The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Psyk
I support something like federalism (not technically true federalism, the UK Parliament would still have supreme authority). I think England should be multiple regions with their own assemblies/parliaments rather than one big one though.

what do you think is the advantage of keeping the traditional model of parliament being supreme? to me it means that countries like scotland and wales can determine the social policies of england, but welsh and scottish people don't live in england so what point is there of them imposing their policies on us and what's the point of us imposing our own policies on them (although it doesn't really happen anymore)? and the idea of parts of england getting assemblies is an all right idea, I don't know if I'd go that far with the idea - at least the countries within the union should be entitled to assemblies, because in the case of federalism, you'd be giving england much more of a say over federal policies e.g. war and international relations etc if there was to be the conventional state-laying of representation within parliament like the senates of india, switzerland, australia and america
Definitely not. Alex Salmond is an absolute rotter.
Reply 4542
aaaaaaaaaaaaa
Original post by FinalMH
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-25352371 I suppose one thing I'm shocked at is the fact that no UK MP has stated this would be illegal or any professional lawyer.


Yet you link us to an article in which a Labour MP states that the policy would be discriminating on the grounds of nationality and that points out such discrimination is illegal under EU law. :confused:
I'm voting yes, and I don't think I need to give any reasons for it.

I'm Scottish, I don't feel British, in fact when I go down to England people hear my accent and just stare at me like I shouldn't be there, that's why I feel we should be our own independent country without having to answer to Westminster.

That's just my opinion though, anyone can disagree!
Reply 4545
Original post by JayStudent
I'm voting yes, and I don't think I need to give any reasons for it.

I'm Scottish, I don't feel British, in fact when I go down to England people hear my accent and just stare at me like I shouldn't be there, that's why I feel we should be our own independent country without having to answer to Westminster.

That's just my opinion though, anyone can disagree!


So you feel like a Scouse in Somerset?

Or a Gaelic speaker in Motherwell.

You don't need any reasons for your vote. But which year do you think Scotland would be out of transition and be an independent country? (ie not using rUK infrastructure)
Original post by Quady
So you feel like a Scouse in Somerset?

Or a Gaelic speaker in Motherwell.

You don't need any reasons for your vote. But which year do you think Scotland would be out of transition and be an independent country? (ie not using rUK infrastructure)


Well I'm not sure about how divided areas are in England, but I don't personally think that in Scotland many areas are divided! In terms of accent, I don't think anyone pays much attention to where you are from; of course they notice as Edinburgh and Glasgow are far different yet only 45 minutes apart, but no one cares. The only time there's a divide is if it's the typical neds/chavs that everywhere in the world has.

Well in the vote next year, I hope there is a majority yes vote and the plan set out in the white paper on us being fully independent by.. 2016 I think it was? Definitely happens. I know there will probably be SOME sacrifices we have to make financially to be able to thrive on our own, but I don't think it is as bad as some scaremongers are preaching. (At least, I don't think we will be the next Greece anyway..)
Reply 4547
Original post by JayStudent
Well I'm not sure about how divided areas are in England, but I don't personally think that in Scotland many areas are divided! In terms of accent, I don't think anyone pays much attention to where you are from; of course they notice as Edinburgh and Glasgow are far different yet only 45 minutes apart, but no one cares. The only time there's a divide is if it's the typical neds/chavs that everywhere in the world has.

Well in the vote next year, I hope there is a majority yes vote and the plan set out in the white paper on us being fully independent by.. 2016 I think it was? Definitely happens. I know there will probably be SOME sacrifices we have to make financially to be able to thrive on our own, but I don't think it is as bad as some scaremongers are preaching. (At least, I don't think we will be the next Greece anyway..)


Yeah but not everyone in Scotland understands Glesga patter, meh.

So you think in 18 months from the vote Scotland will have setup its Passport Service, DVLA, systems to collect tax and distribute benefits? Where would Scotland get the money from in those 18 months to pay for those projects?

2016 Scotland will elect a government, but I'd be somewhat suprised if it could independently pay Mrs Miggins of Cumnock her pension.
Original post by Quady
Yeah but not everyone in Scotland understands Glesga patter, meh.

So you think in 18 months from the vote Scotland will have setup its Passport Service, DVLA, systems to collect tax and distribute benefits? Where would Scotland get the money from in those 18 months to pay for those projects?

2016 Scotland will elect a government, but I'd be somewhat suprised if it could independently pay Mrs Miggins of Cumnock her pension.


