Living standards today are double what they were in 1980. People had enough money for food and energy in 1980. Discuss.
The average household will find 2022 energy costs painful but feasible.
Half households are below average though.
Below the median.
Yes OK, but the same principle applies.
Incidentally, what do you think of the Drunken Lobster in Ventnor? Is it a good place to take Mrs Foxy for an anniversary?
Asian fusion meets seafood, in a trendy setting, replacing the vegan restaurant that failed (pitching vegan breakfasts on the IOW was badly missing the market) which itself replaced the long-running Spanish place once the owners finally found employment on the Canary Islands. I worried that Asian fusion might also miss the market, but it was full last night when I walked past with the dog. Run by the same family that have the Smoking Lobster on the seafront.
Living standards today are double what they were in 1980. People had enough money for food and energy in 1980. Discuss.
The average household will find 2022 energy costs painful but feasible.
It will mean finding an extra £2000-£3000 over a year.
Yes, for most people that will be doable but unpleasant; very many people have that much discrecionary spend or rainy day savings easily accessible. Even then, the knockon effects of where that money isn't spent won't be pretty.
So the first question is how many people simply won't have access to that money? The next (somewhat uglier) one is whether the wider public is prepared to pay up to bail out the really needy and not demand that they are helped as well? The signs there don't look brilliant.
The hard reality is that a lot of households that don't have the money will use other mitigations, like the much-maligned jumpers, and bring it down to something less than £2000. And a lot of other households will defer special purchases like phones for a few months. Leaving a core that can't do anything about their bills and can't pay.
The problem with the second question is that groups 1 and 2 who could do something would like the same treatment as group 3 who genuinely can't pay, while in turn group 4 (everyone else) expects not to be discriminated against for social crimes like having a job, etc.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
The trouble is, as soon as they got to iScotland, these new migrants would all move south to England, where the weather is better and the people are friendlier and the towns more exuberant and, also, London
So it would never work, unless you put a VERY hard border long Hadrian's Wall (and this would also likely be the end of the CTA with Ireland) and make movement between Scotland and rUK extremely difficult. Do Scots want that? I don't believe they do
Slight logic fail there. England is not the only border.
It would be the only land border on the island of Great Britain. To stop New Scots coming south there would have to be a hard border
This is presuming iScotland manages to attract a million new migrants. What is going to stop them going south to richer, kinder, sunnier southern England? Who wants to stay in Wick when you can go to Wimbledon?
"sunnier" is perhaps the issue. As you were saying only today.
Conservatives MPs want to do a deal with Boris Johnson for him to quit parliament and in return axe the inquiry into whether he misled them over Partygate, as allies of the prime minister branded it a “witch-hunt”.
Although he is due to leave No 10 in less than a month, a Commons privileges committee inquiry is still ongoing into the prime minister’s initial denials in December last year that any Covid laws were broken during lockdown.
Some of Johnson’s critics want him to stand down as an MP, to avoid the process keeping the spotlight on a deeply embarrassing issue for the party that has strained relations between colleagues.
The investigation, which is being led by a committee with a Tory majority that chose Labour’s Harriet Harman to chair it, is expected to drag on for months.
A tranche of evidence has been demanded by the committee, including Johnson’s diaries covering the 12 days on which parties were held in Westminster in defiance of Covid rules, as well as emails, WhatsApp messages, photographs, internal notes and a list of deleted documents.
If Johnson is found to have misled parliament, he could face suspension from the Commons and a recall petition, which, if signed by 10% of his Uxbridge and South Ruislip constituents, would trigger a byelection.
Unlike when Conservative MPs were whipped to save Owen Paterson, which sparked unrest within the party’s ranks over sleaze and scandal, some of Johnson’s fiercest Tory opponents said they would happily support ending the Partygate investigation if Johnson stepped down as an MP.
One source said: “I think there’s a case – not just for the parliament party, but for everyone – that we just move on from this psychodrama.”
The “quid pro quo” for backing a motion that would effectively wind up the probe would be Johnson “getting out of the Commons”, they added.
Another Tory MP who helped bring down Johnson said if the incoming prime minister decided to spare Johnson’s fate by tabling a motion in the Commons to end the investigation and asked for colleagues’ support, “that’s fine”.
Living standards today are double what they were in 1980. People had enough money for food and energy in 1980. Discuss.
The average household will find 2022 energy costs painful but feasible.
Half households are below average though.
Below the median.
Yes OK, but the same principle applies.
Incidentally, what do you think of the Drunken Lobster in Ventnor? Is it a good place to take Mrs Foxy for an anniversary?
Asian fusion meets seafood, in a trendy setting, replacing the vegan restaurant that failed (pitching vegan breakfasts on the IOW was badly missing the market) which itself replaced the long-running Spanish place once the owners finally found employment on the Canary Islands. I worried that Asian fusion might also miss the market, but it was full last night when I walked past with the dog. Run by the same family that have the Smoking Lobster on the seafront.
Have you tried it yourself? It got a good review in the paper.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
It would have to first be allowed an independence vote and second win it. Then also be accepted into the EU.
However even if it did an independent Scotland which also joined the Euro would not really be voting for full independence anyway
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
Scotland would meet the criteria a darn sight more than Ukraine.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
It would have to first be allowed an independence vote and second win it. Then also be accepted into the EU.
However even if it did an independent Scotland which also joined the Euro would not really be voting for full independence anyway
You obviously need a new sound to fill the B side of your disc. I recommend Warship diesel-hydraulics myself.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
It would have to first be allowed an independence vote and second win it. Then also be accepted into the EU.
However even if it did an independent Scotland which also joined the Euro would not really be voting for full independence anyway
So you voted against full independence when you voted Remain?!
Living standards today are double what they were in 1980. People had enough money for food and energy in 1980. Discuss.
The average household will find 2022 energy costs painful but feasible.
Half households are below average though.
Below the median.
Yes OK, but the same principle applies.
Incidentally, what do you think of the Drunken Lobster in Ventnor? Is it a good place to take Mrs Foxy for an anniversary?
Asian fusion meets seafood, in a trendy setting, replacing the vegan restaurant that failed (pitching vegan breakfasts on the IOW was badly missing the market) which itself replaced the long-running Spanish place once the owners finally found employment on the Canary Islands. I worried that Asian fusion might also miss the market, but it was full last night when I walked past with the dog. Run by the same family that have the Smoking Lobster on the seafront.
Have you tried it yourself? It got a good review in the paper.
Actually I haven’t, so I can’t vouch for it. I think they are doing better with the visitors than the locals. It’s a bit too Japanese for my taste, and I don’t often get cravings for tempura prawn or crab. Well, never, really. But the family that runs it are half British, quarter Italian and quarter Japanese (I think), so they know how to cook and have some interesting recipes….
Here you go…Matt & Cat are the only reviews that count on the Island:
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
It would have to first be allowed an independence vote and second win it. Then also be accepted into the EU.
However even if it did an independent Scotland which also joined the Euro would not really be voting for full independence anyway
So you voted against full independence when you voted Remain?!
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
The trouble is, as soon as they got to iScotland, these new migrants would all move south to England, where the weather is better and the people are friendlier and the towns more exuberant and, also, London
So it would never work, unless you put a VERY hard border long Hadrian's Wall (and this would also likely be the end of the CTA with Ireland) and make movement between Scotland and rUK extremely difficult. Do Scots want that? I don't believe they do
Slight logic fail there. England is not the only border.
It would be the only land border on the island of Great Britain. To stop New Scots coming south there would have to be a hard border
This is presuming iScotland manages to attract a million new migrants. What is going to stop them going south to richer, kinder, sunnier southern England? Who wants to stay in Wick when you can go to Wimbledon?
"sunnier" is perhaps the issue. As you were saying only today.
There's no water. And when there is water, it tastes shit. And it wrecks your kettle.
Yes. I found it overly complicated and so went back to turn based games like Empire Total War and Civilisation 6.
I've heard it's amazing if you can get your head round all of it though.
My son (12) just came back from camp, and made a new friend. Said friend is obsessed with Hearts of Iron, and I am under a lot of pressure to purchase it on Steam.
It's fine - it's semi-realtime nature hides that it is effectively quite a shallow game at its core (I only ever played as Russia, adding naval stuff makes it more fiddly and complex). There is an excellent after action report called Battleship for Bhutan where a player plays as Bhutan and tries to get them a battleship which is a stunningly hard thing to do.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
The trouble is, as soon as they got to iScotland, these new migrants would all move south to England, where the weather is better and the people are friendlier and the towns more exuberant and, also, London
So it would never work, unless you put a VERY hard border along Hadrian's Wall (and this would also likely be the end of the CTA with Ireland) and make movement between Scotland and rUK extremely difficult. Do Scots want that? I don't believe they do
Please stop using Hadrian's Wall. It is irritating to those of us who live many miles north of it. And still the best part of an hour from the border.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
The trouble is, as soon as they got to iScotland, these new migrants would all move south to England, where the weather is better and the people are friendlier and the towns more exuberant and, also, London
So it would never work, unless you put a VERY hard border long Hadrian's Wall (and this would also likely be the end of the CTA with Ireland) and make movement between Scotland and rUK extremely difficult. Do Scots want that? I don't believe they do
Slight logic fail there. England is not the only border.
It would be the only land border on the island of Great Britain. To stop New Scots coming south there would have to be a hard border
This is presuming iScotland manages to attract a million new migrants. What is going to stop them going south to richer, kinder, sunnier southern England? Who wants to stay in Wick when you can go to Wimbledon?
"sunnier" is perhaps the issue. As you were saying only today.
lol. I don't think global warming is going to kick in that quick so as to make Cumbernauld more appealing than Camden. If anything, for the next two or three decades, it is going to make southern England MORE appealing as the summers improve
This is a serious issue. And I am not making light of the problem: Scotland needs more people, so arguably it needs a more relaxed immigration policy than England. Except, the UK ALREADY has a very liberal immigration policy. We issued long term visas to nearly a million people last year: workers, students, you name it, from all over the world
If they're not going to Scotland now, why would they go there in the future, should it ever be independent? And why would they then not go to England, which seems to be their preferred destination?
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
The trouble is, as soon as they got to iScotland, these new migrants would all move south to England, where the weather is better and the people are friendlier and the towns more exuberant and, also, London
So it would never work, unless you put a VERY hard border long Hadrian's Wall (and this would also likely be the end of the CTA with Ireland) and make movement between Scotland and rUK extremely difficult. Do Scots want that? I don't believe they do
Slight logic fail there. England is not the only border.
It would be the only land border on the island of Great Britain. To stop New Scots coming south there would have to be a hard border
This is presuming iScotland manages to attract a million new migrants. What is going to stop them going south to richer, kinder, sunnier southern England? Who wants to stay in Wick when you can go to Wimbledon?
rcs1000 - The US is facing the same demographic problems as Britain, and most Americans wish it were not so: "When Gallup asked why couples aren’t having more kids, most Americans (65%) in 2013, whether with or without children, cited the costs associated with raising a child. An additional 11% said it’s because of the state of the economy and the jobs situation. Just 6% cited personal choice, 3% cited lack of time and 3% cited career concerns." source: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/05/08/ideal-size-of-the-american-family/
In my area, the cost of housing probably discourages what a biologist might call pair bonding, and then having children, even in such a relationship.
