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.
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#1381
Report 6 years ago
#1381
(Original post by Maths Tutor)
I guess you extend that stupidity to the 47% of Scottish voters who voted for him at the last Scottish election?

I guess the 53% of the Scottish voters who didn't vote for him can't wait for Lamont or Davidson or Rennie to take over as First Minister?

Perhaps you could remind us of the latest popularity scores of these 4 party leaders?

That'll probably change in the future. Krisina de kirchener was in the 60s a few months ago. She's down to 38. Her country's going down the pan though. But people still vote fir her through nationalistic jingoism.


Anyway, with such a high level of support why is support for seperation stuck at 30%
0
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#1382
Report 6 years ago
#1382
(Original post by Maths Tutor)
Those police figures were the very figures spinned by the anti-Independence Axis to present a 17% decline in anti-English attacks as an increase.

That is why MatureStudent36 was TERRIFIED of linking to the one source which was telling the truth.


Sadly though they weren't.


Go back to my post and you'll find the original data set in there.
0
Maths Tutor
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#1383
Report 6 years ago
#1383
(Original post by Midlander)
You're talking so far out your backside it's unreal. It wouldn't take much for Scottish athletes to refuse to compete.
Says someone who can't even read and understand properly and makes claims like "Anglophobia is rife in Scotland". I am talking about the Scottish public, not Scottish athletes. And Scotland as part of the UK has no possibility of having its own team.

(Original post by Midlander)
I note you have stayed quiet on Salmond's lies on EU membership.
The EU has made it clear that it can only give a definite answer if the UK government asks. But the UK government is refusing to ask because it is afraid that the SNP will be proven right. Why else would Westminster not formally ask a simple question to the EU?

Barroso has absolutely no power to make a decision and his 'theoretical' comments were spinned by the BBC. Both the Irish and Luxembourgish foreign ministers have complained that they were misquoted by the BBC.

WHO IS IN FACT LYING will therefore only be proved on Day 1 of Independence. If Scotland is a member on Day 1, Salmond and the SNP will be proved right, if not you can THEN say that they had been lying.
0
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#1384
Report 6 years ago
#1384
(Original post by Maths Tutor)
Says someone who can't even read and understand properly and makes claims like "Anglophobia is rife in Scotland". I am talking about the Scottish public, not Scottish athletes. And Scotland as part of the UK has no possibility of having its own team.



The EU has made it clear that it can only give a definite answer if the UK government asks. But the UK government is refusing to ask because it is afraid that the SNP will be proven right. Why else would Westminster not formally ask a simple question to the EU?

Barroso has absolutely no power to make a decision and his 'theoretical' comments were spinned by the BBC. Both the Irish and Luxembourgish foreign ministers have complained that they were misquoted by the BBC.

WHO IS IN FACT LYING will therefore only be proved on Day 1 of Independence. If Scotland is a member on Day 1, Salmond and the SNP will be proved right, if not you can THEN say that they had been lying.


Are you planning direct action when you loose next year? Because I feel you've filled your head with some rather biased viewpoints off the Internet.

it truly worries me how much venom you have inside you.
0
Maths Tutor
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#1385
Report 6 years ago
#1385
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
Would it? Care to show me this poll? And Internet polls don't count. I would like one conducted properly.
Another poster who can't read and understand.

I said 'WOULD' so how can I show you a poll which hasn't been carried out?

And you call others 'mongs'.
0
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#1386
Report 6 years ago
#1386
(Original post by Maths Tutor)
Another poster who can't read and understand.

I said 'WOULD' so how can I show you a poll which hasn't been carried out?

And you call others 'mongs'.


So you've claimed that an imaginary poll, asking an imaginary question would get 75%?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...x-Salmond.html

and yet support for seperation dropped during the Olympics. Interesting.
0
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#1387
Report 6 years ago
#1387
(Original post by Maths Tutor)
Says someone who can't even read and understand properly and makes claims like "Anglophobia is rife in Scotland". I am talking about the Scottish public, not Scottish athletes. And Scotland as part of the UK has no possibility of having its own team.



The EU has made it clear that it can only give a definite answer if the UK government asks. But the UK government is refusing to ask because it is afraid that the SNP will be proven right. Why else would Westminster not formally ask a simple question to the EU?

Barroso has absolutely no power to make a decision and his 'theoretical' comments were spinned by the BBC. Both the Irish and Luxembourgish foreign ministers have complained that they were misquoted by the BBC.

WHO IS IN FACT LYING will therefore only be proved on Day 1 of Independence. If Scotland is a member on Day 1, Salmond and the SNP will be proved right, if not you can THEN say that they had been lying.

I'm struggling to see the point you're making here. It's like the guy who claims he can fly, so he jumps off a cliff to prove it. In this analogy if he's right he'll survive. If he's wrong he'll die.


