[dj1015]

Scottish people have it far to easy.

But one day the money tree will disappear and Salmond and his little band will be without a paddle. Then 9K fees will be the best students can hope for north of the baorder.

[Shomberlon]

(Original post by dj1015)
Scottish people have it far to easy.

But one day the money tree will disappear and Salmond and his little band will be without a paddle. Then 9K fees will be the best students can hope for north of the baorder.

The money only run out once the oil in the north sea does


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

[dj1015]

(Original post by Shomberlon)
The money only run out once the oil in the north sea does


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App

That oil belongs to all the UK btw. Its not to fund someone's socialist agenda.

[pshewitt1]

(Original post by Norton1)
And with that tiny section of a sentence you prove yourself a fool we needn't listen to.

yes because I wrote Britain instead of England all the truth I said before has become false, what an astute and well mannered observation. Grow up. My point is still valid and has already been proven, even if it is a small amount the Scottish definitely get a better deal.

[Norton1]

(Original post by pshewitt1)
yes because I wrote Britain instead of England all the truth I said before has become false, what an astute and well mannered observation. Grow up. My point is still valid and has already been proven, even if it is a small amount the Scottish definitely get a better deal.

Oh no, you misunderstand, you were talking nonsense before. That just revealed the crushing depths of your idiocy and ignorance.

(Original post by dj1015)
That oil belongs to all the UK btw. Its not to fund someone's socialist agenda.

It's Scotland's oil.

[pshewitt1]

(Original post by Norton1)
Oh no, you misunderstand, you were talking nonsense before. That just revealed the crushing depths of your idiocy and ignorance.



It's Scotland's oil.

no, as already proven secondly, no it's not Scotland's oil, you were in masses of debt and they only way to get out of your situation was to form a union with us, it is the UK's oil.

[dj1015]

(Original post by Norton1)
Oh no, you misunderstand, you were talking nonsense before. That just revealed the crushing depths of your idiocy and ignorance.



It's Scotland's oil.

ha ha ha.

[TheAdequateGatsby]

lol u mad bro?

[Norton1]

(Original post by pshewitt1)
no, as already proven secondly, no it's not Scotland's oil, you were in masses of debt and they only way to get out of your situation was to form a union with us, it is the UK's oil.

(Original post by dj1015)
ha ha ha.

Not our fault we won the natural lottery. Enjoy your coal guys.

[InkingTheSky]

Yes, Scottish students will enter Clearing on the 7th whereas English will enter on the 15th, but only Scottish unis will have posted their vacancies before the 15th. And yes, we get all of our tuition fees paid.

I would say we do get it easier, but really not by as much as English students seem to believe. Scottish universities reject a lot of Scottish applicants as they would rather get the inflated fees from other UK applicants, the Scottish government pay a lot less to them than £9K per student! It's actually more difficult to find a place in university up here I feel.

[pshewitt1]

(Original post by Norton1)
Not our fault we won the natural lottery. Enjoy your coal guys.

shall I remind you of the bankruptcy in panama which we bailed you out of, Scotland is not independent and in this the oil belongs to the U.K. also apart from the oil you really didn't win the natural lottery :/

[Norton1]

(Original post by pshewitt1)
shall I remind you of the bankruptcy in panama which we bailed you out of, Scotland is not independent and in this the oil belongs to the U.K

Yeah. The 1700's. Whelp, they're relevant. Oh no wait. They're totally not. If the argument is Scottish people are given subsidies and you draw a border for that purpose then I can draw a border letting us have all our oil. Free education. YOLO!

£9 grand a year eh. Bloody hell. You must hate paying that. That's £36,000 more than I paid. Dear oh dear oh dear.

[The Polymath]

(Original post by Norton1)
Yeah. The 1700's. Whelp, they're relevant. Oh no wait. They're totally not. If the argument is Scottish people are given subsidies and you draw a border for that purpose then I can draw a border letting us have all our oil. Free education. YOLO!

£9 grand a year eh. Bloody hell. You must hate paying that. That's £36,000 more than I paid. Dear oh dear oh dear.

Calm down you had to live in Scotland during that time.

[Norton1]

(Original post by Junaid96)
Calm down you had to live in Scotland during that time.

Heh. It's not exactly a blasted heath.

[ConnorMcKenzie]

(Original post by Norton1)
Yeah. The 1700's. Whelp, they're relevant. Oh no wait. They're totally not. If the argument is Scottish people are given subsidies and you draw a border for that purpose then I can draw a border letting us have all our oil. Free education. YOLO!

£9 grand a year eh. Bloody hell. You must hate paying that. That's £36,000 more than I paid. Dear oh dear oh dear.

Point well made!




If the Scottish Government are giving Scottish students free education and its within their budget, why not?