(Then there is this oddity in American fertility: During 2006 and 2007, the US fertility rate was above replacement, barely. I don't know of any other advanced industrial nation where that has happened, since at least 2000.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
The trouble is, as soon as they got to iScotland, these new migrants would all move south to England, where the weather is better and the people are friendlier and the towns more exuberant and, also, London
So it would never work, unless you put a VERY hard border long Hadrian's Wall (and this would also likely be the end of the CTA with Ireland) and make movement between Scotland and rUK extremely difficult. Do Scots want that? I don't believe they do
Slight logic fail there. England is not the only border.
It would be the only land border on the island of Great Britain. To stop New Scots coming south there would have to be a hard border
This is presuming iScotland manages to attract a million new migrants. What is going to stop them going south to richer, kinder, sunnier southern England? Who wants to stay in Wick when you can go to Wimbledon?
"sunnier" is perhaps the issue. As you were saying only today.
There's no water. And when there is water, it tastes shit. And it wrecks your kettle.
THames Water? oh yes, but then in part it IS shite and piss recycled.
Living standards today are double what they were in 1980. People had enough money for food and energy in 1980. Discuss.
The average household will find 2022 energy costs painful but feasible.
Half households are below average though.
Below the median.
Yes OK, but the same principle applies.
Incidentally, what do you think of the Drunken Lobster in Ventnor? Is it a good place to take Mrs Foxy for an anniversary?
Asian fusion meets seafood, in a trendy setting, replacing the vegan restaurant that failed (pitching vegan breakfasts on the IOW was badly missing the market) which itself replaced the long-running Spanish place once the owners finally found employment on the Canary Islands. I worried that Asian fusion might also miss the market, but it was full last night when I walked past with the dog. Run by the same family that have the Smoking Lobster on the seafront.
Have you tried it yourself? It got a good review in the paper.
Actually I haven’t, so I can’t vouch for it. I think they are doing better with the visitors than the locals. It’s a bit too Japanese for my taste, and I don’t often get cravings for tempura prawn or crab. Well, never, really. But the family that runs it are half British, quarter Italian and quarter Japanese (I think), so they know how to cook and have some interesting recipes….
Well made tempura is one of the great joys of world cooking. For shame
And Japanese food in general is in the top three cuisines. Tsk!
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
The trouble is, as soon as they got to iScotland, these new migrants would all move south to England, where the weather is better and the people are friendlier and the towns more exuberant and, also, London
So it would never work, unless you put a VERY hard border along Hadrian's Wall (and this would also likely be the end of the CTA with Ireland) and make movement between Scotland and rUK extremely difficult. Do Scots want that? I don't believe they do
Please stop using Hadrian's Wall. It is irritating to those of us who live many miles north of it. And still the best part of an hour from the border.
To hear Leon, there'd be a Checkpoint Charlie right in front of Newcastle Central Station.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
While all that is true, I think the divorce from rUK will complicate things a lot. National debt cannot be just wished away by the SNP.
Living standards today are double what they were in 1980. People had enough money for food and energy in 1980. Discuss.
The average household will find 2022 energy costs painful but feasible.
Half households are below average though.
Below the median.
Yes OK, but the same principle applies.
Incidentally, what do you think of the Drunken Lobster in Ventnor? Is it a good place to take Mrs Foxy for an anniversary?
Asian fusion meets seafood, in a trendy setting, replacing the vegan restaurant that failed (pitching vegan breakfasts on the IOW was badly missing the market) which itself replaced the long-running Spanish place once the owners finally found employment on the Canary Islands. I worried that Asian fusion might also miss the market, but it was full last night when I walked past with the dog. Run by the same family that have the Smoking Lobster on the seafront.
Have you tried it yourself? It got a good review in the paper.
Actually I haven’t, so I can’t vouch for it. I think they are doing better with the visitors than the locals. It’s a bit too Japanese for my taste, and I don’t often get cravings for tempura prawn or crab. Well, never, really. But the family that runs it are half British, quarter Italian and quarter Japanese (I think), so they know how to cook and have some interesting recipes….
I shall book and report back. Mrs Foxy quite likes fusion, and the seafood sounds good.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
The trouble is, as soon as they got to iScotland, these new migrants would all move south to England, where the weather is better and the people are friendlier and the towns more exuberant and, also, London
So it would never work, unless you put a VERY hard border long Hadrian's Wall (and this would also likely be the end of the CTA with Ireland) and make movement between Scotland and rUK extremely difficult. Do Scots want that? I don't believe they do
Slight logic fail there. England is not the only border.
It would be the only land border on the island of Great Britain. To stop New Scots coming south there would have to be a hard border
This is presuming iScotland manages to attract a million new migrants. What is going to stop them going south to richer, kinder, sunnier southern England? Who wants to stay in Wick when you can go to Wimbledon?
"sunnier" is perhaps the issue. As you were saying only today.
lol. I don't think global warming is going to kick in that quick so as to make Cumbernauld more appealing than Camden. If anything, for the next two or three decades, it is going to make southern England MORE appealing as the summers improve
This is a serious issue. And I am not making light of the problem: Scotland needs more people, so arguably it needs a more relaxed immigration policy than England. Except, the UK ALREADY has a very liberal immigration policy. We issued long term visas to nearly a million people last year: workers, students, you name it, from all over the world
If they're not going to Scotland now, why would they go there in the future, should it ever be independent? And why would they then not go to England, which seems to be their preferred destination?
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
Border's been fixed since about 1560. Unlike the UK's current border with the EU which is up in the air.
Okay. I fear the nations of the world are not going to collaborate to arrest or reverse climate change(**). But thinking about it, we in the 1st world have for centuries pretty well used the poorer nations at will. So let us "1st worlders" take on an attempt to use technology to try a fix. For instance, can we make machines to capture and sequester Co2 somewhere safe? 24/7/365 ? At our expense? We can invent to technology to chop up an al Qaeda leader from afar, so why not something a bit more sane?
(**) Speaking of Mankind's mulishness, how could on define war? Somewhere in a continuum from "War Between the Tates" and thermonuclear Armageddon. Having decided on a definition has there ever been a time in the last thousand years (say) when there has been universal peace?
India china and the third world arent going to stop trying to grow. Climate change will accelerate therefore. Western countries will become fortress against climate change refugees as they cant take on the two or three billion that is predicted. The world will become harsher deal with it
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
Border's been fixed since about 1560. Unlike the UK's current border with the EU which is up in the air.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
"I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process,"
The French might want this to spite "the British", I cannot think of any other country that would favour accelerated application
All the E European countries went through a long painful accession process, Scotland would be forced to do the same: it would be told to permanently fix its trading arrangements with rUK first (the EU has to know what kind of country is applying) and then Scotland would have to come up with an answer on the currency, Schenghen, the border with England. Then there would be protracted negotiations about fishing, defence, and so on (again made difficult by the rUK relationship)
In reality it would take a decade of hard bargaining. We've seen how the EU work: slow, painful, legalistic. And that is presuming a country like Spain doesn't say: Nah, fuck it, veto, because Catalunya. That is entirely possible. Or a country like Hungary or Bulgaria would veto just to get more leverage in Brussels. Happens all the time
At best it would take many years, at worst Scotland would get vetoed, and never join. Your glib remarks are fatuous
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
Nah, just the M74 and A1 (plus 3 A roads in between). Wouldn't take much for UK Gov to flex some muscle.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
The trouble is, as soon as they got to iScotland, these new migrants would all move south to England, where the weather is better and the people are friendlier and the towns more exuberant and, also, London
So it would never work, unless you put a VERY hard border along Hadrian's Wall (and this would also likely be the end of the CTA with Ireland) and make movement between Scotland and rUK extremely difficult. Do Scots want that? I don't believe they do
Please stop using Hadrian's Wall. It is irritating to those of us who live many miles north of it. And still the best part of an hour from the border.
To hear Leon, there'd be a Checkpoint Charlie right in front of Newcastle Central Station.
Manned by aggressive, homeless drunkards with incomprehensible accents no doubt. Come to think of it that's pretty much Central Station already.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
Border's been fixed since about 1560. Unlike the UK's current border with the EU which is up in the air.
Ok, smartypants. Border infrastucture.
Very few actual crossings, in fact. Remarkably few.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Scotland would be told by Berlin, Brussels and Frankfurt to impose deep austerity and slash spending to get its deficit under control before being allowed in the Euro. Just as Greece was to stay in the Euro. Or else vastly raise taxes
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
The trouble is, as soon as they got to iScotland, these new migrants would all move south to England, where the weather is better and the people are friendlier and the towns more exuberant and, also, London
So it would never work, unless you put a VERY hard border along Hadrian's Wall (and this would also likely be the end of the CTA with Ireland) and make movement between Scotland and rUK extremely difficult. Do Scots want that? I don't believe they do
Please stop using Hadrian's Wall. It is irritating to those of us who live many miles north of it. And still the best part of an hour from the border.
To hear Leon, there'd be a Checkpoint Charlie right in front of Newcastle Central Station.
Manned by aggressive, homeless drunkards with incomprehensible accents no doubt. Come to think of it that's pretty much Central Station already.
The newish automated ticket barrier is only, what, about 20 metres off being on the actual line of the Wall, isn't it?
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
The trouble is, as soon as they got to iScotland, these new migrants would all move south to England, where the weather is better and the people are friendlier and the towns more exuberant and, also, London
So it would never work, unless you put a VERY hard border long Hadrian's Wall (and this would also likely be the end of the CTA with Ireland) and make movement between Scotland and rUK extremely difficult. Do Scots want that? I don't believe they do
Slight logic fail there. England is not the only border.
It would be the only land border on the island of Great Britain. To stop New Scots coming south there would have to be a hard border
This is presuming iScotland manages to attract a million new migrants. What is going to stop them going south to richer, kinder, sunnier southern England? Who wants to stay in Wick when you can go to Wimbledon?
"sunnier" is perhaps the issue. As you were saying only today.
lol. I don't think global warming is going to kick in that quick so as to make Cumbernauld more appealing than Camden. If anything, for the next two or three decades, it is going to make southern England MORE appealing as the summers improve
This is a serious issue. And I am not making light of the problem: Scotland needs more people, so arguably it needs a more relaxed immigration policy than England. Except, the UK ALREADY has a very liberal immigration policy. We issued long term visas to nearly a million people last year: workers, students, you name it, from all over the world
If they're not going to Scotland now, why would they go there in the future, should it ever be independent? And why would they then not go to England, which seems to be their preferred destination?
Historical patterns; London; the fact that England is the bit where most land.
Established communities, too. Is assume there is an exponential aspect to immigration, and these having been kick-started in the same way here. I think our biggest group is Poles, and they are quite dispersed across the country.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
Nah, just the M74 and A1 (plus 3 A roads in between). Wouldn't take much for UK Gov to flex some muscle.
Any farmers with land in both jurisdictions? We were told that was a terrible, insurmountable problem on the Island of Ireland.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
It is Westmister policy to ignore the border in Ireland by ripping up the NI protocol, so why cannot indy Scotland do the same?
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
It would have to first be allowed an independence vote and second win it. Then also be accepted into the EU.
However even if it did an independent Scotland which also joined the Euro would not really be voting for full independence anyway
So you voted against full independence when you voted Remain?!
I would have voted Leave if the Euro was on the cards
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
The trouble is, as soon as they got to iScotland, these new migrants would all move south to England, where the weather is better and the people are friendlier and the towns more exuberant and, also, London
So it would never work, unless you put a VERY hard border long Hadrian's Wall (and this would also likely be the end of the CTA with Ireland) and make movement between Scotland and rUK extremely difficult. Do Scots want that? I don't believe they do
Slight logic fail there. England is not the only border.
