The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Is Scottish independence a 'good or bad' thing?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by pane123

And why shouldn't England fans go into each tournament with a bit of belief? I think some Celtic fans genuinely believe they were in with a chance of winning the Champions' League this year.


I don't see the problem. If some Celtic fans thought they could win the Champions League then I would expect them to take a lot of stick when they were cuffed out by Juventus. With sport, and especially football, that's the nature of the beast.
It is a good thing. Scotland is able to take a chance at control of her future, away from England's shadow. The U.K. has a muzzle on Scotland, limiting her voice to the whole world. She deserves her future. Does it make sense, that the best thing for a country to prosper is the will of the people themselves and freedom?

Scotland does have her own government, yes, but is she truly in charge of her own future?

Shouldn't the oil under Scottish waters be her?

Shouldn't Scotland have power of her own future?

Now, the 'myths' on passports, defence, unemployment rising, Scottish students having to pay for higher education post-independence, and the such are not true.


http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2013/03/19/top-10-unionist-myths-debunked-banned-then-re-debunked/
Original post by WATKINS94
It is a good thing. Scotland is able to take a chance at control of her future, away from England's shadow. The U.K. has a muzzle on Scotland, limiting her voice to the whole world. She deserves her future. Does it make sense, that the best thing for a country to prosper is the will of the people themselves and freedom?

Scotland does have her own government, yes, but is she truly in charge of her own future?

Shouldn't the oil under Scottish waters be her?

Shouldn't Scotland have power of her own future?

Now, the 'myths' on passports, defence, unemployment rising, Scottish students having to pay for higher education post-independence, and the such are not true.


http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2013/03/19/top-10-unionist-myths-debunked-banned-then-re-debunked/


I agree, The unionist leaders have admitted we can go it alone.

Why not control our own future?
Original post by Left Hand Drive
I agree, The unionist leaders have admitted we can go it alone.

Why not control our own future?



Because we already control our own future. I'd much rather not take any unnecessary risks along the way. After all, Why just stop at Scotland, lets break it down even further. Let anarchy reign.

I see Chris Hoy is getting called all kind of names now by the YesSNP on line supporters.
Original post by WATKINS94
It is a good thing. Scotland is able to take a chance at control of her future, away from England's shadow. The U.K. has a muzzle on Scotland, limiting her voice to the whole world. She deserves her future. Does it make sense, that the best thing for a country to prosper is the will of the people themselves and freedom?

Scotland does have her own government, yes, but is she truly in charge of her own future?

Shouldn't the oil under Scottish waters be her?

Shouldn't Scotland have power of her own future?

Now, the 'myths' on passports, defence, unemployment rising, Scottish students having to pay for higher education post-independence, and the such are not true.


http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2013/03/19/top-10-unionist-myths-debunked-banned-then-re-debunked/



Ah, the teary eyed sentimental arguments. Many of your myths however have been found to be based on fact by many independent analysts. That is because the SNPs roadmap appears to be based on assumptions.

You are right though. It's only been the SNP that have promoted to 'too wee, too small, too stupid' line, a phrase coined by Swinney in 2003. The question remains however will we be in a better or worse situation post seperation, and the SNP have failed to answer those questions effectively other than making wild assumptions.

you also seem to have forgotten about Wales and Northern Ireland in your ramblings and have focused in England. Everybody is an equal partner in the UK.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by MatureStudent36
Because we already control our own future. I'd much rather not take any unnecessary risks along the way. After all, Why just stop at Scotland, lets break it down even further. Let anarchy reign.

I see Chris Hoy is getting called all kind of names now by the YesSNP on line supporters.


But as a country we didn't vote for the conservatives. Our MP's voted against the cuts.

Why all don't we unite with the rest of europe or stop there the world?
Original post by Left Hand Drive
But as a country we didn't vote for the conservatives. Our MP's voted against the cuts.

Why all don't we unite with the rest of europe or stop there the world?


Did they vote against the cuts? Labour acknowledged cuts had to be made. The fact that they were just being partisan and arguing against them for the sake of it.

Was the SNP planning to continue to spend money that we didn't have? Or was it planning to fill the gaps with the mythical sovereign oil fund.