I'd much rather he not jump off the cliff and find out.


nationalists and their infatuation with politicians worry me greatly.
0
Maths Tutor
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#1388
Report 6 years ago
#1388
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
You see the Internet is a wonderful thing, but there's no control on it.so can you please quote reputable media and not websites of dubious background.
You spend hours on this blog posting items you have searched on the internet, without having made a single specific and precise point so far.

Are you referring to your 'reputable media' sources which presented a 17% decline in attacks on white English people as an increase? Those 'reputable media' reports were DEMOLISHED by the one source you were TERRIFIED of quoting - newsnetscotland.com.

Back to the point, it is a FACT that revenues from throughout the UK including Scotland have been or will be used to upgrade London's sewers. If you are refuting this point, say PRECISELY where the money to upgrade London's sewers has come from.
0
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#1389
Report 6 years ago
#1389
(Original post by Maths Tutor)
You spend hours on this blog posting items you have searched on the internet, without having made a single specific and precise point so far.

Are you referring to your 'reputable media' sources which presented a 17% decline in attacks on white English people as an increase? Those 'reputable media' reports were DEMOLISHED by the one source you were TERRIFIED of quoting - newsnetscotland.com.

Back to the point, it is a FACT that revenues from throught the UK including Scotland have been or will be used to upgrade London's sewers. If you are refuting this point, say PRECISELY where the money to upgrade London's sewers has come from.

http://www.cjscotland.co.uk/2012/12/...910-published/


numertous sources plus official statistics. Remember that media is regulated. Newsnetscotland is an Internet site and isn't therefore regulated so can publish whatever tripe they like.

the money fir the sewers came from a central fund. Scottish oil, London financial tax receipts, welsh lamb, Irish linen, midlands automotive etc etc etc. just like your tuition fees may even be traced back to a Liverpool docker. It all comes from a central fund.

You are aware that London generates a good chunk of the uk budget? So infact its Wales, Northern Ireland and the north of England you should be getting angry at.
0
Maths Tutor
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#1390
Report 6 years ago
#1390
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
I'm struggling to see the point you're making here.
If you are "strugglingto see the point" why do you have to comment, considering that the point in question is addressed specifically to another poster?

In fact you are struggling to see the point of any of the comments being posted here, which is proven by the ridiculous comments you post, being incapable of posting a meaningful comment:

(Original post by MatureStudent36)
It's like the guy who claims he can fly, so he jumps off a cliff to prove it. In this analogy if he's right he'll survive. If he's wrong he'll die.I'd much rather he not jump off the cliff and find out.
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
Krisina de kirchener was in the 60s a few months ago. She's down to 38. Her country's going down the pan though. But people still vote fir her through nationalistic jingoism.
He was compared with Hitler and Mugabe, now with kirchener!

(Original post by MatureStudent36)
I found this on the Internet so it must be true.

Its about the lizard people.
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
It's not a new concept. Infact Muslim fundamentalists use it. One person says something. A website backs it up. Somebody sees it and believes it. Result. Self radicalised jelly head.
The posting name 'ImmatureStudent06' would be more appropriate for you!

Bye.
0
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#1391
Report 6 years ago
#1391
(Original post by Maths Tutor)
If you are "strugglingto see the point" why do you have to comment, considering that the point in question is addressed specifically to another poster?

In fact you are struggling to see the point of any of the comments being posted here, which is proven by the ridiculous comments you post, being incapable of posting a meaningful comment:





He was compared with Hitler and Mugabe, now with kirchener!





The posting name 'ImmatureStudent06' would be more appropriate for you!

Bye.

Oh. The over emotional nat has gone off.

the points I'm struggling to see is you're use of biased Internet sites and chat rooms as sources. So I think that's a fare analogy. People putting too much emphasis on what they read on un regulated Internet websites and chat rooms.


i'm not likening salmond to kirchener. I'm merely pointing out that high opinion polls numbers don't mean a thing. Proven by my point that support hasn't shifted.
0
Maths Tutor
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#1392
Report 6 years ago
#1392
(Original post by MatureStudent36)
the money fir the sewers came from a central fund.
WHY should it have come from a central fund?

London's sewers don't benefit the people of Scotland do they? Or for that matter the poorer northern parts of England? Why should Scottish or any other taxpayers pay for London's sewers?

The central fund is meant for any project that benefits the whole country.

MY POINT IS PROVEN and it was the likes of YOU and LIB who WERE LYING.

(Original post by MatureStudent36)
You are aware that London generates a good chunk of the uk budget? So infact its Wales, Northern Ireland and the north of England you should be getting angry at.
I don't care what London generates. What is spent on Scotland is generated from Scottish resources plus borrowed money due to the deficit. Not a single penny of London's resources is spent on Scotland.

