Osbourne says no to currency union.

Junkyard, this:

You’re right- since neither Wales or Northern Ireland voted for the current government either, all 3 are ruled by England.

is bollocks, it isn’t a fact.
What other motive than anti-Englishness would explain this false statement?
Do enlighten me…

Ernie is spot on. Plenty of Scots do not hold the view that we are ruled by other people. I suppose what needs dispelled is the myth that yes voters are somehow heralding a socialist cause against the rest of us not quite “Scottish enough Scots”, supportive of a Tory ‘regime’.

Before you all dig out those Che Guevara t-shirts again, some have mentioned the rise of the foodbanks as an example of a social injustice, hence the need for independence. I saw a program recently that outlined the plight of a family from Hull using a foodbank. How does Scottish independence help them? All I can think of is that perhaps with our own national broadcaster and press we don’t need to hear about Hull, then can carry on in ignorant bliss. Power to us brothers.

Also I reckon Trident is not a big issue on its own. People will vote yes regardless of any political parties stance on it. If SNP ever change their stance on nuclear weapons I don’t see many brothers giving up the good fight to freedom. I do understand though that this issue allows some to feel an unfounded sense of moral superiority.

I know their are Scots on both sides of the debate with poor geography skills, however since this the yes side raise the issue, I will say there will be significant numbers of yes voters that could not point to faslane on a map.

Easy to call something “silly nonsense”

Very easy, especially when people try to suggest that Scotland is some sort of colony under the yoke of the English.

it isn’t a fact.
What other motive than anti-Englishness would explain this false statement?
Do enlighten me

An ability to count mainly
Have a look at each area mentioned in turn and see who would rule them alone without england and then look at who rules the UK with england. What conclusion do you reach?
TBH i have no idea why you wish to claim it is bollox or anti english
its still reality,

dispelled is the myth that yes voters are somehow heralding a socialist cause against the rest of us not quite “Scottish enough Scots”, supportive of a Tory ‘regime’.

I agree its a myth that anyone thinks that

does a picture help?

do you really think that talk about being ruled by the English really helps ?

Yes, it seems to be the only card that wee eck has left to play. And the polls suggest that he has some success with it especially when he adds the word Tory to it. Given that most if not all of the other major arguments (to the extent that they even exist beyond the realms of fantasy) have been squashed already, I would expect the ruled by the English card will become a regular one played over the remainder. Time for mass screenings of face painted antipodeans……

Map shows how unrepresentative all those years of Labour government were, doesn’t it…

Given that yet another body reaches the obvious conclusion…

The study concluded: “Any future independent Scottish government would need to further consolidate its fiscal position, meaning either an increase in taxes, a reduction in government spending or a combination of these two measures.”

(the Scottish Institute today, but you can put most think tanks in there…)

…yS might as well play the ruled by English card for all it’s worth. It’s a better argument than the rest of the guff.

Indeed it does. Just look at all those orange bits at the top which will be ruled by the central belt.

Map shows how unrepresentative all those years of Labour government were, doesn’t it…

Not really. It shows just how unrepresentative of Tory support a political map can be.

That is a political map of the UK after the last general election. In that election the Tories received 36% of the vote and failed to secure a majority in Parliament, they were however able to form a government thanks to all those Scottish Liberal Democrat MPs.

However looking at the map you could mistakenly believe that support for the Tories in the UK was solid and overwhelming, in contrast with actual reality. Which of course is why Junkyard posted it.

EDIT: I posted it to prove that NW point was correct as we cannot really debate this I am relived to see you did not go down the personal route nor make a spurious reason for why I posted it.
the clearest point would be that almost all the Blue is in England bar 4 so it is obvious that NW point is correct
If you remove those 11 seats [ scots lib dems] they still have 353 seats so No ernie it would not be true to say that. you can even remove the scot tory one as well if you want and they still have a majority. Pfft facts eh

BTW do you have a reference for your claim re the Scots role in the empire as we would not want to attempt to mislead now 🙄

aracer well we have not done that angle before …its like deja vu all over again.

It proves NW was correct and not anti english

Ninfan those really are blue tinged glasses you wear 😉

What conclusion do you reach?

A different one to you.
Firstly, no-one voted for a coalition government.
Secondly, it doesn’t matter where Westminster is located geographically, it houses MPs from England, Scotland and Wales.
By golly, we even had a Scottish Prime minister not that long ago!
So no, you are not ruled by England.