Obviously I believe we won't have the money to maintain it forever, but why shouldn't we benefit just now?

[The Mr Z]

(Original post by Norton1)
It's Scotland's oil.

There are international laws relating to how national waters are determined. They say that the North Sea oil fields would be split roughly half and half between England and Scotland. Further, much of the infrastructure essential to oil purification lies south of the border.

The reality is that oil production could not continue without an agreement for shared assets between England and Scotland, and that would necessitate that England gets its fair share of revenue. It would not be economically viable for either side to replicate missing infrastructure on their side of the border.

It's not Scotland's oil.

[Smack]

(Original post by The Mr Z)
They say that the North Sea oil fields would be split roughly half and half between England and Scotland, with the currently most active platforms actually on the English side.

I work in said industry and this is not true at all.

[Norton1]

(Original post by The Mr Z)
X

That's largely dependent on what law you choose to use. It's Scotland's oil.

[Dandyflower]

(Original post by roh)
Leads to us getting free education in Scotland under EU law regarding discrimination on the grounds of nationality, the same as other EU nationals, as it stops being a purely internal issue.

Unless we quit the EU obviously.

If Scotland becomes independent, it loses EU membership and will have to apply again.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...embership.html

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpo...t-scotland-eu/

The reality may very well be that Scotland will continue to be in the EU, but although some commentators think the reapplication is a formality, the renegotiation of terms will not be, i.e. it is highly likely it would have to adopt the euro as all new members do. A lot of people within the Eurozone countries really do not like the fact that Britain has the pound.

So a) I wouldn't take that for granted and b) the reality is the tuition fees in Scotland would shoot up; one reason being that they'll lose the same terms of trade with the rest of Europe as they have now.

As far as the oil goes, some Scots claim 'it's Scotland's'. There are studies, it seems, which suggest that it may be mostly English, some which suggest that it may largely go to Scotland. The reality will be that Scotland will get to keep precious little of the depleting supply. Westminster just won't allow it.

[Sly Blade]

(Original post by The Mr Z)
Haha, if you're going to try and be a pedant, at least be correct! You've got your definition of "country" is wrong.

Heh, i tried however...

(Original post by The Mr Z)
The UK is one country. I wasn't being technical on terms there, I was being completely truthful. I can select parts of England (the nation, the semi-arbitrary set of boundaries around a packet of land) that have less than 1/10th the population of the whole UK (The country, with actual international status)

... The UK is not one country... it is if anything the union of the British isle and Northern Ireland. By definition it is the union of what is considered ot be 2 separate geological countries.

(Original post by The Mr Z)
And then I can apply your argument wholesale to that part of England as to why it should get all the financial benefits that Scotland (The equally arbitrary set of boundaries encompassing a pocket of land. Borders are really arbitrary, they don't match up to the historic separate countries before unification because those borders were undefined and shifted continuously.)

You obviously lack an understanding to what makes a country... There is more to a country than just its geological borders, for you to be able to claim what you have you must ignore that Scotland shares a common people, its own 'assembly' and a recent History as a separate country. No individual part of England can claim that. i could probably put this all a lot better and slightly less aggressively but i'm tired and therefore i apologise.

(Original post by The Mr Z)
England chose to acknowledge Scotland as a separate local authority. To be a Country you need to be recognised by the United Nations (formal definition), have a separate government, head of state and embassies.

I can't argue with this as we obviously share different definitions of a country. Though i fear yours is the one that would stand up in court, though not necessarily historically accurate. However can you name any individual location in England that is less that a tenth of the population that has been recognised as its own authority?

(Original post by The Mr Z)
London is a better candidate for a separate Country than Scotland - it actually has all but recognition by the UN, whereas Scotland lacks its own head of state and embassies. (London has a mayor for head of state, an elected assembly with executive power, and its own Embassies abroad thanks to the 2012 Olympics. Scotland just has an assembly with executive power, it has neither a head of state nor diplomatic relations)

fair enough but irrelevant as far as my globes concerned London is its own country anyway... weird globe. Just out of Curiosity is the queen not still Scotland's head of state?

(Original post by The Mr Z)
Westminster has Scottish members of both the commons and the lords who are permitted to vote in such measures, and if you hadn't noticed those are things that affect all member parts of the UK! The defining feature of democracy is that mandate is given to majority decision, not unanimous decision.

And that's why we are a Constitutional Monarchy (sorry just wanted to say that.) I don't understand your point here sorry. England still holds the majority representation in both does it not?

(Original post by The Mr Z)
English MPs however cannot have any say in matters which affect only Scotland, but Scottish MPs can have a say in matter which affect only England. This is, at best a travesty, and more importantly unconstitutional.

Westminster can impose any law on solely Scotland as it sees fit, if voted for by the majority.