is expecting to do better? If they are not expecting to do better, why would they vote for Independence? Many surveys across the UK have shown that people are 'happy' to pay more tax to support the less well off, but when they actually vote this does not happen.
So again the question - Would Scotland be trying for Independence without the oil? I have no issue with BenC saying he would vote Yes, after his comments for 200+ pages it is expected. But what about the 5 million people across Scotland. This is important because in many households they will be looking at their finances, as well as the emotive arguments, before they go and vote.
Without a coherent financial proposal(inc currency), voters will not vote in enough numbers for change. Change, and a very significant change in this case, requires an overwhelming argument to make it happen. The fact that this thread is still running after 200+ pages, shows that this proposal either does not exist or has not been presented will enough to make a Yes vote a certainty
I suspect more people sitting on the fence or at the edge of Yes, will change to No than the other way round. Why because it is a big change and people don't like a big change. There is no momentum for the Yes, despite being allowed to pick the date of the vote and duration of the campaign and including 16 and 17 aged voters. At no point has any survey showed a Yes win, and at the moment the Yes voting is in decline.
Free Yorkshire has plenty of oil, we'll not be sharing as it's needed for cooking chips.
it's a funny green that wants to increase the power of oil and gas companies by radically downscaling the size and ability of the state that needs to supervise them. iScotland will be outclassed, outresourced and outnegotiated by any one of the major energy companies.
iScotland will be outclassed, outresourced and outnegotiated by any one of the major energy companies.
Norway seems to have managed okay.
But then none of the finances work. People in Scotland would be significantly worse off after Independence.
Not true. Oil is a very nice bonus to have, but even without oil the GDP per head is similar north and south of the border.
[img] 
[/img]
I see commercial ship building has just gone.
Norway seems to have managed okay.
Statoil seems to help that situation somewhat.
Oil is a very nice bonus to have, but even without oil the GDP per head is similar north and south of the border.
Those are the figures for Scotland as part of the UK – what about for an independent Scotland?
Not true. Oil is a very nice bonus to have, but even without oil the GDP per head is similar north and south of the border.
That ignores the multiplier effect that Oil revenues give.
I see commercial ship building has just gone.
It can't have done, we're Better Together, remember?
Oh wait, the GMB are blaming Salmond for it 🙄
It can't have done, we're Better Together, remember?
As part of the UK, we have the broad shoulders to order ferries from elsewhere.
The headline seems about right to me.
Yes, sounds about right to me too.
Though it's complicated by the fact that often there's no such thing as "the truth". Will there be a currency union? Will Scotland be in the EU? No-one can say for certain, as these things will be negotiated after the referendum, all either side can do is give reasons why they think the negotiations will go their way.
Agree with that too, plus I think too much has been made of the personalities of AS and AD, as if it is an election. What happens after the referendum, which parties choose to seek election and on exactly what policies is another debate. There is even a strong chance the Conservatives could make a resurgence in Scotland, it it were to become independent (well, it would be hard to become less popular).
The question here is 'Do you think Scotland should be an independent country?', not 'Do you think Alex Salmond, or whoever should be First Minister', or even 'Do you think Scotland would be slightly worse off/slightly better off/the same if it were to become independent?'
Norway seems to have managed okay.
d'oh! Statoil is a state-owned company that spent millions of dollars bribing Iranian Islamist fascists. I'm not sure that it's much of a model for a social democratic iScotland in which transnational corporations produce the oil and gas.
far out, this statehood business is more tricky than it looks...
Linky please KB
Genuine interest.
[url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3849147.stm ]This'll save KB the trouble[/url]
d'oh! Statoil is a state-owned company that spent millions of dollars bribing Iranian Islamist fascists.
Which leads us nicely on to major Better Together donor Ian Taylor of Vitol, involved in shady goings-on in Iran, Iraq, Syria and Serbia. He gave a million dollars to a Serbian warlord, gave kickbacks to Saddam Hussein, and gave half a million pounds to Better Together.
I wonder why?
The whole queen thing is interesting and they another example of the fact that even the DO doesn't actually want independence.
Keep the queen - tick
Keep open boundaries - tick
Keep the £ - tick
Keep Westminster in charge if monetary and fiscal policy - tick
Keep the BOE as lender of last resort - tick
Have even great tax powers - tick
All delivered with a NO. So WTF is this all about? Even the DO wants essentially the status quo, except for a bigger throne and mirror.
Loads of independent countries have the queen as titular head of state - we had a wee event for them in Glasgow recently, you might have seen it.
Equally, lots of countries in Europe have open boundaries.
So are you saying no European or Commonwealth country is independent?
We're back to your interesting understanding of independence again, which only really North Korea complies with.
Which leads us nicely on to major Better Together donor Ian Taylor of Vitol, involved in shady goings-on in Iran, Iraq, Syria and Serbia. He gave a million dollars to a Serbian warlord, gave kickbacks to Saddam Hussein, and gave half a million pounds to Better Together.
Who is proposing that iScotland should emulate Vitol or Ian Taylor? No-one. You were suggesting that iScotland could emulate Norway and Statoil.
Your response is pure flannel and whataboutery. It's a strange type of Green that wants to emulate an oil state as a model of sustainable social democracy.
Not sure if that was a question for me Ben, but if so, the odd thing is that throughout, the case is actually being made for the status quo with a little bit but not too much autonomy and the support of a wider union.
There is only one box that delivers that and is has the word NO on it. Essentially both sides want largely the same result. Hence this is largely a waste of time and money (albeit a fun thread).
You were suggesting that iScotland could emulate Norway and Statoil.
No I wasn't. I was using Norway as an example to point out that small countries don't necessarily get bullied by oil companies. I wasn't suggesting that Scotland should emulate Norway in every way.
I want the oil to stay where it is. However, realistically, I know that's not going to happen. So, if it is going to be extracted, I want it to do the greatest good, not be squandered.
There is only one box that delivers that and is has the word NO on it.
What the No box delivers is a cut in funding for Scotland, and no further democracy for anyone. Oh, and we still get to spend colossal sums on nuclear weapons.
[url= http://m.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/scottish-independence-tory-leaflet-dishonest-1-3510966 ]It's not just that Better Together lie, it's that they're so hysterically bad at it...[/url]
Polling card through this morning, shit just got real! 😆
Not got ours yet. ITS A CONSPIRACY I TELL YOU!!,!!
Same here! Maybe the postie is working for BT and hiding them?
Yup,mine too!
None here.
I blame MI6.
Would be amusing is you "cyber nats" got no votes 😛
Mine is here.
I got mine this morning. Wonder if THM, FNF and EL got theirs yet? Oh wait no they can't vote 😆
I'm just going to leave this here. Have a watch of it and tell me that we're better together.