It would be the only land border on the island of Great Britain. To stop New Scots coming south there would have to be a hard border
This is presuming iScotland manages to attract a million new migrants. What is going to stop them going south to richer, kinder, sunnier southern England? Who wants to stay in Wick when you can go to Wimbledon?
"sunnier" is perhaps the issue. As you were saying only today.
lol. I don't think global warming is going to kick in that quick so as to make Cumbernauld more appealing than Camden. If anything, for the next two or three decades, it is going to make southern England MORE appealing as the summers improve
This is a serious issue. And I am not making light of the problem: Scotland needs more people, so arguably it needs a more relaxed immigration policy than England. Except, the UK ALREADY has a very liberal immigration policy. We issued long term visas to nearly a million people last year: workers, students, you name it, from all over the world
If they're not going to Scotland now, why would they go there in the future, should it ever be independent? And why would they then not go to England, which seems to be their preferred destination?
Historical patterns; London; the fact that England is the bit where most land.
Established communities, too. Is assume there is an exponential aspect to immigration, and these having been kick-started in the same way here. I think our biggest group is Poles, and they are quite dispersed across the country.
Okay. I fear the nations of the world are not going to collaborate to arrest or reverse climate change(**). But thinking about it, we in the 1st world have for centuries pretty well used the poorer nations at will. So let us "1st worlders" take on an attempt to use technology to try a fix. For instance, can we make machines to capture and sequester Co2 somewhere safe? 24/7/365 ? At our expense? We can invent to technology to chop up an al Qaeda leader from afar, so why not something a bit more sane?
(**) Speaking of Mankind's mulishness, how could on define war? Somewhere in a continuum from "War Between the Tates" and thermonuclear Armageddon. Having decided on a definition has there ever been a time in the last thousand years (say) when there has been universal peace?
India china and the third world arent going to stop trying to grow. Climate change will accelerate therefore. Western countries will become fortress against climate change refugees as they cant take on the two or three billion that is predicted. The world will become harsher deal with it
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
Border's been fixed since about 1560. Unlike the UK's current border with the EU which is up in the air.
Ok, smartypants. Border infrastucture.
Very few actual crossings, in fact. Remarkably few.
Assumes the EU would be happy with border posts for goods only on roads, not a wall across fields. Obviously for people, the most likely result is that Scotland would be in the CTA like RoI.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
Nah, just the M74 and A1 (plus 3 A roads in between). Wouldn't take much for UK Gov to flex some muscle.
Any farmers with land in both jurisdictions? We were told that was a terrible, insurmountable problem on the Island of Ireland.
Different legal systems ab initio, so it'd be like owning six oranges and six apples.
Living standards today are double what they were in 1980. People had enough money for food and energy in 1980. Discuss.
The average household will find 2022 energy costs painful but feasible.
Half households are below average though.
Below the median.
Yes OK, but the same principle applies.
Incidentally, what do you think of the Drunken Lobster in Ventnor? Is it a good place to take Mrs Foxy for an anniversary?
Asian fusion meets seafood, in a trendy setting, replacing the vegan restaurant that failed (pitching vegan breakfasts on the IOW was badly missing the market) which itself replaced the long-running Spanish place once the owners finally found employment on the Canary Islands. I worried that Asian fusion might also miss the market, but it was full last night when I walked past with the dog. Run by the same family that have the Smoking Lobster on the seafront.
Have you tried it yourself? It got a good review in the paper.
Actually I haven’t, so I can’t vouch for it. I think they are doing better with the visitors than the locals. It’s a bit too Japanese for my taste, and I don’t often get cravings for tempura prawn or crab. Well, never, really. But the family that runs it are half British, quarter Italian and quarter Japanese (I think), so they know how to cook and have some interesting recipes….
I shall book and report back. Mrs Foxy quite likes fusion, and the seafood sounds good.
I edited a review into my comment above after you quoted it.
Credit to them for making that corner property work - the ground floor is small and basement is larger and potentially characterful (I think it may once have been a wine merchants?), but the river that once powered the water mill runs under Pier Street and all the basements along there are riddled with damp. The Spanish couple (well, she was English but the restaurant was Spanish) covered the damp brickwork with various Spanish rugs and wall coverings, and cunningly disguised the odour with Spanish smells. I don’t think the vegan place ever got busy enough for people to need to go downstairs, and the latest owners spent a fortune moving the kitchen downstairs into the damp and opening up the ground floor, which is nevertheless still quite small - so book ahead! I’d imagine the economics of making a profit out of their relatively small number of covers might be a challenge.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
Nah, just the M74 and A1 (plus 3 A roads in between). Wouldn't take much for UK Gov to flex some muscle.
Any farmers with land in both jurisdictions? We were told that was a terrible, insurmountable problem on the Island of Ireland.
I don't think you need a huge wall to cause serious economic damage. Just a couple of checkpoints on the arterial routes.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
It is Westmister policy to ignore the border in Ireland by ripping up the NI protocol, so why cannot indy Scotland do the same?
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
It is Westmister policy to ignore the border in Ireland by ripping up the NI protocol, so why cannot indy Scotland do the same?
Because the EU won't let them in if they do.
No: because Scotland wouldn't be part of the NI Protocol (only rUK would be, at rUK's insistence).
Okay. I fear the nations of the world are not going to collaborate to arrest or reverse climate change(**). But thinking about it, we in the 1st world have for centuries pretty well used the poorer nations at will. So let us "1st worlders" take on an attempt to use technology to try a fix. For instance, can we make machines to capture and sequester Co2 somewhere safe? 24/7/365 ? At our expense? We can invent to technology to chop up an al Qaeda leader from afar, so why not something a bit more sane?
(**) Speaking of Mankind's mulishness, how could on define war? Somewhere in a continuum from "War Between the Tates" and thermonuclear Armageddon. Having decided on a definition has there ever been a time in the last thousand years (say) when there has been universal peace?
India china and the third world arent going to stop trying to grow. Climate change will accelerate therefore. Western countries will become fortress against climate change refugees as they cant take on the two or three billion that is predicted. The world will become harsher deal with it
They can grow just with more renewables and nuclear rather than fossil fuels
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
Nah, just the M74 and A1 (plus 3 A roads in between). Wouldn't take much for UK Gov to flex some muscle.
Any farmers with land in both jurisdictions? We were told that was a terrible, insurmountable problem on the Island of Ireland.
Different legal systems ab initio, so it'd be like owning six oranges and six apples.
Same animal welfare and sanitary requirements, though. Should an Indy Scotland choose to join the EU it would become illegal (or extremely difficult) to move cows from one field to another.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
Border's been fixed since about 1560. Unlike the UK's current border with the EU which is up in the air.
Ok, smartypants. Border infrastucture.
Very few actual crossings, in fact. Remarkably few.
Assumes the EU would be happy with border posts for goods only on roads, not a wall across fields. Obviously for people, the most likely result is that Scotland would be in the CTA like RoI.
But it really would not, not if Scotland adopted a super relaxed immigration policy (on top of Freedom of Movement if it ever went back into the EU)
The English would not stand for it, because all these migrants could simply get a train down to London from Glasgow and then that's an end to any semblance of "control" of our borders. We have a political storm building over the dinghy people, if all they have to do is get on a minibus at Berwick then blend into England, whoah
Yet again this is one of the suppositions of Scottish independence which presumes that the rest of the UK will simply tolerate whatever Scotland wants, and be super accommodating to Scottish needs and desires, and ignore public sentiment at home in England, Wales and NI. This will not be the case
The UK was very generous to Ireland after Irish indy because the British felt guilty (rightly) and offered stuff like the CTA and voting rights. The British will NOT be so soft hearted to a Scotland that has broken up the UK. Not at all
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
Nah, just the M74 and A1 (plus 3 A roads in between). Wouldn't take much for UK Gov to flex some muscle.
Any farmers with land in both jurisdictions? We were told that was a terrible, insurmountable problem on the Island of Ireland.
Different legal systems ab initio, so it'd be like owning six oranges and six apples.
Same animal welfare and sanitary requirements, though. Should an Indy Scotland choose to join the EU it would become illegal (or extremely difficult) to move cows from one field to another.
Have you seen the border? Most of it is bare moorland or water and in different ownership on each side by the nature of things. That argument would be far more of an issue for NI in Brexit and I don't see that that stopped the UK Brexiters.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
It is Westmister policy to ignore the border in Ireland by ripping up the NI protocol, so why cannot indy Scotland do the same?
Because the EU won't let them in if they do.
No: because Scotland wouldn't be part of the NI Protocol (only rUK would be, at rUK's insistence).
You think the EU would agree to a porous border for goods between non-EU England and EU-scotland? With their attitude to the "protection of the Single Market"?
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
Nah, just the M74 and A1 (plus 3 A roads in between). Wouldn't take much for UK Gov to flex some muscle.
Any farmers with land in both jurisdictions? We were told that was a terrible, insurmountable problem on the Island of Ireland.
Different legal systems ab initio, so it'd be like owning six oranges and six apples.
Same animal welfare and sanitary requirements, though. Should an Indy Scotland choose to join the EU it would become illegal (or extremely difficult) to move cows from one field to another.
Haha, that would be a funny project fear 2 attack line.
Ineffective - border farmers must be about the most pro-union people in the country.
We were a strike ridden, nationalised industry dominated economy at the turn of the century 2000?
You seem to be looking two generations back.
At the turn of the century we had privatised industries, much of Canary Wharf had been built, the house price to earnings ratio in almost the entire country was about 3x income multiples.
Then Blair and Brown f***ed things up and we've had population surge by 10 million since then but housing supply hasn't kept up. It has nothing to do with nationalisation versus not nationalisation, its pure supply and demand.
Negative equity is far less of a problem than people not being able to afford a home in the first place. Negative equity is a barrier on mobility but that's it and if you can keep your mortgage repayments going for a few years its a transient problem after which inflation and keeping up with repayments will erode the negative equity and get you back into positive equity.
Having no equity as house prices are 4-8 or higher times incomes and rent is proportionately higher too due to a lack of a supply is a far worse problem than negative equity which is blown up out of all proportion by people who wish to justify their higher equity prices while pretending to be caring.
The problem, as you well know, is it's in everyone's interests (well, everyone who matters) to keep the supply of land under tight control and house prices high.
For many people, the house is the only asset they have - selling it and downsizing will provide for their pension by liberating capital on which they ca either live or invest. A significant reduction in the value of such assets will leave hundreds of thousands without the means to afford to retire.
Looking at one end of the market "the young can't afford to buy property" forgets the other. If I have a house worth £800k in and around London and I want to downsize and retire elsewhere, I can find a nice little house for £300k (for example) and I have £500k in equity. The problem is not who will buy my house valued at £800k in London but if I buy a £300k property elsewhere I am preventing a local family getting on the ladder.
Do you want to put up rows of small flats/houses on the outskirts of Cornish or Lake District villages and even if you do, you can't guarantee (because there is a free market at work which presumably you support) southern retirees won't snap them up. Even embargoing second home doesn't help because people want to retire to the likes of St Ives and Perranporth and that demand blocks out the locals.
The housing question is complex - simply saying "we need to build more houses" neglects the nuances in the issue.
If people haven't saved for a pension, that's their problem. No divine right to exploit land to ransom that into a payout at a multiple that never existed when it was bought.
