Is Scottish independence a 'good or bad' thing? Watch

Poll: Should Scotland be an independent country?
YES (299)
32.12%
NO (632)
67.88%
This discussion is closed.
Qwertish
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#5521
Report 5 years ago
#5521
(Original post by 1tartanarmy)
What age are you? Please don't be anyone over 16 years old.

I see what you are trying to say. That Scotland would pay the UK money for its share of debt. I get you, but the fact remains, that there is no legal requirement for Scotland to do this, and so an independent Scotland could use this as a bargaining chip, like the UK will use the fact it has final say on exactly which assets Scotland will get.

Thats why it is a negotiation process.

Also, just because the No campaign or anyone linked to it say something, it doesn't make it true just because they said it. Being responsible for debt is what it says, being directly and solely responsible for debt. Scotland would take its share, and rightly so!
Of course there's no legal requirement. I never said there was. The paper I linked to was from the Government... It's the one that was used as a basis for the Guardian article...

No one is stopping Scotland from taking its fair share of assets... The oil is yours, I don't deny that and I think few people would.

I don't understand the bit in bold...
0
1tartanarmy
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#5522
Report 5 years ago
#5522
(Original post by Old_Simon)
Plus the day Scotland becomes independent it becomes responsible for it's own defence and can pay for it. Scrap the Scottish regiments and prohibit Scottish "citizens" joining UK armed forces.
Any terrorist incidents in their oil fields they can deal with themselves. All UK armed forces will have been withdrawn.
Agree, we will pay for it, like we currently do with our taxes at the moment. We will have a much smaller force to pay for, it will be comparable to our population, like every other country of Scotlands size. We will deal with terrorists too, hopefully the fact that we are not part of the UK governments illegal wars any longer, the threat will drop.

The Scottish governments stance is that any military personnel will be allowed to choose which force they want to be part of. I'm sure the UK would take the same fair and logical approach.
0
Quady
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#5523
Report 5 years ago
#5523
(Original post by 1tartanarmy)
Both sides will aim to benefit as much as they can but ultimately some form of balance will be reached. Both sides could not afford to jepordise the negotiation process. Anyways, David Cameron has already signed the Edinburgh agreement and Independence will happen in a yes vote, regardless of all these petty future disagreements.

I agree on the principles of your split, common sense. Some people can not grasp the fact that Scotland deserves a share of its own assets. It makes me want to rip my ears off when I hear it.

I would be confident of a resounding Yes victory in that case! In the 7/8 people I know that have memberships are Yes voters! Didn't I also state that I wasn't talking about everyone in hampden, but the tartan army as a paid membership? I still think Yes would win regardless of the voting eligibility.
Giving the right to declare independence doesn't say that (hypothetically) the UK negotiating position would make it untenable for Scotland to actually declare independence. For example if agreement isn't reached on currency union, how tax/benefits will be collected/paid from March '16 would make it impossible for the Scottish Govt to declare independence even though they'd have the right to.

Its more people use it as a dumb argument, which results in dumb arguments back like 'well we won't take the debt share'. For me it just boils down to the nature of a shared currency (its not an easy one to design as has been seen in the Eurozone) and the transition costs/timescale.

Meh perhaps.
0
Qwertish
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#5524
Report 5 years ago
#5524
(Original post by 1tartanarmy)
If Scotland continued using the pound, its GDP would still affect the pound.

Whats your point here?

Any country that uses a currency affects that currency in some way. Look at spain, Italy Greece and Ireland, they affected the Euro, their economies affected the Euro.
They are in a currency union with centralised banking facilities. If Scotland simply decided to use the pound it wouldn't have access to the BoE as lender of last resort, would have no control over whether or not money is printed or not etc.