It may have missed you by, but it's not a conservative government. It's a coalition government and 20% of teh Scottish Elcetorate voted for the parties in that coalition. Infact, the SNP is great about talking for Scotland, but they only returned 6 seats out of 59. Hardly ground breaking
(edited 10 years ago)
Reply 2267
Avatar for Kj91
Kj91
6
A good thing. I would rather the future of Scotland was determined by Scottish politicians elected by the Scottish people. Independence is the default status of any country. The system we have now as mentioned is where Scotland is effectively held on a leash by Westminisiter who look for Londons interests first. Why can't Scotland go it alone, even David Cameron has admitted Scotland had what it takes to go it alone if it wants to.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/02/10/uk-britain-scotland-cameron-idUKBRE91900020130210 . The oil money could also have been used to build a Savings fund similar to Norway rather than squandered by Westminister politicians. There are also claims that Westminister has undervalued Scotlands oil in order to play down the threat of Nationalism . Here is another article on an interview with Denis Healey who claims that Scotland pays it fair share to the Union and that Thatcher would have been unable to carry out her policies without the additional 5 per cent gdp from oil.http://www.holyrood.com/2013/05/still-raising-eyebrows/ I think we Scots are to risk averse though and I think the Yes Scotland campaign has a lot to work to do. But theres still time left.
Original post by Kj91
A good thing. I would rather the future of Scotland was determined by Scottish politicians elected by the Scottish people. Independence is the default status of any country. The system we have now as mentioned is where Scotland is effectively held on a leash by Westminisiter who look for Londons interests first. Why can't Scotland go it alone, even David Cameron has admitted Scotland had what it takes to go it alone if it wants to.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/02/10/uk-britain-scotland-cameron-idUKBRE91900020130210 . The oil money could also have been used to build a Savings fund similar to Norway rather than squandered by Westminister politicians. There are also claims that Westminister has undervalued Scotlands oil in order to play down the threat of Nationalism . Here is another article on an interview with Denis Healey who claims that Scotland pays it fair share to the Union and that Thatcher would have been unable to carry out her policies without the additional 5 per cent gdp from oil.http://www.holyrood.com/2013/05/still-raising-eyebrows/ I think we Scots are to risk averse though and I think the Yes Scotland campaign has a lot to work to do. But theres still time left.


Singapore is only a city and can go it alone. We all know there's no issues with us doing it. It's just a case of if the pro's outweigh the cons, and it appears that the cons win in this case......Not too mention that the majority of us don't want to leave and are quite happy with where we are.

Scotland_SPOMKT_IndyTrend_Feb13_lrg.jpg

Yes, North Sea Oil has been beneficial, but so has the automotive industry, Aeronautical Industry, Financial Sector, Pharmaceutical, Logistics and a whole raft of other industry's that UKPLC has to draw on. I for one don't want to see Edinburgh Financial Industry getting a hammering.

Dennis Healey can claim what he want, although he makes no claim tha the numbers were falsified. In fact, even the author of the not so secret, secret McCrone Report states that all of the figures for North Sea Oil were readily available and he just quoted what was readily available to everyone.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2F-H01Qm1I


But I know that facts aren't going to get in the way of you're belief of persecution. Was the oil money squandered? Possibly, but that's what you get for returning governments based on socialist policies who were more concerned about buying votes with freebies, than dealing with realities. Not too different to what we have in Holyrood at the moment is it?
Original post by MatureStudent36

you also seem to have forgotten about Wales and Northern Ireland in your ramblings and have focused in England. Everybody is an equal partner in the UK.


This is just manifestly untrue. How could it possibly be true? The vast majority of people in the UK live in England and therefore the vast majority of the votes and MPs come from England. I'm not saying this is a bad thing, it's just reality. The same way that London and Torquay are not equal partners.
Original post by Gordon1985
This is just manifestly untrue. How could it possibly be true? The vast majority of people in the UK live in England and therefore the vast majority of the votes and MPs come from England. I'm not saying this is a bad thing, it's just reality. The same way that London and Torquay are not equal partners.


I'm sorry. Do the people in London get more votes than the people in Torquay?

Should we balance up the elections in Holyrood so Glasgow and Dundee can only deliver one MSP each in the spirit of fairness?