If people from London want to retire to Cornwall or the outskirts of the Lakes (outside protected AONBs) and buy any houses that are constructed then what's stopping more from being built? If whole new towns or cities spring up in Cornwall or the Lakes, outside protected zones, then I see no problems with that.
If thousands, tens of thousands or more houses get built then they get built and people have homes.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
The trouble is, as soon as they got to iScotland, these new migrants would all move south to England, where the weather is better and the people are friendlier and the towns more exuberant and, also, London
So it would never work, unless you put a VERY hard border along Hadrian's Wall (and this would also likely be the end of the CTA with Ireland) and make movement between Scotland and rUK extremely difficult. Do Scots want that? I don't believe they do
Depends where abouts in England and whereabouts in Scotland. Can tell you that people in NE England are far friendlier than in NE England.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
Border's been fixed since about 1560. Unlike the UK's current border with the EU which is up in the air.
Ok, smartypants. Border infrastucture.
Very few actual crossings, in fact. Remarkably few.
Assumes the EU would be happy with border posts for goods only on roads, not a wall across fields. Obviously for people, the most likely result is that Scotland would be in the CTA like RoI.
But it really would not, not if Scotland adopted a super relaxed immigration policy (on top of Freedom of Movement if it ever went back into the EU)
The English would not stand for it, because all these migrants could simply get a train down to London from Glasgow and then that's an end to any semblance of "control" of our borders. We have a political storm building over the dinghy people, if all they have to do is get on a minibus at Berwick then blend into England, whoah
Yet again this is one of the suppositions of Scottish independence which presumes that the rest of the UK will simply tolerate whatever Scotland wants, and be super accommodating to Scottish needs and desires, and ignore public sentiment at home in England, Wales and NI. This will not be the case
The UK was very generous to Ireland after Irish indy because the British felt guilty (rightly) and offered stuff like the CTA and voting rights. The British will NOT be so soft hearted to a Scotland that has broken up the UK. Not at all
Does anything actually prevent someone who has a visa for RoI but not for UK taking a ferry from Dublin to Liverpool? What about a train to Belfast, then a ferry to the UK?
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
It is Westmister policy to ignore the border in Ireland by ripping up the NI protocol, so why cannot indy Scotland do the same?
Because the EU won't let them in if they do.
No: because Scotland wouldn't be part of the NI Protocol (only rUK would be, at rUK's insistence).
You think the EU would agree to a porous border for goods between non-EU England and EU-scotland? With their attitude to the "protection of the Single Market"?
Ah, I thought you were talking about the protocol specifically. Trade in general is a different matter. But why have no trade at the Scottish border and plenty at Dover? Not possible to treat them differently.
Okay. I fear the nations of the world are not going to collaborate to arrest or reverse climate change(**). But thinking about it, we in the 1st world have for centuries pretty well used the poorer nations at will. So let us "1st worlders" take on an attempt to use technology to try a fix. For instance, can we make machines to capture and sequester Co2 somewhere safe? 24/7/365 ? At our expense? We can invent to technology to chop up an al Qaeda leader from afar, so why not something a bit more sane?
(**) Speaking of Mankind's mulishness, how could on define war? Somewhere in a continuum from "War Between the Tates" and thermonuclear Armageddon. Having decided on a definition has there ever been a time in the last thousand years (say) when there has been universal peace?
India china and the third world arent going to stop trying to grow. Climate change will accelerate therefore. Western countries will become fortress against climate change refugees as they cant take on the two or three billion that is predicted. The world will become harsher deal with it
They can grow just with more renewables and nuclear rather than fossil fuels
No they can't. They want cars and roads to drive them on and fridges and houses and cookers and TVs and all the shit you have. You don't get all that stuff for carbon free just because it's powered by renewables.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
The trouble is, as soon as they got to iScotland, these new migrants would all move south to England, where the weather is better and the people are friendlier and the towns more exuberant and, also, London
So it would never work, unless you put a VERY hard border along Hadrian's Wall (and this would also likely be the end of the CTA with Ireland) and make movement between Scotland and rUK extremely difficult. Do Scots want that? I don't believe they do
Please stop using Hadrian's Wall. It is irritating to those of us who live many miles north of it. And still the best part of an hour from the border.
To hear Leon, there'd be a Checkpoint Charlie right in front of Newcastle Central Station.
Manned by aggressive, homeless drunkards with incomprehensible accents no doubt. Come to think of it that's pretty much Central Station already.
The newish automated ticket barrier is only, what, about 20 metres off being on the actual line of the Wall, isn't it?
Dunno. It pretty much followed the river through the City though so probably not far off.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
Nah, just the M74 and A1 (plus 3 A roads in between). Wouldn't take much for UK Gov to flex some muscle.
Any farmers with land in both jurisdictions? We were told that was a terrible, insurmountable problem on the Island of Ireland.
Different legal systems ab initio, so it'd be like owning six oranges and six apples.
Same animal welfare and sanitary requirements, though. Should an Indy Scotland choose to join the EU it would become illegal (or extremely difficult) to move cows from one field to another.
Have you seen the border? Most of it is bare moorland or water and in different ownership on each side by the nature of things. That argument would be far more of an issue for NI in Brexit and I don't see that that stopped the UK Brexiters.
Nothing should stop the ScotIndy people. They should just know what they're buying. Remainers say we should have defined what Brexit was before having a referendum: let's do that for Scot Indy.
Okay. I fear the nations of the world are not going to collaborate to arrest or reverse climate change(**). But thinking about it, we in the 1st world have for centuries pretty well used the poorer nations at will. So let us "1st worlders" take on an attempt to use technology to try a fix. For instance, can we make machines to capture and sequester Co2 somewhere safe? 24/7/365 ? At our expense? We can invent to technology to chop up an al Qaeda leader from afar, so why not something a bit more sane?
(**) Speaking of Mankind's mulishness, how could on define war? Somewhere in a continuum from "War Between the Tates" and thermonuclear Armageddon. Having decided on a definition has there ever been a time in the last thousand years (say) when there has been universal peace?
India china and the third world arent going to stop trying to grow. Climate change will accelerate therefore. Western countries will become fortress against climate change refugees as they cant take on the two or three billion that is predicted. The world will become harsher deal with it
RIP civilization.
People do what they need to in order to survive. I think most western nations given they are democracies will if put to the choice half your living standards and double your population or take a harsh stance wont be voting to half their living standards.
Your problem is you think civillisation is being nice to people it really isnt. The romans were civillised they weren't particularly nice to non romans
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
Border's been fixed since about 1560. Unlike the UK's current border with the EU which is up in the air.
Ok, smartypants. Border infrastucture.
Very few actual crossings, in fact. Remarkably few.
Assumes the EU would be happy with border posts for goods only on roads, not a wall across fields. Obviously for people, the most likely result is that Scotland would be in the CTA like RoI.
But it really would not, not if Scotland adopted a super relaxed immigration policy (on top of Freedom of Movement if it ever went back into the EU)
The English would not stand for it, because all these migrants could simply get a train down to London from Glasgow and then that's an end to any semblance of "control" of our borders. We have a political storm building over the dinghy people, if all they have to do is get on a minibus at Berwick then blend into England, whoah
Yet again this is one of the suppositions of Scottish independence which presumes that the rest of the UK will simply tolerate whatever Scotland wants, and be super accommodating to Scottish needs and desires, and ignore public sentiment at home in England, Wales and NI. This will not be the case
The UK was very generous to Ireland after Irish indy because the British felt guilty (rightly) and offered stuff like the CTA and voting rights. The British will NOT be so soft hearted to a Scotland that has broken up the UK. Not at all
Does anything actually prevent someone who has a visa for RoI but not for UK taking a ferry from Dublin to Liverpool? What about a train to Belfast, then a ferry to the UK?
I asked the PB Brexiters about exactly that back in 2016 or so given their concern with IMMIGRATION. I was told not to be stupid, the UK didn;t control immigration at its borders because reasons.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
Border's been fixed since about 1560. Unlike the UK's current border with the EU which is up in the air.
Ok, smartypants. Border infrastucture.
Very few actual crossings, in fact. Remarkably few.
Assumes the EU would be happy with border posts for goods only on roads, not a wall across fields. Obviously for people, the most likely result is that Scotland would be in the CTA like RoI.
But it really would not, not if Scotland adopted a super relaxed immigration policy (on top of Freedom of Movement if it ever went back into the EU)
The English would not stand for it, because all these migrants could simply get a train down to London from Glasgow and then that's an end to any semblance of "control" of our borders. We have a political storm building over the dinghy people, if all they have to do is get on a minibus at Berwick then blend into England, whoah
Yet again this is one of the suppositions of Scottish independence which presumes that the rest of the UK will simply tolerate whatever Scotland wants, and be super accommodating to Scottish needs and desires, and ignore public sentiment at home in England, Wales and NI. This will not be the case
The UK was very generous to Ireland after Irish indy because the British felt guilty (rightly) and offered stuff like the CTA and voting rights. The British will NOT be so soft hearted to a Scotland that has broken up the UK. Not at all
Precisely. I am totally in favour of scottish independence, but I also want the uk governement to negotiate with what is best for the uk in mind after a yes vote and if that means saying no to scottish wants that is tough luck for them
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
Border's been fixed since about 1560. Unlike the UK's current border with the EU which is up in the air.
Ok, smartypants. Border infrastucture.
Very few actual crossings, in fact. Remarkably few.
Assumes the EU would be happy with border posts for goods only on roads, not a wall across fields. Obviously for people, the most likely result is that Scotland would be in the CTA like RoI.
But it really would not, not if Scotland adopted a super relaxed immigration policy (on top of Freedom of Movement if it ever went back into the EU)
The English would not stand for it, because all these migrants could simply get a train down to London from Glasgow and then that's an end to any semblance of "control" of our borders. We have a political storm building over the dinghy people, if all they have to do is get on a minibus at Berwick then blend into England, whoah
Yet again this is one of the suppositions of Scottish independence which presumes that the rest of the UK will simply tolerate whatever Scotland wants, and be super accommodating to Scottish needs and desires, and ignore public sentiment at home in England, Wales and NI. This will not be the case
The UK was very generous to Ireland after Irish indy because the British felt guilty (rightly) and offered stuff like the CTA and voting rights. The British will NOT be so soft hearted to a Scotland that has broken up the UK. Not at all
Does anything actually prevent someone who has a visa for RoI but not for UK taking a ferry from Dublin to Liverpool? What about a train to Belfast, then a ferry to the UK?
Indeed. The CTA is an anomaly, and I am genuinely unsure how long it will last, now we are post Brexit
It is sustainable, perhaps, because there is a sea between Ireland and the UK. But if it ever became apparent that migrants were using the open Anglo-Irish border to access the UK this would be a big issue
Ironically, the Irish are the ones complaining at the moment, about migrants flooding into Ireland via the UK to avoid the Rwanda policy
"New arrivals fleeing the war in Ukraine will be housed in tents on an army base from Monday, after a significant increase in people seeking asylum in Ireland led to the main reception centre at Citywest outside Dublin reaching full capacity.
"Taoiseach Micheal Martin said the accommodation situation was partly due to a recent increase in people coming to Ireland because of the controversial Rwanda scheme.
""We will be analysing this, but something has happened in the last two to three months in terms of the surge within international protection applicants, something has clearly happened," the Taoiseach said.""