Otherwise are you able to say confidently in black and white - England subsidises Scotland? Then do so in precise words and produce the figures to prove it.
0
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#1393
Report 6 years ago
#1393
(Original post by Maths Tutor)
WHY should it have come from a central fund?

London's sewers don't benefit the people of Scotland do they? Or for that matter the poorer northern parts of England? Why should Scottish or any other taxpayers pay for London's sewers?

The central fund is meant for any project that benefits the whole country.

MY POINT IS PROVEN and it was the likes of YOU and LIB who WERE LYING.



I don't care what London generates. What is spent on Scotland is generated from Scottish resources plus borrowed money due to the deficit. Not a single penny of London's resources is spent on Scotland.

Otherwise are you able to say confidently in black and white - England subsidises Scotland? Then do so in precise words and produce the figures to prove it.
all tax receipts go into a central pot and distributed from that throughout the uk. I'd love a case of only spending our own money. I wouldn't have to pay for other people's benefits, health care, retirement, education. But then again I believe in the welfare state.

you keep having this unhealthy obsession with London. London, the southeast and Scotland are in the best poditions.Other regions don't. But you're advocating a rather selfish mentality of just look after yourself.

and it would appear that the Londoners are paying fir it themselves

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/n...e-a-stink.html
0
Naivasha
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#1394
Report 6 years ago
#1394
One upside of Scottish independence is univerisity fees.

English students could study for free at Scottish universities, as other EU students pay no fees to study there, and we wouldn't have to fund the Scottish students free univerisity education.
0
Cmca1
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#1395
Report 6 years ago
#1395
(Original post by CartoonHeart)
Sorry for poor phrasing of the question, but I'm about to start an essay on Scottish Independence and I'm having the "blank paper" problem. I'm writing the essay in terms of fiscal policy but I am not sure what my opinion is. So that's why I want to know, what do the general public (or at least a load of intellectual, opinionated students) think about this? Even if anybody doesn't have anything to offer for my essay - in terms of fiscal policy - it may be quite an interesting debate. So all opinions regardless of the relevency to my work would be interesting. Thankyou - (Nothing rude please, there's no need for it).
I think it would be a good thing.

Take this debate in light of the growing Eurosceptic views within the UK.

The Conservatives and UKIP will tell you that Europe is bad because there is little accountability; policies don't suit or reflect UK circumstances; the UK pays in more than it gets back; there is an influx of migrants from new member states and the UK sovereignty has been undermined etc.

Imagine you are in Scotland. 41 of the 59 MPs are Labour (and only one is Conservative) whilst in the Scottish Parliament there are 69 SNP MSPs out of 129 - Yet, Scotland is under a Con-Dem coalition at Westminster. Many of the arguments used by anti-EU politicians and supporters are mirror-image of those in favour of Scottish independence.

Policies come from a government not voted for by Scotland and as such are deemed to be unsuitable (even by pro-Union Labour) for Scotland - Scotland has British nuclear weapons for example in the Clyde, the SNP and Labour would both approach the economic crisis differently from the current Westminster (and English dominated government) etc. The SNP and other pro-independence supporters will also tell you that when oil is considered they put more into the UK than the Scottish Parliament gets back. Scotland also wants powers (back?) from Westminster in the same way London wants powers back from the EU. So some of the arguments are similar to those made by a growing number of anti-EU, British politicians in a European context.

I'm not necessarily trying to make an argument which is pro-independence, but I do think Scotland would be better off making decisions for itself because clearly, what they have voted for politically to date, is not what they are getting from Westminster.

In the same way, those who are Eurosceptic might argue that the European project is beginning to adversely affect the UK and that what the UK public votes for in the UK, is not what they get back from the EU.
0
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#1396
Report 6 years ago
#1396
(Original post by Cmca1)
I think it would be a good thing.

Take this debate in light of the growing Eurosceptic views within the UK.

The Conservatives and UKIP will tell you that Europe is bad because there is little accountability; policies don't suit or reflect UK circumstances; the UK pays in more than it gets back; there is an influx of migrants from new member states and the UK sovereignty has been undermined etc.

Imagine you are in Scotland. 41 of the 59 MPs are Labour (and only one is Conservative) whilst in the Scottish Parliament there are 69 SNP MSPs out of 129 - Yet, Scotland is under a Con-Dem coalition at Westminster. Many of the arguments used by anti-EU politicians and supporters are mirror-image of those in favour of Scottish independence.

Policies come from a government not voted for by Scotland and as such are deemed to be unsuitable (even by pro-Union Labour) for Scotland - Scotland has British nuclear weapons for example in the Clyde, the SNP and Labour would both approach the economic crisis differently from the current Westminster (and English dominated government) etc. The SNP and other pro-independence supporters will also tell you that when oil is considered they put more into the UK than the Scottish Parliament gets back. Scotland also wants powers (back?) from Westminster in the same way London wants powers back from the EU. So some of the arguments are similar to those made by a growing number of anti-EU, British politicians in a European context.