Is there some mythical difference between that of somebody from Scotland and some one from England?

You seem to forget that it's only a tiny minority of voters that seem to segment people along tribal 'you're not from round these parts so you must be different.'
(edited 10 years ago)
Reply 2271
Avatar for L i b
L i b
19
Original post by Kj91
A good thing. I would rather the future of Scotland was determined by Scottish politicians elected by the Scottish people. Independence is the default status of any country.


Oh please, are we at the stage where we're even going to pretend an appeal to nature is in any way a legitimate argument?

It's even demonstrably untrue. There are 200-odd states in the world. There are countless hundreds of communities, thousands even, across the globewhich could be reasonably described as national. Any state of significant size has such minorities within it.

The system we have now as mentioned is where Scotland is effectively held on a leash by Westminisiter who look for Londons interests first.


Aren't conspiracy theories fun? :rolleyes:


http://uk.reuters.com/article/2013/02/10/uk-britain-scotland-cameron-idUKBRE91900020130210 . The oil money could also have been used to build a Savings fund similar to Norway rather than squandered by Westminister politicians.


Your understanding of economics is as poor as your understanding of political science. There are many, very good arguments against oil funds. These arguments were made at the time, in cabinet, and it was decided against. I'm very grateful for that, considering the economic shift it allowed us to undertake in the 1980s. Britain is far better off for that decision.

There are also claims that Westminister has undervalued Scotlands oil in order to play down the threat of Nationalism .


Which were demonstrably proven to be false earlier this week through the novel use of actually looking at predictions and matching them to output.
Reply 2272
Avatar for L i b
L i b
19
Original post by Left Hand Drive
But as a country we didn't vote for the conservatives. Our MP's voted against the cuts.


As a race, maybe white people voted Labour. As a gender, maybe women would have elected a Lib Dem government into power in Scotland. In either case, I couldn't give two hoots. This is a democracy, and in a democracy all that counts is the vote of the individual.

I remind you that there are many places in Scotland where the Lib Dems, Labour and the Conservatives poll extremely well - yet are currently under a Scottish Government composed of the SNP.

Why all don't we unite with the rest of europe or stop there the world?


I believe we have united with Europe, in some sort of union, last time I checked. Good. As for the world, not a terrible idea - in some ways we do this already through the United Nations and other international bodies. Would I prefer closer co-operation between people? Yes, definitely.
Reply 2273
Avatar for Kj91
Kj91
6
Original post by MatureStudent36
Singapore is only a city and can go it alone. We all know there's no issues with us doing it. It's just a case of if the pro's outweigh the cons, and it appears that the cons win in this case......Not too mention that the majority of us don't want to leave and are quite happy with where we are.

Scotland_SPOMKT_IndyTrend_Feb13_lrg.jpg

Yes, North Sea Oil has been beneficial, but so has the automotive industry, Aeronautical Industry, Financial Sector, Pharmaceutical, Logistics and a whole raft of other industry's that UKPLC has to draw on. I for one don't want to see Edinburgh Financial Industry getting a hammering.

Dennis Healey can claim what he want, although he makes no claim tha the numbers were falsified. In fact, even the author of the not so secret, secret McCrone Report states that all of the figures for North Sea Oil were readily available and he just quoted what was readily available to everyone.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2F-H01Qm1I


But I know that facts aren't going to get in the way of you're belief of persecution. Was the oil money squandered? Possibly, but that's what you get for returning governments based on socialist policies who were more concerned about buying votes with freebies, than dealing with realities. Not too different to what we have in Holyrood at the moment is it?


You keep showing that Ipsi-Mori poll. One poll cannot determine the opinion of the Scottish people that the Independence vote is falling with still a year to go. The majority of us are not happy, the only reason independence is so low is we Scots are worried about the economic prospects of Independenence and are being sucked into scare stories created by 'Better together' .Why did we have devolution in the first place if we were so happy.Devo max would have been much more popular solution. Better Together have had many scare stories about Jobs,pensions,entry to the EU,currency and the Independence support is not falling. In my opinion it can only rise.'Better Together' will eventually run out of scare stories.The Yes campaign will step up nearer the time.You say we have pros and cons and that cons outweigh the pros but have not listed any of them.