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
The trouble is, as soon as they got to iScotland, these new migrants would all move south to England, where the weather is better and the people are friendlier and the towns more exuberant and, also, London
So it would never work, unless you put a VERY hard border along Hadrian's Wall (and this would also likely be the end of the CTA with Ireland) and make movement between Scotland and rUK extremely difficult. Do Scots want that? I don't believe they do
Depends where abouts in England and whereabouts in Scotland. Can tell you that people in NE England are far friendlier than in NE England.
...which also depends on whereabouts in NE England. You used to live on Teesside, ISTR? And now you live in the wilds of rural Aberdeenshire? I wonder if it is the case that rural communities are friendlier than urban communities? In my experience this is normally the case. This film tested the theory that the further north you go the friendlier people get. The friendliest person the protagonist met was inthe Shetland Islands - but he wasn't from Shetland. So the theory is that northerly latitudes make people nice. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/It's_Nice_Up_North
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
It is Westmister policy to ignore the border in Ireland by ripping up the NI protocol, so why cannot indy Scotland do the same?
Because the EU won't let them in if they do.
No: because Scotland wouldn't be part of the NI Protocol (only rUK would be, at rUK's insistence).
You think the EU would agree to a porous border for goods between non-EU England and EU-scotland? With their attitude to the "protection of the Single Market"?
Ah, I thought you were talking about the protocol specifically. Trade in general is a different matter. But why have no trade at the Scottish border and plenty at Dover? Not possible to treat them differently.
No, there should be as much trade as possible! But necessarily the EU would insist on some sort of border infrastructure.
Of course, if Scotland becomes independent and does not immediately join the EU, there would be no need for such a border until or unless Scotland joins the EU: the UK's trading partners would probably be happy to search & replace "UK" for "UK or Scotland" in their trade deals.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
Border's been fixed since about 1560. Unlike the UK's current border with the EU which is up in the air.
Ok, smartypants. Border infrastucture.
Very few actual crossings, in fact. Remarkably few.
Assumes the EU would be happy with border posts for goods only on roads, not a wall across fields. Obviously for people, the most likely result is that Scotland would be in the CTA like RoI.
But it really would not, not if Scotland adopted a super relaxed immigration policy (on top of Freedom of Movement if it ever went back into the EU)
The English would not stand for it, because all these migrants could simply get a train down to London from Glasgow and then that's an end to any semblance of "control" of our borders. We have a political storm building over the dinghy people, if all they have to do is get on a minibus at Berwick then blend into England, whoah
Yet again this is one of the suppositions of Scottish independence which presumes that the rest of the UK will simply tolerate whatever Scotland wants, and be super accommodating to Scottish needs and desires, and ignore public sentiment at home in England, Wales and NI. This will not be the case
The UK was very generous to Ireland after Irish indy because the British felt guilty (rightly) and offered stuff like the CTA and voting rights. The British will NOT be so soft hearted to a Scotland that has broken up the UK. Not at all
Does anything actually prevent someone who has a visa for RoI but not for UK taking a ferry from Dublin to Liverpool? What about a train to Belfast, then a ferry to the UK?
I asked the PB Brexiters about exactly that back in 2016 or so given their concern with IMMIGRATION. I was told not to be stupid, the UK didn;t control immigration at its borders because reasons.
The UK's immigration policies are in some ways quite weak: we don't check people on the way out at airports, and overstaying a visa is trivial. But most people concerned with immigration are concerned with people who want to work, and the ability to work (at least legally) is not the same as the simple ability to be physically present in the country.
I assume the UK and RoI have some collaboration on non-admmitance of undesirables to the CTA, but it is probably informal. The UK is absolutely entitled to allow access to someone banned by the RoI and vice versa. Hence my question about ferries.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
The trouble is, as soon as they got to iScotland, these new migrants would all move south to England, where the weather is better and the people are friendlier and the towns more exuberant and, also, London
So it would never work, unless you put a VERY hard border along Hadrian's Wall (and this would also likely be the end of the CTA with Ireland) and make movement between Scotland and rUK extremely difficult. Do Scots want that? I don't believe they do
Depends where abouts in England and whereabouts in Scotland. Can tell you that people in NE England are far friendlier than in NE England.
...which also depends on whereabouts in NE England. You used to live on Teesside, ISTR? And now you live in the wilds of rural Aberdeenshire? I wonder if it is the case that rural communities are friendlier than urban communities? In my experience this is normally the case. This film tested the theory that the further north you go the friendlier people get. The friendliest person the protagonist met was inthe Shetland Islands - but he wasn't from Shetland. So the theory is that northerly latitudes make people nice. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/It's_Nice_Up_North
There was a blood and soil nationalism in my part of Teesside that more enlightened locals described as "parochial bigotry". Yorkshire vs Durham. Catholics vs Protestants. Town vs country. It was ridiculous. And going off how many "local town for local people" independents have spread like a rash across Teesside, we weren't unique.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
The trouble is, as soon as they got to iScotland, these new migrants would all move south to England, where the weather is better and the people are friendlier and the towns more exuberant and, also, London
So it would never work, unless you put a VERY hard border along Hadrian's Wall (and this would also likely be the end of the CTA with Ireland) and make movement between Scotland and rUK extremely difficult. Do Scots want that? I don't believe they do
Depends where abouts in England and whereabouts in Scotland. Can tell you that people in NE England are far friendlier than in NE England.
...which also depends on whereabouts in NE England. You used to live on Teesside, ISTR? And now you live in the wilds of rural Aberdeenshire? I wonder if it is the case that rural communities are friendlier than urban communities? In my experience this is normally the case. This film tested the theory that the further north you go the friendlier people get. The friendliest person the protagonist met was inthe Shetland Islands - but he wasn't from Shetland. So the theory is that northerly latitudes make people nice. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/It's_Nice_Up_North
Not sure that's strictly true? The south Welsh are obviously warm and friendly, the Cornish can be lovely (outside tourist season)
And the Scots have a reputation for dourness for a reason (tho I have always liked that salty Glaswegian directness: great people). Edinburgh, uhm, less so?
Friendliest people in the UK, to my mind, are the Geordies
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
Border's been fixed since about 1560. Unlike the UK's current border with the EU which is up in the air.
Ok, smartypants. Border infrastucture.
Very few actual crossings, in fact. Remarkably few.
Assumes the EU would be happy with border posts for goods only on roads, not a wall across fields. Obviously for people, the most likely result is that Scotland would be in the CTA like RoI.
But it really would not, not if Scotland adopted a super relaxed immigration policy (on top of Freedom of Movement if it ever went back into the EU)
The English would not stand for it, because all these migrants could simply get a train down to London from Glasgow and then that's an end to any semblance of "control" of our borders. We have a political storm building over the dinghy people, if all they have to do is get on a minibus at Berwick then blend into England, whoah
Yet again this is one of the suppositions of Scottish independence which presumes that the rest of the UK will simply tolerate whatever Scotland wants, and be super accommodating to Scottish needs and desires, and ignore public sentiment at home in England, Wales and NI. This will not be the case
The UK was very generous to Ireland after Irish indy because the British felt guilty (rightly) and offered stuff like the CTA and voting rights. The British will NOT be so soft hearted to a Scotland that has broken up the UK. Not at all
Exactly, if a future UK government is stupid enough to allow an indyref2 within a generation and then inept enough to lose it the UK would be over.
Scottish nationalism and English nationalism would replace it. The English government would be expected to take as hard a line with Edinburgh as the EU did with the UK post Brexit if not harder or English voters would replace it with a more nationalist government that would!
While my predictions, as the Stodge Saturday Patent has demonstrated, aren't worth any attention, I'll offer a thought based on recent experience.
In 50-75 years time, London will empty at the beginning of June as those who can seek solace from the 45c temperatures and humidity associated with the late 21st century British summer between the spring and autumn monsoon seasons.
The newly-refurbished London Euston station will host the regular 30-minute Maglev summer service to the Lake District having passengers disembarking at Oxenholme in little more than a hour. From there, families will decamp to their summer chalets near the lakes (or as near as is affordable). The ability to work independently from location, first established during the 2020 pandemic, will allow tens of thousands of Londoners to continue working far from the overheating capital.
For those without the means to escape the heat, the annual ordeal that is summer in London is the very definition of purgatory. On the hottest days, with temperatures nearing 50c, many head to vast "cool centres" where they can enjoy air conditioned relief before heading home in the later evening.
While the Lakes are one popular "retreat from the heat", the Pennines and Cheviots have also seen summer housing and the major development of the north Scottish coast around Torrisdale and the islands of Harris and Lewis have seen an explosion of summer homes for those from southern and eastern Britain desperate to seek cooler summer weather.
I think you understate the case. The way we're going it will be a runaway climate change. Although some, especially reputable researchers, know what we need to do to counter this, most of us are too gormless to act accordingly. For instance, getting an electric car does not justify an otherwise wanton life style.
That's my fear. That we are now in an accelerating loop of increasing warmth and volatility, which will feed off itself like a chain reaction. And perhaps it is already too late to stop this
Our presence in this universe appears to be the result of a long series of lucky circumstances.
These include: The fortuitous value of the fine structure constant, which, if it were a little difference would not allow stellar fusion to produce carbon. The existence of a rocky planet at just the right distance from a stable and long-lived star. The presence of just enough water on said planet to make a complex environment of coasts and shallows that would drive evolution along. The presence of an unusually large moon orbiting said planet to slosh all that water about and further drive evolution. A complex geology that, combined with the effects of life, has managed to remove CO2 from the Earth's atmosphere at a rate that has just about compensated for the gradual increase in the luminosity of the sun, this keeping the temperature of the Earth in a range compatible with life over the aeons.
And we are just about to screw it all up.
Not at all. Whilst you are right about the serendipity element of our existence, you vastly overestimate the significance of our current civilisation and the nature of the changes we are facing. Presenting these current very minor adjustments in our environment with the vast changes that have occurred over the last few million years (one of which probably reduced the human population to less than 10,000 individuals) really shows a fundamental disconnect with the reality of our existence on planet earth.
The changes of a few degrees - whilst undoubtedly bad for our current comfortable civilisation - are bugger all in both scale and rate of change compared to the natural changes that have occurred even in fairly recent times.
This is not to say we shouldn't try to mitigate such changes, nor that they won't be very bad for our current lifestyles but your hyperbolic comment shows a stunning lack of historical and prehistorical perspective.
Not really, as your parenthesis "(one of which probably reduced the human population to less than 10,000 individuals)" accidentally reveals. What is the point of saying This is nothing, we've had snowball earth and ice free earth and oxygen levels of 31%, this is a mere pin prick, when any one of those three sets of conditions would leave mankind wholly or mainly, stone dead? What has the long view got to do with us, when we have only been in the picture for a couple of minutes relatively speaking?
It's like warning a population of tadpoles in an April puddle that if it doesn't rain in the next week their puddle will dry out and they will all die: not much consolation for them to know that rainfall usually averages out in the course of a year and their puddle was virtually a pond back in January.
Nah. The point is that the changes we are seeing now are pinpricks compared to what nature can and has done in the past. We will and as we always have and this idea that this is the end of humanity or even civilisation which is expressed in FE's posting really is baseless. Indeed civilisations of the past have thrived under exactly the conditions which are being predicted now. It is uncomfortable for individuals and is probably something to be avoided if we can since it will make life miserable for a lot of people. But it is simply rubbish to consider anything we re predicting at the moment as the end of humanity.
Of course if we decided to nuke each other that is another matter. But I grew up in the 70s and 80s when threat was a permanent imminent threat so even that I find a bit of a yawn.
