Jump to content

One Word Post - Should Scotland Be An Independent Country? Yes Or No.


The Jukebox Rebel
 Share

Independence Poll  

126 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you agree that Scotland should be an independent country?

    • Yes
      93
    • No
      33


Recommended Posts

Couldnt say it was over a century ago and at the time Norway never voted for independence Denmark basically never wanted it, again with the others most had been pulled together via the soviet system so different scenario

 

Most of what The YES have said we'd be guaranteed is now being rebuked building frigates, keeping sterling (Wales have said they will stop that) even the Shetlands and Orkneys have now stated if Scotland goes independent they either want to rejoin UK or go alone. The shortfall in cash will either lead to much more taxes or even less public spending than we get from Westminster

 

Excuse me, but is building frigates an essential activity for all countries? Scotland will keep Sterling; a Welsh politician speaks and what he says becomes fact? Shetland and Orkney have stated nothing at all. Some people have said something. Talk about selective hearing/reading! What shortfall in cash? I'd have thought that by now even you would accept that Scotland has been more than paying its way as a region of the UK, while Westminster continues to squander billions on a largely French-designed aircraft carrier, a French-designed and -built nuclear power reactor for the south of England, and on it goes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.telegraph...t-Scotland.html

 

scotland has been in deficit for years and that is going by swinneys own numbers and gets approx £1200 more per person than it puts in and where did you pick up that the aircraft carrier was "largely French-designed" , eck?

as for stirling fine keep the pound but unless you want to still use the BOE we would have to go alone and that come with much more problems

Edited by jaggybunnet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Excuse me, but is building frigates an essential activity for all countries? Scotland will keep Sterling; a Welsh politician speaks and what he says becomes fact? Shetland and Orkney have stated nothing at all. Some people have said something. Talk about selective hearing/reading! What shortfall in cash? I'd have thought that by now even you would accept that Scotland has been more than paying its way as a region of the UK, while Westminster continues to squander billions on a largely French-designed aircraft carrier, a French-designed and -built nuclear power reactor for the south of England, and on it goes.

 

Ah, the Orkney/Shetland "argument". It has been a while since that wee red herring has poked its head above water. As far as I am aware, people in Orkney and Shetland will be asked the same question on September 18th next year as the rest of Scotland. For what it's worth, if I was an Orcadian or a Shetlander who favoured independence for my islands I would be voting Yes next year. Looking at it logically, there is more chance of achieving full independence with only Holyrood to deal with, rather than Holyrood and Westminster.

 

It came as no great surprise that Carwyn Jones, a unionist, should favour Scotland staying in the UK. I also thought he was perfectly entitled to express his opinion on the subject. He may well wish to veto Scotland using sterling in the event of independence but it isn't in his gift to do so. He is a member of the Welsh Assembly and not even a member of the Westminster parliament, let alone its (current) government. Thus, any influence he can exert in post-independence negotiations will be minimal at best.

 

Personally, I would prefer it if we had our own currency; the pros outweigh the cons as far as I can see. But since Scotland is the only constituent member of the UK that actually has a trade surplus, i.e. it exports more than it imports, it makes sense all round to have us as members of the sterling zone in order to maintain its balance of payments.

 

http://www.telegraph...t-Scotland.html

 

scotland has been in deficit for years and that is going by swinneys own numbers and gets approx £1200 more per person than it puts in and where did you pick up that the aircraft carrier was "largely French-designed" , eck?

as for stirling fine keep the pound but unless you want to still use the BOE we would have to go alone and that come with much more problems

 

Scotland doesn't "get" £1200 per person more than it puts in. Public spending in Scotland is higher by roughly that amount (public spending often is in sparsely populated countries) but Scotland actually generates more per head of population than the UK as a whole - 9.9% of revenue from 8.4% of the UK's current population. Even the IFS report that Alistair Darling and co. were wanking themselves into a frenzy over this week confirms as much.

Edited by Guy Incognito
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ah, the Orkney/Shetland "argument". It has been a while since that wee red herring has poked its head above water. As far as I am aware, people in Orkney and Shetland will be asked the same question on September 18th next year as the rest of Scotland. For what it's worth, if I was an Orcadian or a Shetlander who favoured independence for my islands I would be voting Yes next year. Looking at it logically, there is more chance of achieving full independence with only Holyrood to deal with, rather than Holyrood and Westminster.

 

It came as no great surprise that Carwyn Jones, a unionist, should favour Scotland staying in the UK. I also thought he was perfectly entitled to express his opinion on the subject. He may well wish to veto Scotland using sterling in the event of independence but it isn't in his gift to do so. He is a member of the Welsh Assembly and not even a member of the Westminster parliament, let alone its (current) government. Thus, any influence he can exert in post-independence negotiations will be minimal at best.

 

Personally, I would prefer it if we had our own currency; the pros outweigh the cons as far as I can see. But since Scotland is the only constituent member of the UK that actually has a trade surplus, i.e. it exports more than it imports, it makes sense all round to have us as members of the sterling zone in order to maintain its balance of payments.