I will need to look at the McCrone report. What do you mean by the Edinburgh financial industry taking a a hammering?

What do you mean by facts. The majority of you post just consists of your opinion like mine. You can't claim it as a fact.
Original post by MatureStudent36
I'm sorry. Do the people in London get more votes than the people in Torquay?


You're welcome. And no, clearly not but we're not talking about individuals. 'London' as a bloc clearly has far more voting power and influence than 'Torquay' could ever have.


Should we balance up the elections in Holyrood so Glasgow and Dundee can only deliver one MSP each in the spirit of fairness?


No. Read that part of my post where I said this isn't neccesarily a bad thing in itself, just the reality of the situation.


Is there some mythical difference between that of somebody from Scotland and some one from England?


Stupid question, won't dignify it with an answer.


You seem to forget that it's only a tiny minority of voters that seem to segment people along tribal 'you're not from round these parts so you must be different.'


No, I seem not to. I can't stop you imagining what motives I have for making a statement. I was simply stating an absolute fact. It was you who claimed that every constituent country of the UK were equal partners. By making that statement it's you who's highlighting the distinction.
Reply 2275
Avatar for Psyk
Psyk
16
Original post by Kj91
Independence is the default status of any country.


Indeed. I mean how many countries are there other than those in the UK that are not independent?

I wonder what the reason for that might be...
Reply 2276
Avatar for Psyk
Psyk
16
Original post by Gordon1985

No, I seem not to. I can't stop you imagining what motives I have for making a statement. I was simply stating an absolute fact. It was you who claimed that every constituent country of the UK were equal partners. By making that statement it's you who's highlighting the distinction.


Look again at what you quoted:

Original post by MatureStudent36

you also seem to have forgotten about Wales and Northern Ireland in your ramblings and have focused in England. Everybody is an equal partner in the UK.


(emphasis mine)

He could have meant every person is equal.

Of course the problem is that if every nation as a single unit is equal, then there would be huge inequality on an individual level. You can't really have both each nation being equal and each person being equal. I suppose nationalists who consider that a problem would see independence as a solution to that. But it's kind of circular reasoning, they would only see it as a problem because they are nationalist and therefore probably already support independence.
Original post by Psyk
Indeed. I mean how many countries are there other than those in the UK that are not independent?

I wonder what the reason for that might be...


One could argue that there's 50 In the United States, Germany has half a dozen, as does Italy, Australia, France, Spain, Canada etc. Hell, even England could be broken down into several (Wessex, Mercia, Cormwall, Kingdom of Hwice

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sub-Roman_Britain

But then again, it depends on how you decide to identify yourself in tribalistic identity politics. Thankfully the majority of us aren't that narrow minded in our outlook.

I may even start a movement to kick start the Kingdom of Bernicia.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Psyk
Look again at what you quoted:



(emphasis mine)

He could have meant every person is equal.


I sincerely doubt it given the context of the discussion.


Of course the problem is that if every nation as a single unit is equal, then there would be huge inequality on an individual level. You can't really have both each nation being equal and each person being equal. I suppose nationalists who consider that a problem would see independence as a solution to that. But it's kind of circular reasoning, they would only see it as a problem because they are nationalist and therefore probably already support independence.


I agree, 'equality' between nations and regions isn't something that particulalry bothers me. I certainly don't think there's any kind of effort by England (however that could even come about) to somehow discriminate against the other nations. I think that's pretty ridiculous.
Original post by MatureStudent36


But then again, it depends on how you decide to identify yourself in tribalistic identity politics. Thankfully the majority of us aren't that narrow minded in our outlook.



Are you sure about that? I'm not sure what you mean by "us". Whether you mean people in Scotland, the UK, or the world. But I think you'll find identity plays a very prominent role in people's politics whatever one you meant.

The idea that anyone who doesn't support independence is unaffected by identity politics is completely and utterly laughable. For many, it's just a case of a different identity being more important to them, for many it's just not strong enough to affect their opinion on this issue.

The idea that this question is about us cutting ourselves off from the world or embracing some kind of new era of 'one-world' politics is lunacy. Neither are remotely likely to happen whatever way the vote goes.

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you