The world is a wonderful place and will continue to be so pretty much regardless of what we do.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
The trouble is, as soon as they got to iScotland, these new migrants would all move south to England, where the weather is better and the people are friendlier and the towns more exuberant and, also, London
So it would never work, unless you put a VERY hard border along Hadrian's Wall (and this would also likely be the end of the CTA with Ireland) and make movement between Scotland and rUK extremely difficult. Do Scots want that? I don't believe they do
Please stop using Hadrian's Wall. It is irritating to those of us who live many miles north of it. And still the best part of an hour from the border.
To hear Leon, there'd be a Checkpoint Charlie right in front of Newcastle Central Station.
Manned by aggressive, homeless drunkards with incomprehensible accents no doubt. Come to think of it that's pretty much Central Station already.
The newish automated ticket barrier is only, what, about 20 metres off being on the actual line of the Wall, isn't it?
Dunno. It pretty much followed the river through the City though so probably not far off.
Bit more than 20 yards actually on checking - the wall went along Westgate Street, pretty much, at least from the west (the road to Carlisle was built on it as a convenient foundation ...). The ditches to the rear did overlap the station site. Can't find an up to date map though.
Living standards today are double what they were in 1980. People had enough money for food and energy in 1980. Discuss.
The average household will find 2022 energy costs painful but feasible.
Half households are below average though.
Below the median.
Yes OK, but the same principle applies.
Incidentally, what do you think of the Drunken Lobster in Ventnor? Is it a good place to take Mrs Foxy for an anniversary?
Asian fusion meets seafood, in a trendy setting, replacing the vegan restaurant that failed (pitching vegan breakfasts on the IOW was badly missing the market) which itself replaced the long-running Spanish place once the owners finally found employment on the Canary Islands. I worried that Asian fusion might also miss the market, but it was full last night when I walked past with the dog. Run by the same family that have the Smoking Lobster on the seafront.
Have you tried it yourself? It got a good review in the paper.
Actually I haven’t, so I can’t vouch for it. I think they are doing better with the visitors than the locals. It’s a bit too Japanese for my taste, and I don’t often get cravings for tempura prawn or crab. Well, never, really. But the family that runs it are half British, quarter Italian and quarter Japanese (I think), so they know how to cook and have some interesting recipes….
Well made tempura is one of the great joys of world cooking. For shame
And Japanese food in general is in the top three cuisines. Tsk!
I am sure I will get round to trying it. It’s certainly more appealing than the short-lived vegan place it replaced, owned by a woman who went round telling everyone she couldn’t cook and then opened a restaurant to prove it.
In the Scotland border issue, remember that its al theoretical. Even if there was a referendum next year (and there won't be) and it voted Yes (and it won't), its way off into the 2nd half of the decade before they even have discussions about separation, never mind an agreement to instigate.
As the UK's current Brexit settlement is unworkable, it will be reformed. And the reformation will be closer and looser alignment with the EEA and CU. Which makes alignment between an EU Scotland and a post-Brext rUK much easier than it would be now.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
The trouble is, as soon as they got to iScotland, these new migrants would all move south to England, where the weather is better and the people are friendlier and the towns more exuberant and, also, London
So it would never work, unless you put a VERY hard border along Hadrian's Wall (and this would also likely be the end of the CTA with Ireland) and make movement between Scotland and rUK extremely difficult. Do Scots want that? I don't believe they do
Depends where abouts in England and whereabouts in Scotland. Can tell you that people in NE England are far friendlier than in NE England.
...which also depends on whereabouts in NE England. You used to live on Teesside, ISTR? And now you live in the wilds of rural Aberdeenshire? I wonder if it is the case that rural communities are friendlier than urban communities? In my experience this is normally the case. This film tested the theory that the further north you go the friendlier people get. The friendliest person the protagonist met was inthe Shetland Islands - but he wasn't from Shetland. So the theory is that northerly latitudes make people nice. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/It's_Nice_Up_North
Interesting. Canadians are renowned for it. Especially away from the Cities, and most Canadians, in what is a surprisingly urbanised country, live south of Seattle. There is also the US stereotype of Minnesota nice.
Okay. I fear the nations of the world are not going to collaborate to arrest or reverse climate change(**). But thinking about it, we in the 1st world have for centuries pretty well used the poorer nations at will. So let us "1st worlders" take on an attempt to use technology to try a fix. For instance, can we make machines to capture and sequester Co2 somewhere safe? 24/7/365 ? At our expense? We can invent to technology to chop up an al Qaeda leader from afar, so why not something a bit more sane?
(**) Speaking of Mankind's mulishness, how could on define war? Somewhere in a continuum from "War Between the Tates" and thermonuclear Armageddon. Having decided on a definition has there ever been a time in the last thousand years (say) when there has been universal peace?
India china and the third world arent going to stop trying to grow. Climate change will accelerate therefore. Western countries will become fortress against climate change refugees as they cant take on the two or three billion that is predicted. The world will become harsher deal with it
They can grow just with more renewables and nuclear rather than fossil fuels
No they can't. They want cars and roads to drive them on and fridges and houses and cookers and TVs and all the shit you have. You don't get all that stuff for carbon free just because it's powered by renewables.
If powered by renewable that would itself be a huge step in the right direction
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
Border's been fixed since about 1560. Unlike the UK's current border with the EU which is up in the air.
Ok, smartypants. Border infrastucture.
Very few actual crossings, in fact. Remarkably few.
Assumes the EU would be happy with border posts for goods only on roads, not a wall across fields. Obviously for people, the most likely result is that Scotland would be in the CTA like RoI.
But it really would not, not if Scotland adopted a super relaxed immigration policy (on top of Freedom of Movement if it ever went back into the EU)
The English would not stand for it, because all these migrants could simply get a train down to London from Glasgow and then that's an end to any semblance of "control" of our borders. We have a political storm building over the dinghy people, if all they have to do is get on a minibus at Berwick then blend into England, whoah
Yet again this is one of the suppositions of Scottish independence which presumes that the rest of the UK will simply tolerate whatever Scotland wants, and be super accommodating to Scottish needs and desires, and ignore public sentiment at home in England, Wales and NI. This will not be the case
The UK was very generous to Ireland after Irish indy because the British felt guilty (rightly) and offered stuff like the CTA and voting rights. The British will NOT be so soft hearted to a Scotland that has broken up the UK. Not at all
Exactly, if a future UK government is stupid enough to allow an indyref2 within a generation and then inept enough to lose it the UK would be over.
Scottish nationalism and English nationalism would replace it. The English government would be expected to take as hard a line with Edinburgh as the EU did with the UK post Brexit if not harder or English voters would replace it with a more nationalist government that would!
I refer you to Hymek diesel-hydraulics for a change.
I thought Sunak did very well and he does seem more realistic and would be a safer pair of hands .
Truss just looks out of her depth and has changed positions on many issues far too many times . I find nothing likeable about her and she’s just continuity Bozo without any charm .
In the Scotland border issue, remember that its al theoretical. Even if there was a referendum next year (and there won't be) and it voted Yes (and it won't), its way off into the 2nd half of the decade before they even have discussions about separation, never mind an agreement to instigate.
As the UK's current Brexit settlement is unworkable, it will be reformed. And the reformation will be closer and looser alignment with the EEA and CU. Which makes alignment between an EU Scotland and a post-Brext rUK much easier than it would be now.
What incentive does the rUK have to make it a long, drawn out process?
There is dissonance between "Westminster is evil" and "Westminster will be reasonable post Yes vote".
In the Scotland border issue, remember that its al theoretical. Even if there was a referendum next year (and there won't be) and it voted Yes (and it won't), its way off into the 2nd half of the decade before they even have discussions about separation, never mind an agreement to instigate.
As the UK's current Brexit settlement is unworkable, it will be reformed. And the reformation will be closer and looser alignment with the EEA and CU. Which makes alignment between an EU Scotland and a post-Brext rUK much easier than it would be now.
No, if Scotland left the UK that makes it much easier to sustain a hard Brexit for England permanently. For Scotland was the only 1 of the 3 home nations in GB that voted Remain
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
An independent Scotland could be quite appealing to rUK youngsters wanting to move to an English speaking country with the advantages of EU membership.
Rather assumes EU membership. What would be the entry requirements? Would Scotland be forced into the euro? Would it meet economic criteria?
I think Scotland would find quite an accelerated application process, after all very little has changed since it was a member last year. The Euro is more theoretical. Applicants have to promise to join, but with no timescale so in practice it is voluntary.
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
Surely building the border would take some time? No Irish Sea to put it in. Real one.
Border's been fixed since about 1560. Unlike the UK's current border with the EU which is up in the air.
Ok, smartypants. Border infrastucture.
Very few actual crossings, in fact. Remarkably few.
Assumes the EU would be happy with border posts for goods only on roads, not a wall across fields. Obviously for people, the most likely result is that Scotland would be in the CTA like RoI.
But it really would not, not if Scotland adopted a super relaxed immigration policy (on top of Freedom of Movement if it ever went back into the EU)
The English would not stand for it, because all these migrants could simply get a train down to London from Glasgow and then that's an end to any semblance of "control" of our borders. We have a political storm building over the dinghy people, if all they have to do is get on a minibus at Berwick then blend into England, whoah
Yet again this is one of the suppositions of Scottish independence which presumes that the rest of the UK will simply tolerate whatever Scotland wants, and be super accommodating to Scottish needs and desires, and ignore public sentiment at home in England, Wales and NI. This will not be the case
The UK was very generous to Ireland after Irish indy because the British felt guilty (rightly) and offered stuff like the CTA and voting rights. The British will NOT be so soft hearted to a Scotland that has broken up the UK. Not at all
Exactly, if a future UK government is stupid enough to allow an indyref2 within a generation and then inept enough to lose it the UK would be over.
Scottish nationalism and English nationalism would replace it. The English government would be expected to take as hard a line with Edinburgh as the EU did with the UK post Brexit if not harder or English voters would replace it with a more nationalist government that would!
Yes of course. Emotions would run high for many years after any successful indyvote - and on both sides
The pressure would then be on both governments to extract maximum possible from the divorce negotiations, and turn the screws on the other. Except, of course, that rUK is ten times the size of Scotland so rUK would be in the entirely dominant position. Scotland would suffer. It's not pretty, but it is realpolitik. It's what we saw with Brexit, the EU used its strength. This would be that, with extra layers of resentment and anger, as the Scots would have plunged both sides into deep recession (probably depression in Scotland) and a decade of constitutional chaos
In the Scotland border issue, remember that its al theoretical. Even if there was a referendum next year (and there won't be) and it voted Yes (and it won't), its way off into the 2nd half of the decade before they even have discussions about separation, never mind an agreement to instigate.
As the UK's current Brexit settlement is unworkable, it will be reformed. And the reformation will be closer and looser alignment with the EEA and CU. Which makes alignment between an EU Scotland and a post-Brext rUK much easier than it would be now.
Even if we could bounce the EU into mutual recognition of standards (which we probably can't) or the EU can bounce us into dynamic alignment (which they probably can't) that still leaves us outside the CU, which still means border infrastructure.
Unless, of course, away-from-the-border Unicorns really do exist...
I thought Sunak did very well and he does seem more realistic and would be a safer pair of hands .
Truss just looks out of her depth and has changed positions on many issues far too many times . I find nothing likeable about her and she’s just continuity Bozo without any charm .