Unless you harbour anti-British, anti-English feelings in which case I could quite understand that point of view.

JY. Plenty of people think the way I describe. As an aside, how do you think Scottish independence helps a family in Hull using a foodbank??

Just like we’ve not had the “ruled by the English” before, eh?

athgray – Member

JY. Plenty of people think the way I describe. As an aside, how do you think Scottish independence helps a family in Hull using a foodbank??

It’s unimportant.
Much like wanting democracy but only as long as you get the result you want.

If you remove those 11 seats [ scots lib dems]….

So you mean that contrary to the impression that the map you posted gives most of Scotland isn’t Liberal Democrat ?

That map is misleading ?!!!

I saw a program recently that outlined the plight of a family from Hull using a foodbank. How does Scottish independence help them?

It shows them that you dont have to take the same old claptrap from the red tories or the blue tories over and over again.

1) Why does it have to be radical?
2) If the UK leaves the EU does anyone expect radical change from that?
Should we not bother discussing it then?
3) It is a proposal to be independent it is not a proposal to become a radical socialist utopia free of inequity with equal opportunities for all.

1) because if it’s not a significant improvement from the status quo, it’s not worth the significant cost and time inputs. Those are all resources that could be used to improve Scotland’s healthcare, education, criminal justice system – all stuff that is already fixable by the Scottish government and not under UK control.

2) if the only proposal were to leave the EU but keep everything else the same, then no, that’s not worth talking about either.

3) well, correct – unfortunately some nationalists see independence as an achievement n itself. It shouldn’t be – it should be a tool that unlocks some other more important goal – like, reducing inequity, poverty and conflict.

States should exist to serve their populations and facilitate good governance. There has not been an articulation of what significant changes should and could be made with the new tool of independence or why those changes could not be made under the status quo – just an assertion that there will be an improvement even though everything will stay the same.

Ultimately this is a problem with the SNP being the Tartan Tories – they think they can only sell independence on a “don’t scare the horses” platform – “don’t worry, independence won’t mean that iScotland will nationalize your second bedroom and force you to speak Lallans to your dog”. But if you push a small c conservative platform then you don’t end up with significant changes (so why bother ?) and you don’t have any technocratic/pragmatic arguments in favour of change (so you can only appeal to sentiment).

Time for mass screenings of face painted antipodeans……

Just as an aside, I don’t know whether Gibson considers himself Australian or not. IIRC he was born in the US to an American family but his loopy father brought them to Sydney because of the Vietnam war. Gibson attended Sydney Uni and was quite active in the anti war movement (which is pretty annoying when you see some of his later crappy war films).

A different one to you.

and the actual numbers.

So no, you are not ruled by England.

I am still not in scotland – how many times do I have to say this?
the tories lead the coalition without the england votes there are no tories [ ok there are 4 across the three other provinces/areas regions] . It takes a lot of spin/inability to grasp figures to claim this is not england deciding/ruling

Unless you harbour anti-British, anti-English feelings in which case I could quite understand that point of view.

You are confusing an ability to count with those aflictions

JY. Plenty of people think the way I describe. As an aside, how do you think Scottish independence helps a family in Hull using a foodbank??

Is this a trick question? Independence for scotland is highly unlikely to have an impact on a poor family elsewhere in the union or the world.
What is your point?

Ernie is it really your claim tha I have used a map of the election result by constituency to misrepresent the election result. Is that you being humorous? The map proves NW point which is all it was meant to do hence you are left doing this desperate stuff. Ignore the figures if you wish but it undeniably proves that england decided we got Tories and not the regions/areas NW mentioned.

KB thanks you for your post and explanation. I understand your view, Cheers.

Who do I answer JY or gordimhor?
JY watch what you copy and paste. The first part was a statement, not a question.

I know but I included it as you had directed it to me and it seemed pointless to abridge – I may have got a little cut and paste happy even by my standards 😳

Ignore us both is my best advice 😉

I know I should but I can’t.

Gordimhor, that is what saddens me. Can Scots not find the same way out of the same old claptrap as a struggling family using a foodbank in Hull? 😥 I hope we can.

Loads of waffle, but still no countries that want to come back under UK rule.

“Loads of waffle” says the man who makes a comparison between former colonies of the British Empire and Scotland today, and talks about being “under the yoke” 😆

<sigh> I’ve resisted, but this is for you, epicyclo:

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.

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 Pakistani 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