 

 

 

Scotland doesn't "get" £1200 per person more than it puts in. Public spending in Scotland is higher by roughly that amount (public spending often is in sparsely populated countries) but Scotland actually generates more per head of population than the UK as a whole - 9.9% of revenue from 8.4% of the UK's current population. Even the IFS report that Alistair Darling and co. were wanking themselves into a frenzy over this week confirms as much.

 

wrong, if you change that into actual money it is as i have said, you can hide loads by putting it into %

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand what you mean by hiding figures by putting %s in?

 

OK very simplistic analysis coming up but I've not seen any other figures being put up so...

 

Found a short summary table here for tax receipts - http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0041/00418381.pdf

 

In a recent Herald article it talks about "public spending being 15% higher in Scotland per head compared to the rest of the UK" - http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/treasury-public-spending-in-scotland-15-higher-than-uk-average.1385049327

 

I can't get a 2012/13 for GERS figures so can't comapre the years directly but going very roughly

 

For 2011/12 £10,700 per capita in Scotland, £9,000 per capita UK in tax. For 2012/13 it talks about public spending per head as £10,152 in Scotland, £8,788 for the UK, so £1,364 more in Scotland

 

£9,000 + £1,364 = £10,364 so £336 more has gone to Westminster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand what you mean by hiding figures by putting %s in?

 

OK very simplistic analysis coming up but I've not seen any other figures being put up so...

 

Found a short summary table here for tax receipts - http://www.scotland....41/00418381.pdf

 

In a recent Herald article it talks about "public spending being 15% higher in Scotland per head compared to the rest of the UK" - http://www.heraldsco...rage.1385049327

 

I can't get a 2012/13 for GERS figures so can't comapre the years directly but going very roughly

 

For 2011/12 £10,700 per capita in Scotland, £9,000 per capita UK in tax. For 2012/13 it talks about public spending per head as £10,152 in Scotland, £8,788 for the UK, so £1,364 more in Scotland

 

£9,000 + £1,364 = £10,364 so £336 more has gone to Westminster.

 

Scotland put in 9.9% which = to £56.9 Bn.

 

Scotland took out 9.3 % which = to 64.5 BN

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.telegraph...t-Scotland.html

 

scotland has been in deficit for years and that is going by swinneys own numbers and gets approx £1200 more per person than it puts in and where did you pick up that the aircraft carrier was "largely French-designed" , eck?

as for stirling fine keep the pound but unless you want to still use the BOE we would have to go alone and that come with much more problems

 

You really seem to read only things that keep you comfortable in your make-believe world along with most other britnats. Read this, for a start (from Wik, not "eck"):

 

In 2003 Thales UK's design won the competition for the Royal Navy Future Carrier (CVF) and the company now participates in an alliance company with BAE Systems and the UK Ministry of Defence. This Thales design may form the basis of theFuture French aircraft carrier which the company has agreed to build with DCN.

 

This might hurt your sensibilities, but this French-subsidized company was allowed by Westminster to take over an "important" UK defence company: "The company changed its name to Thales from Thomson-CSF in December 2000 shortly after the £1,300 million acquisition of Racal Electronics plc, a UK defence electronics group. It is partially state-owned by the French State,[2] and has operations in more than 50 countries."

 

And I wonder if you've forgotten that when bankrupt Britain eventually scrapes together enough money to put planes on its white elephant (which your beloved british state has plans to share with France), those planes will be American!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You really seem to read only things that keep you comfortable in your make-believe world along with most other britnats. Read this, for a start (from Wik, not "eck"):

 

In 2003 Thales UK's design won the competition for the Royal NavyFuture Carrier (CVF) and the company now participates in an alliance company with BAE Systems and the UK Ministry of Defence. This Thales design may form the basis of theFuture French aircraft carrier which the company has agreed to build with DCN.

 

 

This might hurt your sensibilities, but this French-subsidized company was allowed by Westminster to take over an "important" UK defence company: "The company changed its name to Thales from Thomson-CSF in December 2000 shortly after the £1,300 million acquisition of Racal Electronics plc, a UK defence electronics group. It is partially state-owned by the French State,[2] and has operations in more than 50 countries."

 

And I wonder if you've forgotten that when bankrupt Britain eventually scrapes together enough money to put planes on its white elephant (which your beloved british state has plans to share with France), those planes will be American!

 

 

you should start to read your own bunf first before posting.

 

"was a planned new aircraft carrier developed for the French Navy by Thales Naval France and DCNS from the Thales UK/BMT design for the future British Queen Elizabeth class."

 

The requirement for the carriers was confirmed by Jacques Chirac in 2004 for the centennial of the Entente Cordiale and on 26 January 2006 the defence ministers of France and Britain reached an agreement regarding cooperation on the design of their future carriers. France agreed to pay the UK for access to the design due to the investment made to date.

 

British design by the UK part of Thales :thumbsup2:

Edited by jaggybunnet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

you should start to read your own bunf first before posting.

 

"was a planned new aircraft carrier developed for the French Navy by Thales Naval France and DCNS from the Thales UK/BMT design for the future British Queen Elizabeth class."