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
The trouble is, as soon as they got to iScotland, these new migrants would all move south to England, where the weather is better and the people are friendlier and the towns more exuberant and, also, London
So it would never work, unless you put a VERY hard border along Hadrian's Wall (and this would also likely be the end of the CTA with Ireland) and make movement between Scotland and rUK extremely difficult. Do Scots want that? I don't believe they do
Depends where abouts in England and whereabouts in Scotland. Can tell you that people in NE England are far friendlier than in NE England.
...which also depends on whereabouts in NE England. You used to live on Teesside, ISTR? And now you live in the wilds of rural Aberdeenshire? I wonder if it is the case that rural communities are friendlier than urban communities? In my experience this is normally the case. This film tested the theory that the further north you go the friendlier people get. The friendliest person the protagonist met was inthe Shetland Islands - but he wasn't from Shetland. So the theory is that northerly latitudes make people nice. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/It's_Nice_Up_North
Not sure that's strictly true? The south Welsh are obviously warm and friendly, the Cornish can be lovely (outside tourist season)
And the Scots have a reputation for dourness for a reason (tho I have always liked that salty Glaswegian directness: great people). Edinburgh, uhm, less so?
Friendliest people in the UK, to my mind, are the Geordies
It is more to do with class, perhaps
Well it's a comedy documentary, so I'm not sure it stands up to too much scrutiny. Personally, I can't think of anywhere I've been in the UK which I've found unfriendly. Even stereotypically unfriendly London: look confused for a moment, and people fall over themselves to help you. I daresay the commuter suburbs which surround it are a bit cold - not unfriendly per se, just a bit of a dormitory.
While my predictions, as the Stodge Saturday Patent has demonstrated, aren't worth any attention, I'll offer a thought based on recent experience.
In 50-75 years time, London will empty at the beginning of June as those who can seek solace from the 45c temperatures and humidity associated with the late 21st century British summer between the spring and autumn monsoon seasons.
The newly-refurbished London Euston station will host the regular 30-minute Maglev summer service to the Lake District having passengers disembarking at Oxenholme in little more than a hour. From there, families will decamp to their summer chalets near the lakes (or as near as is affordable). The ability to work independently from location, first established during the 2020 pandemic, will allow tens of thousands of Londoners to continue working far from the overheating capital.
For those without the means to escape the heat, the annual ordeal that is summer in London is the very definition of purgatory. On the hottest days, with temperatures nearing 50c, many head to vast "cool centres" where they can enjoy air conditioned relief before heading home in the later evening.
While the Lakes are one popular "retreat from the heat", the Pennines and Cheviots have also seen summer housing and the major development of the north Scottish coast around Torrisdale and the islands of Harris and Lewis have seen an explosion of summer homes for those from southern and eastern Britain desperate to seek cooler summer weather.
I think you understate the case. The way we're going it will be a runaway climate change. Although some, especially reputable researchers, know what we need to do to counter this, most of us are too gormless to act accordingly. For instance, getting an electric car does not justify an otherwise wanton life style.
That's my fear. That we are now in an accelerating loop of increasing warmth and volatility, which will feed off itself like a chain reaction. And perhaps it is already too late to stop this
Our presence in this universe appears to be the result of a long series of lucky circumstances.
These include: The fortuitous value of the fine structure constant, which, if it were a little difference would not allow stellar fusion to produce carbon. The existence of a rocky planet at just the right distance from a stable and long-lived star. The presence of just enough water on said planet to make a complex environment of coasts and shallows that would drive evolution along. The presence of an unusually large moon orbiting said planet to slosh all that water about and further drive evolution. A complex geology that, combined with the effects of life, has managed to remove CO2 from the Earth's atmosphere at a rate that has just about compensated for the gradual increase in the luminosity of the sun, this keeping the temperature of the Earth in a range compatible with life over the aeons.
And we are just about to screw it all up.
Not at all. Whilst you are right about the serendipity element of our existence, you vastly overestimate the significance of our current civilisation and the nature of the changes we are facing. Presenting these current very minor adjustments in our environment with the vast changes that have occurred over the last few million years (one of which probably reduced the human population to less than 10,000 individuals) really shows a fundamental disconnect with the reality of our existence on planet earth.
The changes of a few degrees - whilst undoubtedly bad for our current comfortable civilisation - are bugger all in both scale and rate of change compared to the natural changes that have occurred even in fairly recent times.
This is not to say we shouldn't try to mitigate such changes, nor that they won't be very bad for our current lifestyles but your hyperbolic comment shows a stunning lack of historical and prehistorical perspective.
Not really, as your parenthesis "(one of which probably reduced the human population to less than 10,000 individuals)" accidentally reveals. What is the point of saying This is nothing, we've had snowball earth and ice free earth and oxygen levels of 31%, this is a mere pin prick, when any one of those three sets of conditions would leave mankind wholly or mainly, stone dead? What has the long view got to do with us, when we have only been in the picture for a couple of minutes relatively speaking?
It's like warning a population of tadpoles in an April puddle that if it doesn't rain in the next week their puddle will dry out and they will all die: not much consolation for them to know that rainfall usually averages out in the course of a year and their puddle was virtually a pond back in January.
Nah. The point is that the changes we are seeing now are pinpricks compared to what nature can and has done in the past. We will and as we always have and this idea that this is the end of humanity or even civilisation which is expressed in FE's posting really is baseless. Indeed civilisations of the past have thrived under exactly the conditions which are being predicted now. It is uncomfortable for individuals and is probably something to be avoided if we can since it will make life miserable for a lot of people. But it is simply rubbish to consider anything we re predicting at the moment as the end of humanity.
Of course if we decided to nuke each other that is another matter. But I grew up in the 70s and 80s when threat was a permanent imminent threat so even that I find a bit of a yawn.
The world is a wonderful place and will continue to be so pretty much regardless of what we do.
The world is a wonderful place here and now for well heeled UK property owning PBers with money in the bank and drink in the fridge, sure. Our current predicament is such that either hundreds of millions of people who are mainly poor and fucked up anyway are going to be wiped out, or all of us are. I can't pretend to be terribly fussed at either possibility, but that's because I am a selfish twat. How about you?
Speaking from a non manager point of view, just a man in the street who does normal man in the street things, basically no one has noticed anything different since we left the eu....food is slighty dearer but that is as much the increase in fuel prices and the ukraine war....some people have to queue a little longer to holiday in france...who gives a shit frankly. That is the average worker stance not rochdale pioneers we are all doomed stance and frankly there are a lot of workers and not many rochdales so tough shit really
In the Scotland border issue, remember that its al theoretical. Even if there was a referendum next year (and there won't be) and it voted Yes (and it won't), its way off into the 2nd half of the decade before they even have discussions about separation, never mind an agreement to instigate.
As the UK's current Brexit settlement is unworkable, it will be reformed. And the reformation will be closer and looser alignment with the EEA and CU. Which makes alignment between an EU Scotland and a post-Brext rUK much easier than it would be now.
No, if Scotland left the UK that makes it much easier to sustain a hard Brexit for England permanently. For Scotland was the only 1 of the 3 home nations in GB that voted Remain
England won't have sustained a hard Brexit by the time we theoretically got there. Because the Brexit we have doesn't work. Unless Mistress Truss has whipped everyone to back punishment beatings.
Okay. I fear the nations of the world are not going to collaborate to arrest or reverse climate change(**). But thinking about it, we in the 1st world have for centuries pretty well used the poorer nations at will. So let us "1st worlders" take on an attempt to use technology to try a fix. For instance, can we make machines to capture and sequester Co2 somewhere safe? 24/7/365 ? At our expense? We can invent to technology to chop up an al Qaeda leader from afar, so why not something a bit more sane?
(**) Speaking of Mankind's mulishness, how could on define war? Somewhere in a continuum from "War Between the Tates" and thermonuclear Armageddon. Having decided on a definition has there ever been a time in the last thousand years (say) when there has been universal peace?
India china and the third world arent going to stop trying to grow. Climate change will accelerate therefore. Western countries will become fortress against climate change refugees as they cant take on the two or three billion that is predicted. The world will become harsher deal with it
They can grow just with more renewables and nuclear rather than fossil fuels
No they can't. They want cars and roads to drive them on and fridges and houses and cookers and TVs and all the shit you have. You don't get all that stuff for carbon free just because it's powered by renewables.
If powered by renewable that would itself be a huge step in the right direction
In the Scotland border issue, remember that its al theoretical. Even if there was a referendum next year (and there won't be) and it voted Yes (and it won't), its way off into the 2nd half of the decade before they even have discussions about separation, never mind an agreement to instigate.
As the UK's current Brexit settlement is unworkable, it will be reformed. And the reformation will be closer and looser alignment with the EEA and CU. Which makes alignment between an EU Scotland and a post-Brext rUK much easier than it would be now.
Even if we could bounce the EU into mutual recognition of standards (which we probably can't) or the EU can bounce us into dynamic alignment (which they probably can't) that still leaves us outside the CU, which still means border infrastructure.
Unless, of course, away-from-the-border Unicorns really do exist...
The UK has already abandoned any plans to erect border infrastructure. Because we are functionally incompetent.
Speaking from a non manager point of view, just a man in the street who does normal man in the street things, basically no one has noticed anything different since we left the eu....food is slighty dearer but that is as much the increase in fuel prices and the ukraine war....some people have to queue a little longer to holiday in france...who gives a shit frankly. That is the average worker stance not rochdale pioneers we are all doomed stance and frankly there are a lot of workers and not many rochdales so tough shit really
Sure - we're boiling frogs. But people voted for the moon on a stick they were promised. As it becomes clearer there is no moon coming to them, they will get angry. As Tories are starting to notice in the red wall.
@StuartDickson you touch on an interesting point on migration. Scotland would need to at least double net migration to make up for our low fertility rate (even lower than the UK generally), depending on what migration projection you go for.
This is a valid argument for indy, imo. Open the borders! The problem with this is is about 2/3td of current net migration is from rUK, so you'd probably cut that to an extent (though this tends to be much older than international migration, so might not be a bad thing for health spending etc).
The other problem is that in period with open borders, Scotland just didn't really see that much immigration. How do you attract people?
The trouble is, as soon as they got to iScotland, these new migrants would all move south to England, where the weather is better and the people are friendlier and the towns more exuberant and, also, London
So it would never work, unless you put a VERY hard border along Hadrian's Wall (and this would also likely be the end of the CTA with Ireland) and make movement between Scotland and rUK extremely difficult. Do Scots want that? I don't believe they do
Depends where abouts in England and whereabouts in Scotland. Can tell you that people in NE England are far friendlier than in NE England.
...which also depends on whereabouts in NE England. You used to live on Teesside, ISTR? And now you live in the wilds of rural Aberdeenshire? I wonder if it is the case that rural communities are friendlier than urban communities? In my experience this is normally the case. This film tested the theory that the further north you go the friendlier people get. The friendliest person the protagonist met was inthe Shetland Islands - but he wasn't from Shetland. So the theory is that northerly latitudes make people nice. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/It's_Nice_Up_North
Not sure that's strictly true? The south Welsh are obviously warm and friendly, the Cornish can be lovely (outside tourist season)
And the Scots have a reputation for dourness for a reason (tho I have always liked that salty Glaswegian directness: great people). Edinburgh, uhm, less so?