Yeh I know but that's kinda what I meant by the neds/chavs, the only time a Glaswegian accent is hard to understand by most people is if it's ridiculously rough which USUALLY only happens if they are a ned. I have a few Glaswegian friends and it is quite funny sometimes to listen to how they say things, take the mick out of them:biggrin:

And of course not, but I mean from the point we have our own government in 2016, if it happens, I agree we will have to find a way to make money, but I'm just saying I don't think we are going to be as bad as people say. Of course we will have enough to pay people their pensions, it's not like anyone these days is getting them before their near their death bed anyway!:eek:
Reply 4549
Original post by JayStudent
And of course not, but I mean from the point we have our own government in 2016, if it happens, I agree we will have to find a way to make money, but I'm just saying I don't think we are going to be as bad as people say. Of course we will have enough to pay people their pensions, it's not like anyone these days is getting them before their near their death bed anyway!:eek:


I didn't say there wasn't enough money to pay the pension. Just there won't be Scottish owned/run system to pay it in 2016.
Original post by JayStudent
it's not like anyone these days is getting them before their near their death bed anyway!:eek:


The truth is that people are living far longer and receiving pensions for longer, and this is set to get worse (if that is the right word). What is more, Scotland's pension problem is going to be significantly worse than England's.

Government figures show the life expectancy of a 65-year old male is now 22 years. In 1951 it was only 12 years and it is expected to be almost 26 years by 2053.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/223190/life_expectancy.pdf
Original post by Good bloke
The truth is that people are living far longer and receiving pensions for longer, and this is set to get worse (if that is the right word). What is more, Scotland's pension problem is going to be significantly worse than England's.

Government figures show the life expectancy of a 65-year old male is now 22 years. In 1951 it was only 12 years and it is expected to be almost 26 years by 2053.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/223190/life_expectancy.pdf


Ohh my bad, misread what you were trying to say! I have no clue if it will be Scottish run or not, like I said, I want it purely for the national identity, I don't care much for the economics or anything behind it!

Isn't the life expectancy of many places in Scotland not only like 60-70 years old now anyway, much shorter than England?
Original post by JayStudent

Isn't the life expectancy of many places in Scotland not only like 60-70 years old now anyway, much shorter than England?


Life expectancy in Scotland is little different from that in the rest of the UK, though marginally lower. Anyway, that isn't the problem:

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/comment/columnists/pensions-puzzle-for-an-independent-scotland-131964n.21741033
The problem with this is that the SNP dont seem to actually want independence.

They want to have their cake and eat it.

i.e keeping the pound. In what world are you independent if you keep the currency of your former country and therefore have no control of youre interest rates. If the UK government dont allow them to keep the pound. And why should they? They would need their own currency which would create a whole host of problems.
Original post by Good bloke
Life expectancy in Scotland is little different from that in the rest of the UK, though marginally lower. Anyway, that isn't the problem:

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/comment/columnists/pensions-puzzle-for-an-independent-scotland-131964n.21741033



I'd be looking to have my own private pension anyway, I wouldn't care much for the state pension. It's already quite a tiny amount, people surely couldn't live off it alone?
Original post by JayStudent
I'd be looking to have my own private pension anyway, I wouldn't care much for the state pension. It's already quite a tiny amount, people surely couldn't live off it alone?


What is of more significance is that you will be contributing to the state pensions of an aging population.
Reply 4556
Original post by JayStudent
Ohh my bad, misread what you were trying to say! I have no clue if it will be Scottish run or not, like I said, I want it purely for the national identity, I don't care much for the economics or anything behind it!

Isn't the life expectancy of many places in Scotland not only like 60-70 years old now anyway, much shorter than England?


You said you wanted it so you would be independent of Westminister.
I'm just pointing out you won't be. Even at the basic level of reciving income you'll need Westminister to collect tax on your behalf for a decade after 'independence'.

Its a bit shorter, more like 75-80 though.
Reply 4557
Original post by JayStudent
I'd be looking to have my own private pension anyway, I wouldn't care much for the state pension. It's already quite a tiny amount, people surely couldn't live off it alone?


Fair enough, but you'll still be paying Westminister set National Insurance levels until Scotland gets its own system.

£7,280 isn't to be sniffed at though, not that thats the point...
Original post by Good bloke
Life expectancy in Scotland is little different from that in the rest of the UK, though marginally lower. Anyway, that isn't the problem:

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/comment/columnists/pensions-puzzle-for-an-independent-scotland-131964n.21741033


An article written by Ruth Davidson?

Come on, you're not even trying...
Original post by cowsforsale
An article written by Ruth Davidson?

Come on, you're not even trying...


You think she is lying when she says the IFS has said that Scotland would find it considerably more difficult to fulfil its state pensions requirements than it would if it was to remain part of the UK, then?

Latest

Trending

Trending