 

The requirement for the carriers was confirmed by Jacques Chirac in 2004 for the centennial of the Entente Cordiale and on 26 January 2006 the defence ministers of France and Britain reached an agreement regarding cooperation on the design of their future carriers. France agreed to pay the UK for access to the design due to the investment made to date.

 

British design by the UK part of Thales :thumbsup2:

 

So that makes you think that it's British? Ha ha ha! I suppose you think that Nissan UK is also "British"…. and EDF as well…….

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So that makes you think that it's British? Ha ha ha! I suppose you think that Nissan UK is also "British"…. and EDF as well…….

 

no why would they be? defense contracts are different and anyway Bae is the main contractor with Thales and babcok working alongside in design and building it :thumbsup2:

 

oh and says everything i need to know that that was what you picked up from my original post :clapping:

Edited by jaggybunnet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

thread title:

One Word Post - Should Scotland Be An Independent Country? Yes Or No.

 

yes

 

 

hoo woo !!!

 

seen the light and come away from the dark side, jaggybunnet has

 

days happy !!!

 

 

:shakeshout:

 

:crazy:

 

:clapping::D:tongue2::sign:

 

at least you are admitting staying in the union and the bitter together scaremongers are the dark side.

 

hope for you yet jb there might be

 

:crazy::lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes it's a deficit, just like the UK has one as well with pretty much similar % of debt for GDP figures (Scotland being slightly better off) http://www.scotland....013/03/GERS6313

 

that's the point we have had a deficit and will continue to have one, the snp have tried to hide this using % when putting it out to the public, i want to know if we would be better off and as yet (awaiting white paper) no one can prove that we would be, so why would i vote for it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that's the point we have had a deficit and will continue to have one, the snp have tried to hide this using % when putting it out to the public, i want to know if we would be better off and as yet (awaiting white paper) no one can prove that we would be, so why would i vote for it?

 

No-one can prove anything about the future. If you believe that this (i.e. Scotland's continued dependence on Westminster telling it how much pocket money it gets to spend) is as good as it gets, then fair enough. But I think that you know even before the white paper is out that you will defend the too wee too poor too stupid stories that Project Fear continues to throw around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No-one can prove anything about the future. If you believe that this (i.e. Scotland's continued dependence on Westminster telling it how much pocket money it gets to spend) is as good as it gets, then fair enough. But I think that you know even before the white paper is out that you will defend the too wee too poor too stupid stories that Project Fear continues to throw around.

 

Yes of course unlike project talking bollocks which has been open and honest :borat::loco:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes but out of the EU like Norway, Switzerland and Iceland. Scotland cannot be independent if it has to implement laws imposed by Brussels. Unfortunately, that's not on offer according to wee fat Alex so he can feck off. And a truly independent Scotland should not be part of other international government bodies such as the Council of Europe, UN, NATO, WTO, OECD etc!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what I don't get. The question is "should Scotland be independent", but the actual question should be "do you agree with the snp's vision of an independent scotland detailed in it's white paper." Two very different things.

 

I suspect a "yes" vote would be higher for the first question than the second...

 

Anyway, it is all theoretical for me - despite being Scottish I don't even get to vote living over here. Thanks for that Alex.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes but out of the EU like Norway, Switzerland and Iceland. Scotland cannot be independent if it has to implement laws imposed by Brussels. Unfortunately, that's not on offer according to wee fat Alex so he can feck off. And a truly independent Scotland should not be part of other international government bodies such as the Council of Europe, UN, NATO, WTO, OECD etc!

 

Err, the UK has to implement laws imposed by Brussels, or haven't you noticed. So can't [insert your insult here] Cameron feck off? Oh, and your UK is also a member of the other bodies you mention; you have no problem with that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what I don't get. The question is "should Scotland be independent", but the actual question should be "do you agree with the snp's vision of an independent scotland detailed in it's white paper." Two very different things.

 

I suspect a "yes" vote would be higher for the first question than the second...

 

Anyway, it is all theoretical for me - despite being Scottish I don't even get to vote living over here. Thanks for that Alex.

 

Having spent nearly 2 hours reading through it, it truely is a magnificent work............ of fiction.

 

In Brief this is what caught me

  • Thirty hours of childcare per week in term time for all three and four-year-olds, as well as vulnerable two-year-olds.
  • Housing benefit reforms, or the "bedroom tax" to be abolished in first year of an independent Scottish parliament.
  • Basic rate tax allowances and tax credits to rise at least in line with inflation
  • Review UK plan for increasing state pension age to 67
  • Minimum wage to rise at least in line with inflation
  • Basic rate tax allowances and tax credits to rise at least in line with inflation
  • Single tier state pension of £160 per week from April 2016
  • Royal Mail returned to public ownership

In basic the SNP will cut taxes, increase benefits, and buy back industries to the public sector, sounds fantastic., but what is going to pay for it??

 

If the SNP honestly believe the oil revenue will whilst also servicing the national debt and bridging the defecit then they really have lost the plot

Edited by Norgethistle
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...