Friendliest people in the UK, to my mind, are the Geordies
It is more to do with class, perhaps
Well it's a comedy documentary, so I'm not sure it stands up to too much scrutiny. Personally, I can't think of anywhere I've been in the UK which I've found unfriendly. Even stereotypically unfriendly London: look confused for a moment, and people fall over themselves to help you. I daresay the commuter suburbs which surround it are a bit cold - not unfriendly per se, just a bit of a dormitory.
Yes, I generally agree
Capital cities are notoriously unfriendly around the world. NYC, Paris, London, Moscow. Even in Tbilisi they have that reputation amongst other Georgians
Away from the metropolis humans are a friendly species worldwide, curious, smiley, happy to help
Indeed having travelled the world I can name the unfriendly countries on one hand. Morocco. Martinique. Venice in summer (but who can blame them). Greenland after dark when they've had a drink. Er, that's pretty much it
Comments
The problem with the second question is that groups 1 and 2 who could do something would like the same treatment as group 3 who genuinely can't pay, while in turn group 4 (everyone else) expects not to be discriminated against for social crimes like having a job, etc.
Conservatives MPs want to do a deal with Boris Johnson for him to quit parliament and in return axe the inquiry into whether he misled them over Partygate, as allies of the prime minister branded it a “witch-hunt”.
Although he is due to leave No 10 in less than a month, a Commons privileges committee inquiry is still ongoing into the prime minister’s initial denials in December last year that any Covid laws were broken during lockdown.
Some of Johnson’s critics want him to stand down as an MP, to avoid the process keeping the spotlight on a deeply embarrassing issue for the party that has strained relations between colleagues.
The investigation, which is being led by a committee with a Tory majority that chose Labour’s Harriet Harman to chair it, is expected to drag on for months.
A tranche of evidence has been demanded by the committee, including Johnson’s diaries covering the 12 days on which parties were held in Westminster in defiance of Covid rules, as well as emails, WhatsApp messages, photographs, internal notes and a list of deleted documents.
If Johnson is found to have misled parliament, he could face suspension from the Commons and a recall petition, which, if signed by 10% of his Uxbridge and South Ruislip constituents, would trigger a byelection.
Unlike when Conservative MPs were whipped to save Owen Paterson, which sparked unrest within the party’s ranks over sleaze and scandal, some of Johnson’s fiercest Tory opponents said they would happily support ending the Partygate investigation if Johnson stepped down as an MP.
One source said: “I think there’s a case – not just for the parliament party, but for everyone – that we just move on from this psychodrama.”
The “quid pro quo” for backing a motion that would effectively wind up the probe would be Johnson “getting out of the Commons”, they added.
Another Tory MP who helped bring down Johnson said if the incoming prime minister decided to spare Johnson’s fate by tabling a motion in the Commons to end the investigation and asked for colleagues’ support, “that’s fine”.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/aug/07/tories-call-for-boris-johnson-to-quit-as-mp-to-avoid-partygate-inquiry
However even if it did an independent Scotland which also joined the Euro would not really be voting for full independence anyway
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jBlDSGtbGiw
Here you go…Matt & Cat are the only reviews that count on the Island:
https://mattandcat.co.uk/drunken-lobster-ventnor/
https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/battleships-for-bhutan-an-aar.112255/
This is a serious issue. And I am not making light of the problem: Scotland needs more people, so arguably it needs a more relaxed immigration policy than England. Except, the UK ALREADY has a very liberal immigration policy. We issued long term visas to nearly a million people last year: workers, students, you name it, from all over the world
If they're not going to Scotland now, why would they go there in the future, should it ever be independent? And why would they then not go to England, which seems to be their preferred destination?
https://migrationobservatory.ox.ac.uk/resources/briefings/long-term-international-migration-flows-to-and-from-the-uk/
I think it would be the best currency for Scotland, and works for Ireland. It might well revitalise the Scottish financial sector if they join.
"When Gallup asked why couples aren’t having more kids, most Americans (65%) in 2013, whether with or without children, cited the costs associated with raising a child. An additional 11% said it’s because of the state of the economy and the jobs situation. Just 6% cited personal choice, 3% cited lack of time and 3% cited career concerns."
source: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/05/08/ideal-size-of-the-american-family/
In my area, the cost of housing probably discourages what a biologist might call pair bonding, and then having children, even in such a relationship.
(Then there is this oddity in American fertility: During 2006 and 2007, the US fertility rate was above replacement, barely. I don't know of any other advanced industrial nation where that has happened, since at least 2000.
Feeling of unity after the 9/11 attack?)
And Japanese food in general is in the top three cuisines. Tsk!
The French might want this to spite "the British", I cannot think of any other country that would favour accelerated application
All the E European countries went through a long painful accession process, Scotland would be forced to do the same: it would be told to permanently fix its trading arrangements with rUK first (the EU has to know what kind of country is applying) and then Scotland would have to come up with an answer on the currency, Schenghen, the border with England. Then there would be protracted negotiations about fishing, defence, and so on (again made difficult by the rUK relationship)
In reality it would take a decade of hard bargaining. We've seen how the EU work: slow, painful, legalistic. And that is presuming a country like Spain doesn't say: Nah, fuck it, veto, because Catalunya. That is entirely possible. Or a country like Hungary or Bulgaria would veto just to get more leverage in Brussels. Happens all the time
At best it would take many years, at worst Scotland would get vetoed, and never join. Your glib remarks are fatuous
Come to think of it that's pretty much Central Station already.
Credit to them for making that corner property work - the ground floor is small and basement is larger and potentially characterful (I think it may once have been a wine merchants?), but the river that once powered the water mill runs under Pier Street and all the basements along there are riddled with damp. The Spanish couple (well, she was English but the restaurant was Spanish) covered the damp brickwork with various Spanish rugs and wall coverings, and cunningly disguised the odour with Spanish smells. I don’t think the vegan place ever got busy enough for people to need to go downstairs, and the latest owners spent a fortune moving the kitchen downstairs into the damp and opening up the ground floor, which is nevertheless still quite small - so book ahead! I’d imagine the economics of making a profit out of their relatively small number of covers might be a challenge.
The English would not stand for it, because all these migrants could simply get a train down to London from Glasgow and then that's an end to any semblance of "control" of our borders. We have a political storm building over the dinghy people, if all they have to do is get on a minibus at Berwick then blend into England, whoah
Yet again this is one of the suppositions of Scottish independence which presumes that the rest of the UK will simply tolerate whatever Scotland wants, and be super accommodating to Scottish needs and desires, and ignore public sentiment at home in England, Wales and NI. This will not be the case
The UK was very generous to Ireland after Irish indy because the British felt guilty (rightly) and offered stuff like the CTA and voting rights. The British will NOT be so soft hearted to a Scotland that has broken up the UK. Not at all
Ineffective - border farmers must be about the most pro-union people in the country.
If people from London want to retire to Cornwall or the outskirts of the Lakes (outside protected AONBs) and buy any houses that are constructed then what's stopping more from being built? If whole new towns or cities spring up in Cornwall or the Lakes, outside protected zones, then I see no problems with that.
If thousands, tens of thousands or more houses get built then they get built and people have homes.
Your problem is you think civillisation is being nice to people it really isnt. The romans were civillised they weren't particularly nice to non romans
It is sustainable, perhaps, because there is a sea between Ireland and the UK. But if it ever became apparent that migrants were using the open Anglo-Irish border to access the UK this would be a big issue
Ironically, the Irish are the ones complaining at the moment, about migrants flooding into Ireland via the UK to avoid the Rwanda policy
"New arrivals fleeing the war in Ukraine will be housed in tents on an army base from Monday, after a significant increase in people seeking asylum in Ireland led to the main reception centre at Citywest outside Dublin reaching full capacity.
"Taoiseach Micheal Martin said the accommodation situation was partly due to a recent increase in people coming to Ireland because of the controversial Rwanda scheme.
""We will be analysing this, but something has happened in the last two to three months in terms of the surge within international protection applicants, something has clearly happened," the Taoiseach said.""
The big fat dill pickle of piquant ironies
https://news.sky.com/story/irish-prime-minister-calls-uks-rwanda-scheme-for-asylum-seekers-shocking-and-wrong-12652197
I wonder if it is the case that rural communities are friendlier than urban communities? In my experience this is normally the case.
This film tested the theory that the further north you go the friendlier people get. The friendliest person the protagonist met was inthe Shetland Islands - but he wasn't from Shetland. So the theory is that northerly latitudes make people nice.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/It's_Nice_Up_North
Of course, if Scotland becomes independent and does not immediately join the EU, there would be no need for such a border until or unless Scotland joins the EU: the UK's trading partners would probably be happy to search & replace "UK" for "UK or Scotland" in their trade deals.
Btw - commonwealth games have been good. Really enjoyed the womens relay.
I assume the UK and RoI have some collaboration on non-admmitance of undesirables to the CTA, but it is probably informal. The UK is absolutely entitled to allow access to someone banned by the RoI and vice versa. Hence my question about ferries.
And the Scots have a reputation for dourness for a reason (tho I have always liked that salty Glaswegian directness: great people). Edinburgh, uhm, less so?
Friendliest people in the UK, to my mind, are the Geordies
It is more to do with class, perhaps
Scottish nationalism and English nationalism would replace it. The English government would be expected to take as hard a line with Edinburgh as the EU did with the UK post Brexit if not harder or English voters would replace it with a more nationalist government that would!
Of course if we decided to nuke each other that is another matter. But I grew up in the 70s and 80s when threat was a permanent imminent threat so even that I find a bit of a yawn.
The world is a wonderful place and will continue to be so pretty much regardless of what we do.
As the UK's current Brexit settlement is unworkable, it will be reformed. And the reformation will be closer and looser alignment with the EEA and CU. Which makes alignment between an EU Scotland and a post-Brext rUK much easier than it would be now.
There is also the US stereotype of Minnesota nice.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_nice#:~:text=Minnesota nice is a cultural,who are not like them.
I wonder if it applies in reverse in the Southern Hemisphere?
I thought Sunak did very well and he does seem more realistic and would be a safer pair of hands .
Truss just looks out of her depth and has changed positions on many issues far too many times . I find nothing likeable about her and she’s just continuity Bozo without any charm .
There is dissonance between "Westminster is evil" and "Westminster will be reasonable post Yes vote".
The pressure would then be on both governments to extract maximum possible from the divorce negotiations, and turn the screws on the other. Except, of course, that rUK is ten times the size of Scotland so rUK would be in the entirely dominant position. Scotland would suffer. It's not pretty, but it is realpolitik. It's what we saw with Brexit, the EU used its strength. This would be that, with extra layers of resentment and anger, as the Scots would have plunged both sides into deep recession (probably depression in Scotland) and a decade of constitutional chaos
Best avoided. Horrible
Unless, of course, away-from-the-border Unicorns really do exist...
Personally, I can't think of anywhere I've been in the UK which I've found unfriendly. Even stereotypically unfriendly London: look confused for a moment, and people fall over themselves to help you. I daresay the commuter suburbs which surround it are a bit cold - not unfriendly per se, just a bit of a dormitory.
I hope Truss has told the new CofE to be working on it stat.
That goes for all of them.
Capital cities are notoriously unfriendly around the world. NYC, Paris, London, Moscow. Even in Tbilisi they have that reputation amongst other Georgians
Away from the metropolis humans are a friendly species worldwide, curious, smiley, happy to help
Indeed having travelled the world I can name the unfriendly countries on one hand. Morocco. Martinique. Venice in summer (but who can blame them). Greenland after dark when they've had a drink. Er, that's pretty much it