It would be like how Cuba uses the US dollar.
0
cowsforsale
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#5525
Report 5 years ago
#5525
(Original post by Old_Simon)
Plus the day Scotland becomes independent it becomes responsible for it's own defence and can pay for it. .
http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/def...land-1-5787359

Probably a good thing to be honest, Scotland pays 3.3m and gets 1.9m spent.
0
Midlander
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#5526
Report 5 years ago
#5526
(Original post by 1tartanarmy)
An independent Scotland will become responsible for the debt? says who? says the Westminster government? It has publicly declared it will be responsible for paying the debt, do you know what that means? It means that they will be responsible for the debt, whether Scotland pays its share or not. That was what was declared by THE UK.

I want Scotland to take its share, and it will do so in exchange for assets, Nobody can force debt on anybody. Its a negotiation process and debt is one of them.

Can another unionist please have some integrity and correct your fellow unionist supporter here.
Scotland has run up a deficit of billions a year so it certainly should take a fair share of the debt-after all, England did a lot to stabilise the Scottish economy when the union was first formed.

What I find reprehensible is the SNP saying they will refuse to pay any debt if they don't get sterling. You can't run up a tab with someone then skimp on your share of the bill!


Posted from TSR Mobile
0
Quady
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#5527
Report 5 years ago
#5527
(Original post by Old_Simon)
Plus the day Scotland becomes independent it becomes responsible for it's own defence and can pay for it. Scrap the Scottish regiments and prohibit Scottish "citizens" joining UK armed forces.
Any terrorist incidents in their oil fields they can deal with themselves. All UK armed forces will have been withdrawn.
ffs, exaggerated/obvious 'arguments' are pointless. What terrorist incidents has the North Sea seen that the army has been involved...?

Why would the Scottish regiments be scrapped? They'd be transferred to the Scottish Govt who would decide whether to keep or disband them.
0
1tartanarmy
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#5528
Report 5 years ago
#5528
(Original post by Quady)
Giving the right to declare independence doesn't say that (hypothetically) the UK negotiating position would make it untenable for Scotland to actually declare independence. For example if agreement isn't reached on currency union, how tax/benefits will be collected/paid from March '16 would make it impossible for the Scottish Govt to declare independence even though they'd have the right to.

Its more people use it as a dumb argument, which results in dumb arguments back like 'well we won't take the debt share'. For me it just boils down to the nature of a shared currency (its not an easy one to design as has been seen in the Eurozone) and the transition costs/timescale.

Meh perhaps.
I agree with a lot of what you say here. Those arguments really are stupid, but many unionists and you have been guilty of this. Only now that I argue the other stupid side of it (that we won't pay our debt) that you post this.
0
1tartanarmy
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#5529
Report 5 years ago
#5529
(Original post by Midlander)
Scotland has run up a deficit of billions a year so it certainly should take a fair share of the debt-after all, England did a lot to stabilise the Scottish economy when the union was first formed.

What I find reprehensible is the SNP saying they will refuse to pay any debt if they don't get sterling. You can't run up a tab with someone then skimp on your share of the bill!


Posted from TSR Mobile
Yes, formed against the will of the majority of scots, not relevant but I had to add!

Scotland has run at a surplus far more than England, I can't be bothered getting the source but its easy to find if you search. But I agree, debt should be shared fairly. for the millionth time!

You can't scrimp yes, but you also can't deny something to somebody when they have helped pay for it over a 100 years.
0
Old_Simon
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#5530
Report 5 years ago
#5530
(Original post by Quady)
ffs, exaggerated/obvious 'arguments' are pointless. What terrorist incidents has the North Sea seen that the army has been involved...?

Why would the Scottish regiments be scrapped? They'd be transferred to the Scottish Govt who would decide whether to keep or disband them.
LOL. The UK will not be transferring any of its military assets to Scotland. They can pay for their own. The Scottish regiments are notoriously under recruited and made up with Commonwealth volunteers. So lets leave it to Scotland to defend themselves. Oh wait- they can try and enter into defence treaties with us if they wish but we may or may not agree. If you want to be a Sovereign State you need to play by international rules. Ps: They need a Navy too. And an Air Force.
0
Quady
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#5531
Report 5 years ago
#5531
(Original post by Midlander)
Scotland has run up a deficit of billions a year so it certainly should take a fair share of the debt-after all, England did a lot to stabilise the Scottish economy when the union was first formed.