I'm not necessarily trying to make an argument which is pro-independence, but I do think Scotland would be better off making decisions for itself because clearly, what they have voted for politically to date, is not what they are getting from Westminster.

In the same way, those who are Eurosceptic might argue that the European project is beginning to adversely affect the UK and that what the UK public votes for in the UK, is not what they get back from the EU.
a good analogy. But we do have aDemocratic say in the uk whilst there's a democratic deficit in Europe.
1
L i b
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#1397
Report 6 years ago
#1397
(Original post by Maths Tutor)
http://www.scottishtimes.com/scottish_news_cameron

http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...-London-sewers

"Recently, the Westminster government used the UK Reserve Fund to pay for the cost of upgrading the London Sewers, as well as cutting South-East England's water bills by roughly £50 per person.

Every Country in the UK pays taxes into the reserve fund.

The issue with this; is that UK Reserve Fund is only supposed to be used for projects that 'Benefit the UK as a whole' and normally to pay for this, they would have had to use DEFRA. DEFRA operates similarly to the UK Reserve Fund, but under it, the devolved nations of the UK receive compensation for the use of their nation's tax payers money.

The compensation would come as a percentage under the Barnett Formula;

I don't have the figures for Wales and N.I. but Scotland would be compensated some £400m.

However, since they used the UK Reserve Fund, the devolved nations are not entitled to any compensation, despite the fact that their tax money, as well as England's, it being used to fund the upgrade to the London sewers and the cut to South-East England's water bills.

Quick edit: Wales would have been due £100m, which the Welsh Government states they wished to put to use in strengthening the flood defences around Wales coast."

WHO IS "making stuff up again" and WHO IS "telling porkies" and a "blatant lie"?

NOT ME for sure.
I'm sorry, but you are telling, if not blatant lies, certainly blatant falsehoods. Lies imply that you know you're wrong. Quoting a forum (I mean, really...) and a Scottish nationalist website don't make a single difference to that.

This expenditure simply didn't happen. The project is being funded privately.
0
L i b
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#1398
Report 6 years ago
#1398
(Original post by Maths Tutor)
The EU has made it clear that it can only give a definite answer if the UK government asks. But the UK government is refusing to ask because it is afraid that the SNP will be proven right. Why else would Westminster not formally ask a simple question to the EU?
No-one, save perhaps a court, can give a definitive answer on a matter of law. That notwithstanding, it's clear that the SNP's argument on this point is - as constitutional law experts have been saying for over a decade - pseudolaw.

It's about as credible as those nutters who say that the law has no jurisdiction over them because they make certain silly declarations or say certain apparently magic words.

Barroso has absolutely no power to make a decision and his 'theoretical' comments were spinned by the BBC. Both the Irish and Luxembourgish foreign ministers have complained that they were misquoted by the BBC.
Barroso has quite clearly said what the situation is, as has the European Commission, just as countless legal experts have.

WHO IS IN FACT LYING will therefore only be proved on Day 1 of Independence. If Scotland is a member on Day 1, Salmond and the SNP will be proved right, if not you can THEN say that they had been lying.
Even the SNP don't seem to believe in that now. They now believe in negotiated entry.

As for waiting until Scottish independence, that simply isn't good enough for anyone.
0
L i b
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#1399
Report 6 years ago
#1399
(Original post by Maths Tutor)
Back to the point, it is a FACT that revenues from throughout the UK including Scotland have been or will be used to upgrade London's sewers. If you are refuting this point, say PRECISELY where the money to upgrade London's sewers has come from.
Not a single penny of state money has been spent on the project you refer to. Not a single penny. It is owned by a private water company and upgrades to sewers are entirely their responsibility.

There's not really much more we can say on this issue. I cannot prove something did not happen, but when you're quoting a blog and a Scottish nationalist website to demonstrate a point - when any multi-billion pound expenditure would be well documented in official sources - then I think it's safe to say no one will believe you.
0
wibletg
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#1400
Report 6 years ago
#1400
(Original post by Maths Tutor)
You spend hours on this blog posting items you have searched on the internet, without having made a single specific and precise point so far.

Are you referring to your 'reputable media' sources which presented a 17% decline in attacks on white English people as an increase? Those 'reputable media' reports were DEMOLISHED by the one source you were TERRIFIED of quoting - newsnetscotland.com.

Back to the point, it is a FACT that revenues from throughout the UK including Scotland have been or will be used to upgrade London's sewers. If you are refuting this point, say PRECISELY where the money to upgrade London's sewers has come from.
Come on mate, some reputable news sources please? I don't even care if it's the Scotsman, anything is better than 'newsnetscotland'.
1
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 (144)
60.25%
No I haven't decided yet (54)
22.59%
Yes but I might change my mind (41)
17.15%

Watched Threads

View All