The Student Room Group

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 Midlander
Funny then that you don't extend this to other countries where tuition fees are charged. You also fail to grasp that if iScotland is in the EU then that proposal is illegal and it doesn't matter what you think of Westminster's tuition fee policy, you can't pick and choose which laws you want to follow.

Also, the heads of universities like St Andrews have said that not even £9k covers the cost of teaching an undergrad for the year. You may want something for nothing but if you want to meet the rising demand for higher education then someone's got to pay for it. Despite tuition being free the elite Scottish unis still struggle to draw people from poorer backgrounds-why would that be?

Posted from TSR Mobile


The UK is about to withdraw from the European Union.
Reply 9221
Avatar for Boab
Boab
Original post by MatureStudent36
I've never heard the daily mail say its coming out and supporting the no campaign.


Apart from that very clear example I just provided you with?
Original post by Choo.choo
You quoted that from a better together newspaper. I have read all those points. Big deal. They are arguments for independence. If we generate more tax per head than any other part of the UK, then this shows Scotland can afford to be independent.
If these benefits you mention are so great, tell me why Scotland is the 14th richest country (out of 196) in the OECD, but the UK is 18th.
Scotland can do all the things you mention as an independent country.
Why do we need the UK Government for those things?


I didn't quote it from anybody. Scotland does indeed generate the most tax per head but this is reliant on oil revenues coupled with a small population and it still runs at a loss of billions every year.

As part of the UK set-up Scotland does not have to worry about meeting the shortfall in funding for things like R and D and fluctuations in oil money are absorbed by an economy which is not dependent upon it. Once the oil runs out Scotland's economy will be in serious trouble.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Choo.choo
The UK is about to withdraw from the European Union.


No it isn't.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Choo.choo
Of course some people vote Tory, but the point is they have never won an election in Scotland, and there is only one Tory MP in Scotland from the UK wide vote. The SNP won the election.


The Tories polled at nearly 20% of the vote but only got 1 MP out of 59. The SNP only got 5 more and didn't get over 50% of the vote for Holyrood either.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 9225
Avatar for Boab
Boab
Original post by Midlander
The SNP... didn't get over 50% of the vote for Holyrood either.


Posted from TSR Mobile


And?
Original post by Boab
And?


But are the ruling party despite not getting most of the electorate to vote for them. Don't you see a problem with that?


Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 9227
Avatar for Boab
Boab
Original post by Midlander
But are the ruling party despite not getting most of the electorate to vote for them. Don't you see a problem with that?


Posted from TSR Mobile


Er no. This is how politics works. The odds now of any party in Scotland or the UK gaining 50% of the vote are between slim to nowt.
Original post by Boab
Er no. This is how politics works. The odds now of any party in Scotland or the UK gaining 50% of the vote are between slim to nowt.


Not good enough.
Also, a question to Choo Choo:

The SNP doesn't advocate charging students from Belgium, Malta, Croatia, Romania, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, France, Germany, Holland, Portugal, or Spain, even though all of these countries charge their students. Why so blatantly discriminate against RUK?
(edited 9 years ago)
Reply 9230
Avatar for Boab
Boab
Original post by Midlander
Not good enough.


So any party that wants to form a government needs 50% of the vote in your opinion?

So given no political party has gained this in the UK since 1931 who should have been running the country?
Original post by Boab
So any party that wants to form a government needs 50% of the vote in your opinion?

So given no political party has gained this in the UK since 1931 who should have been running the country?


An electoral system should have been in place which leads to the ruling party being endorsed by over 50% of the electorate. Technically HM the Queen rules the country and I don't agree with that either.
Reply 9232
Avatar for Boab
Boab
Original post by Midlander
An electoral system should have been in place which leads to the ruling party being endorsed by over 50% of the electorate.


Eh?

Such as?

If 50% of the population don't wish to endorse a party, they won't!
Original post by Boab
Eh?

Such as?

If 50% of the population don't wish to endorse a party, they won't!


Simple-rather than vote for one candidate you rank them in order of preference. In an ideal world we wouldn't be ruled by a Windsor on the basis of birth but that is a different debate entirely/
Original post by Midlander
But are the ruling party despite not getting most of the electorate to vote for them. Don't you see a problem with that?
How come this is more of a problem than the ridiculous majorities we often see in Westminster? I agree it's not ideal that a party at Holyrood can win a majority without a majority of the vote, but the system is still more proportional than the UK's. If you have a problem with the SNP's legitimacy to govern, surely you must also have a problem with the legitimacy of virtually every UK government ever?
Original post by Blue Meltwater
How come this is more of a problem than the ridiculous majorities we often see in Westminster? I agree it's not ideal that a party at Holyrood can win a majority without a majority of the vote, but the system is still more proportional than the UK's. If you have a problem with the SNP's legitimacy to govern, surely you must also have a problem with the legitimacy of virtually every UK government ever?


I do-there are many things about how the UK is run that I want changing. The present coalition is a very good case in point-the Lib Dems get a fraction of the seats Labour did but then get seats in the cabinet? Totally wrong.

The Tories only getting 1 out of 59 MPs in Scotland despite getting nearly a fifth of the vote is equally absurd.
Reply 9236
Avatar for Boab
Boab
Original post by Midlander
Simple-rather than vote for one candidate you rank them in order of preference.


That is still not gaining 50% of the vote!

What you propose is the alternative vote which is less proportional than the current system we have in Scotland.
Original post by Boab
That is still not gaining 50% of the vote!

What you propose is the alternative vote which is less proportional than the current system we have in Scotland.


It's tantamount to saying 'if I can't have x candidate I'm happy with y'-nothing wrong with that.
Reply 9238
Avatar for Boab
Boab
Original post by Midlander
It's tantamount to saying 'if I can't have x candidate I'm happy with y'-nothing wrong with that.


Nonsense. I vote for one party. The rest would be who I detest the least in order.

AV is less proportionate than the current Scottish system, can actually prove less proportionate than FPTP in many circumstances and doesn't do anything to address your 50% issue.

It also got trounced in the referendum.

But by the by, the SNP gained a bigger proportion of the vote in 2011 than any party has done in a General Election since 1970.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by Boab
Nonsense. I vote for one party. The rest would be who I detest the least in order.

AV is less proportionate than the current Scottish system, can actually prove less proportionate than FPTP in many circumstances and doesn't do anything to address your 50% issue.

It also got trounced in the referendum.

But by the by, the SNP gained a bigger proportion of the vote in 2011 than any party has done in a General Election since 1970.


There is a wider issue for me of not wanting the UK to be a constitutional monarchy. I want an elected head of state and the present set-up is obviously not compatible with that.

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you