What I find reprehensible is the SNP saying they will refuse to pay any debt if they don't get sterling. You can't run up a tab with someone then skimp on your share of the bill!


Posted from TSR Mobile
Its a pointless argurement, if Scotland doesn't take the debt the rUK doesn't give them access to the pension/benefit/NI records of Scottish citizens, the driver/car information of Scottish car owners or any help transitioning income tax/NI collection.

IMHO those cards the rUK holds blow into oblivion anything on the Scottish side. They can take our debt:GDP ratio up by 12% and setup their own currency/join the Euro which would cut rUK GDP by perhaps 3% but in reality, it would mess Scotland over far more.
0
1tartanarmy
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#5532
Report 5 years ago
#5532
(Original post by Qwertish)
They are in a currency union with centralised banking facilities. If Scotland simply decided to use the pound it wouldn't have access to the BoE as lender of last resort, would have no control over whether or not money is printed or not etc.

It would be like how Cuba uses the US dollar.
I agree, which is why we want a currency union.
0
1tartanarmy
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#5533
Report 5 years ago
#5533
(Original post by Old_Simon)
LOL. The UK will not be transferring any of its military assets to Scotland. They can pay for their own. The Scottish regiments are notoriously under recruited and made up with Commonwealth volunteers. So lets leave it to Scotland to defend themselves. Oh wait- they can try and enter into defence treaties with us if they wish but we may or may not agree. If you want to be a Sovereign State you need to play by international rules. Ps: They need a Navy too. And an Air Force.
Says who? you? Nobody on any side has said this ever.

We already pay for defence, through the same taxes as you pay.

So now England and Scotland are going to go to war again? All your points instantly become not credible.

A navy and Air force will be set up, we already have trained personnell, bases and equipment. Faslane and leuchers exists btw, its not fantasy. They currently exist in Scotland and operate.
0
tes1996
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#5534
Report 5 years ago
#5534
(Original post by Old_Simon)
LOL. The UK will not be transferring any of its military assets to Scotland. They can pay for their own. The Scottish regiments are notoriously under recruited and made up with Commonwealth volunteers. So lets leave it to Scotland to defend themselves. Oh wait- they can try and enter into defence treaties with us if they wish but we may or may not agree. If you want to be a Sovereign State you need to play by international rules. Ps: They need a Navy too. And an Air Force.
The Irish Guards still recruit from ROI, which got its independence in the early 20th century.
And I'm sure recruitment isn't as much of a problem as you make out- the reason there are more Fijians than Glaswegians is because there's just so many battalions, serving a population that doesn't warrant the number.
And just to put my twopenneth in, 1st Bt Scots Guards has been one of the most consistently manned battalions in recent years.
Salmon can **** off if he thinks he can get his hand on our regiments.
0
Quady
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#5535
Report 5 years ago
#5535
(Original post by Old_Simon)
LOL. The UK will not be transferring any of its military assets to Scotland. They can pay for their own. The Scottish regiments are notoriously under recruited and made up with Commonwealth volunteers. So lets leave it to Scotland to defend themselves. Oh wait- they can try and enter into defence treaties with us if they wish but we may or may not agree. If you want to be a Sovereign State you need to play by international rules. Ps: They need a Navy too. And an Air Force.
Well as you already call them 'Scottish regiments' its hardly a transfer...

Meh I didn't know that, less to 'transfer' then.

They don't need an air force.

Edit
You realise if the UK scraps the regiment the UK will be paying the redundancy payments? Financially it'd be far more sensible to 'transfer' them.
1
tes1996
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#5536
Report 5 years ago
#5536
(Original post by 1tartanarmy)
Says who? you? Nobody on any side has said this ever.

We already pay for defence, through the same taxes as you pay.

So now England and Scotland are going to go to war again? All your points instantly become not credible.

