Is Scottish independence a 'good or bad' thing?

Have a read through this thread, especially the comments from SNP youth activists. Did you know we'll get free TV if we leave?

I was reading somewhere though, that although the Bedroom tax has become a political football, it does have broad support from the electorate. I may be wrong though.

Although they're (the SNP) are promising to do a U turn on this and doing their usual, which is blaming Westminster for a generic problem that they actually already have the power to do something about . I doubt following their leaked report about how spending would have to be cut, they'll actually do a U turn on it.

I have read some of their bodged policies such as the NATO and EU membership which back-fired on them fairly quickly. Not to mention the lack of an economic policy that isn’t the type of thing found in economists Christmas cracker.

The up-shot of promising a ridiculous amount of policies which they cannot deliver will of course either destroy their party come an unsuccessful referendum and any real chance of another stab at independence or place them in a position where a 'new' country will be expecting these goods and services.

This is the problem though. I think if they're successful and they can't deliver on their promises they'll be the usual exscuse of blaming Westminster for not playing ball. Knowing full well that it would be unlikely of us to try and renogotiate joining.

If you read the comments boards on teh media which are filled with their supporters coordinated responses, the two new lines are.
1) It's not just SNP supporters who want seperation. (Meaning that even less of those who voted for the SNP back them on that one.)
2) It'll be up to the new Scottish Government to sort these problems out.

I'm sorry, but when it comes to my future, I don't want to kick the can down the road until after the decisions been made. I think I'd respect the SNP and the Yes campaign more if they actually came out and said what their supporters on line are saying which is 'we don't really know.'

What I don't understand is the argument that it will be bad for England why would it be? Just because a country is bigger does not mean it is better look at China and then look at Germany, China is far bigger yet Germany has higher wages, life expectancy etc.

If they are successful in terms of achieving the separation of Scotland, but their policies or plans simply do not come to fruition, then the default argument will be to move the blame to other, what will then be governments in other countries although I doubt the SNP would be able to survive splitting off from the UK and then defaulting on a wide variety of plans.

Given a 'Yes' vote, I cannot see whatever new government forms as being in a position to re-negotiate joining the UK, given the fervor behind the drive to leave now. Not only would it be a killer sting for any nationalist drives in the future but I think the terms of Scotland re-joining would not be as beneficial as they currently are.

It is a bit diifcult to make comparisons without taking in affect cultural and societal differences. Instead of using China, why don't you use the US? We could compare St Kitts and Japan. There's a whole host of other reasons. Labour Productivity is one of the main ones and that is indpendant of size.

Would you care to explain why a Scotsman isn't allowed to donate money? After all the SnP seem to love wielding out tax exiles to tell us how to vote.

Scottish Labour MP Jim Sheridan (Paisley and Renfrewshire North) already did:


"Jim Sheridan (Paisley and Renfrewshire North) said only those who lived within Scotland and paid their taxes should be allowed to donate towards the campaign for independence ahead of the referendum next year." (The Herald, Tuesday, 15 January 2013)

You might not know, but:

The pro-Independence campaign is not accepting donations of more than £500 from anyone who doesn't live in Scotland.

The anti-independence campaign has accepted a donation of £500,000 from Ian Taylor who doesn't live in Scotland. Just a few months ago, Labour MP John Mann had called Ian Taylor's donations to the Tories "Dirty Money" and demanded that they be returned.

I'd hope you'd be cleverer than to link to an article which is currently subject to an action for defamation by the subject of it.

Could you point me towards that "action for defamation", quoting some 'reliable', 'unbiased' sources like the BBC?

http://wingsoverscotland.com/closing-down-debate/

Whilst I'm not normally one to become embroiled in TSR debates, after watching some of the Scottish Parliament on the BBC earlier, I was thoroughly disappointed by Nicola Sturgeons response to various questions from the chamber. If I remember correctly, the somewhat 'touchy' bedroom tax was highlighted by a female member of the Scottish Labour (I think!) party, which was met with a reply from Sturgeon who ignored the cusp of the policy entirely, instead opting to turn her reply into an opportunity to whinge about Westminster.

Scottish Labour MP Jim Sheridan (Paisley and Renfrewshire North) already did:


"Jim Sheridan (Paisley and Renfrewshire North) said only those who lived within Scotland and paid their taxes should be allowed to donate towards the campaign for independence ahead of the referendum next year." (The Herald, Tuesday, 15 January 2013)

Well that's what the luvvies at the national collective are claiming as you very well know.

I don't think that they're looking long term though. They're just after enough spin to secure a yes vote next September.

That's my concern and the concern of many as shown by recent polling showing another drop in support for seperation back to 30%. (Why hasn't Maths Tutor commented on the drop as he was all over the increase to 34% like a tramp on chips?)

I'm thinking that most of the Nats are thinking we'll get to keep all of the oil revenue and forgetting about the damage to other revenues and additional costs that this fantasy will create.

Indeed. I'm pretty sure at the start of this debate the SNP were entirely ignorant that they could essentially eliminate the underoccupancy charge quite legally in Scotland. They hit it far too hard.

Which led to Labour, understandably, pointing out their ability to end it. It'd cost less than £50 million. Which is rather less than they're shelling out for free prescriptions for the middle classes, free tuition fees that seem to do nothing to promote access to university or a whole range of other crap. Unfortunately they'd just shelled out tens of millions to create a rarer medicines fund, which is a crap idea, so they had no cash left.

It simply looks to me now that they've entirely overplayed that one and look fairly foolish as a result. It's been shown that their doom-and-gloom disaster scenario isn't worth paying to fix in their book. Instead they hope this won't be noticed, and they can still say that this policy would be done away with if they got into office.

But isn't he part of 'Better Together'?

Is his fellow Scottish Labour MP Alistair Darling also one of the thickest men in the House of Commons?

MatureStudent36, do you find this 'eloquent'? Do you understand what your hero Lib is saying here?

But it can't be true because the most 'reliable' and 'unbiased' source in the world, the BBC, hasn't said so.

So Lib must be wrong.

MatureStudent36, do you find this 'eloquent'? Do you understand what your hero Lib is saying here?