A navy and Air force will be set up, we already have trained personnell, bases and equipment. Faslane and leuchers exists btw, its not fantasy. They currently exist in Scotland and operate.
Yes, they operate with many English, Welsh and Irish personnel.
It isn't as simple as just saying, this is yours, this is mine.
Of course England and Scotland aren't going to war, but Scotland is going to be militarily isolated- they won't get membership of NATO, and I can;t think of many countries that would be willing to enter an alliance with an insignificant newly independent state with little military power.
1
1tartanarmy
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#5537
Report 5 years ago
#5537
(Original post by Teaddict)
ICM in SCOTLAND
There is also a new ICM poll on the Scottish referendum, conducted for Scotland on Sunday. Unlike most Scottish referendum polling, normally notable for its stability, this one actually shows a significant change! 37% say they would vote YES, up 5 points from ICM’s last Scottish poll in September, 44% say they would vote NO, down 5 points from September.
John Curtice already has a detailed trawl through the poll here and unlike me he has the luxury of having seen the tables. He picks up one particularly interesting thing: the swing since September is strongly concentrated amongst young people. Amongst over 45s there’s no change, amongst people aged 25-44 support for YES is up 6 points, amongst under 25s it’s up 33 points (!). That rings a few alarm bells, but as ever, one shouldn’t read too much into very small subsamples – it could mean ICM had a weird sample that gave them a weird results, or that they had a weird group of under 25s but the overall sample was fine, or that there genuinely is a big shift towards YES amongst younger voters. We shall see

Taken from UKPollingReport.


Further to this, it should be worth noting Twyman's law: Any piece of data or evidence that looks interesting or unusual is probably wrong! These results are quite peculiar insofar as no other poll has shown any such movement. In all likelihood this is a rogue poll, nothing more.







The reason no other poll within this four month period is? It seems more likely that this is a rogue poll, but some sudden change within the Scottish electorate.




Baseless assumption as outlined above.
Its the most recent poll, that is why none have shown similar results, because there has been none done since December. Obvious?

Rouge poll is a nice way of dismissing an independent opinion poll. Makes me chuckle.
0
navarre
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#5538
Report 5 years ago
#5538
It's sad that 'nationalism' and the belief that somehow 'the nation' will fix everything is beginning to rear its ugly head again in Europe.
0
1tartanarmy
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#5539
Report 5 years ago
#5539
(Original post by tes1996)
Scotland is going to be militarily isolated- they won't get membership of NATO, and I can;t think of many countries that would be willing to enter an alliance with an insignificant newly independent state with little military power.
Wrong

Scotland is currently indirectly a member of NATO, and so it isn't as simple as saying we wouldn't be. In fact talks of continued membership will commence post a yes vote.

Scotland is also ideal territory for defence in Northern Europe, NATO will of course know this, In fact, I'm not sure if you know, but Scotland is actually the best military location for various ventures as it stands, a yes vote won't change the geographical land scape.

Scotland would also be an essential partner for a secure British isles, The RUk are not going to suddenly forget this, after all they know it just now!

Laslty, Although you are so wrong, The lack of alliances does not equate to enemies. Just because Countries don't see us as a massive force, does not mean they will all suddenly become hostile.

More silly scaremongering from English members. Do you realise that the nature of the debate is changing? the scare mongering has long been exposed up here! In fact its being used as a reason to ignore everything BT say. You are about 4 months behind in the debate.
0
Old_Simon
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#5540
Report 5 years ago
#5540
(Original post by tes1996)
The Irish Guards still recruit from ROI, which got its independence in the early 20th century.
And I'm sure recruitment isn't as much of a problem as you make out- the reason there are more Fijians than Glaswegians is because there's just so many battalions, serving a population that doesn't warrant the number.
And just to put my twopenneth in, 1st Bt Scots Guards has been one of the most consistently manned battalions in recent years.
Salmon can **** off if he thinks he can get his hand on our regiments.
The vast majority of the Irish Guards are Scousers LOL. The balance are from NI.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you made up your mind on your five uni choices?

Yes I know where I'm applying (82)
67.77%
No I haven't decided yet (23)
19.01%
Yes but I might change my mind (16)
13.22%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed