Undefined discussion subject.
Options
Comments
-
It is a touching article of faith.Casino_Royale said:
Spain.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?0 -
Oh yes goes with the territory but at elections their MSPs will need to find an actual answer they can come up with instead of blaming London. Post-independence simply saying "London is the problem, they need to fix this/we need independence" will no longer be an answer.Black_Rook said:
To be fair, the latter problem is the product of the ramshackle architecture of devolution. That's Blair's fault, aided and abetted by all the even more useless Prime Ministers who have followed him and failed to correct the flaws.Philip_Thompson said:
That's why I support Scottish independence. Because it will force Scotland to make grown up decisions and simply blaming the English or spending without being liable for taxes will no longer be an option.Black_Rook said:
Well, again, it's not entirely unlike Brexit - difficult but doable, and with a menu of possible choices to be made, none of which might necessarily be described as ideal. Obviously there's going to be a trade-off between bringing more policy levers under Scottish control and parting with some of the conveniences of the current arrangements.CarlottaVance said:
The biggest issue may well turn out to be the sterling denominated debts of individuals and businesses in Scotland, which are owed primarily to institutions based in London. Assuming that the Scottish Parliament post-independence didn't attempt to convert them all to Scottish currency (which, for ease of reference, I'll refer to as dollars) by legislation - which would be a form of default and have very unwelcome consequences - then people in Scotland are going to be stuck with paying down their existing stock of debts in sterling whilst receiving their earnings in dollars.
Thus, if the dollar depreciates relative to the pound then the burden of the debt increases whilst Scottish exports to England become more competitive, whereas if the pound depreciates relative to the dollar then the inverse occurs. The only way to avoid these consequences of exchange rate volatility is to keep using the pound or to attempt to peg the dollar to it, both of which have the same effect of putting Scotland in an informal currency union with England, depriving it of important levers such as control of interest rates, and without the existing system of transfer payments to help make the arrangement workable. The relationship would be akin to that of Germany and one of the smaller states in the dysfunctional Eurozone: were the economic performances of Scotland and the rump UK to diverge significantly then Scotland would find itself stuck with an exchange rate and other policies tailored to the needs of its neighbour, with no recourse to a remedy.
Thinking about it, the Scottish Treasury would likely end up sharing a proportion of UK national debt as part of the carve-up of assets and liabilities, and that would also obviously be denominated in sterling, so probably the best option for Scotland is to float a new currency as soon as possible and then undertake a radical program of deregulation and tight control over spending, not unlike that instituted by Margaret Thatcher. The loss of transfer payments at independence will mean that existing Scottish public spending levels will be hard to sustain anyway, and a programme focussed on increasing Scotland's productivity and giving it sound money should yield more benefits, in terms of the effective reduction of Scotland's sterling-denominated debt pile through currency appreciation, than drawbacks.
Yes, that might do the trick. Independence, followed by Adam Smith.
As to blaming the English, well, it's easy and it's popular, isn't it? I imagine that some people in Scotland will still be blaming England for every problem that befalls them in a thousand years' time.0 -
There will be no tariffs because Boris is currently negotiating the easiest deal in history with the EU. Nowt to worry about.HYUFD said:
It would mean tariffs on Scottish exports and English exports if we were on WTO terms Brexit and border posts across the Scottish borderGallowgate said:I don’t see how immediate Scottish membership of both the Euro and the EU would give rUK a “bloody nose”. It would be good for them and by extension us.
In all seriousness, who cares if there’s tariffs and border posts? That is what we voted for isn’t it?0 -
They are. They can also be amended by the same method as accepting new members.Alistair said:
The EU likes a lot of fudge but the Euro entry rules are strictrottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
Given that Scotland doesn't have its own currency it seems reasonable to me that if the Scots want to join the EU and the Euro simultaneously that the EU could unanimously agree to amend the Euro membership rules for the unique circumstances of Scotland. They could maintain the existing rules for any nation with its own pre-existing currency.
The problem with Scotland is not that it doesn't satisfy the rules but it doesn't even have its own currency in order to begin satisfying the rules. So changing the rules to address that seems an equally valid answer.0 -
And that would not be remotely unusual.rottenborough said:
Yep. As I have posted several times: Johnson will be seriously behind by next summer.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/08/21/behind-red-wall-voters-still-love-boris-johnson-government
Internal polling revealed by the Telegraph earlier this week claimed that by next year Labour would be consistently five per cent ahead of the Conservative party due to growing public disillusionment over the party’s competence in Government.
Polling parity soon!1 -
Who cares?HYUFD said:
Yes, the SNP would blame England for a bad Scexit deal even after independencekle4 said:
Why would you assume independence would prevent the area becoming independent blaming others for its woes and the decisions it makes? Has independence ever prevented the blaming of outside forces?Philip_Thompson said:
That's why I support Scottish independence. Because it will force Scotland to make grown up decisions and simply blaming the English or spending without being liable for taxes will no longer be an option.Black_Rook said:
Well, again, it's not entirely unlike Brexit - difficult but doable, and with a menu of possible choices to be made, none of which might necessarily be described as ideal. Obviously there's going to be a trade-off between bringing more policy levers under Scottish control and parting with some of the conveniences of the current arrangements.CarlottaVance said:
The biggest issue may well turn out to be the sterling denominated debts of individuals and businesses in Scotland, which are owed primarily to institutions based in London. Assuming that the Scottish Parliament post-independence didn't attempt to convert them all to Scottish currency (which, for ease of reference, I'll refer to as dollars) by legislation - which would be a form of default and have very unwelcome consequences - then people in Scotland are going to be stuck with paying down their existing stock of debts in sterling whilst receiving their earnings in dollars.
Thus, if the dollar depreciates relative to the pound then the burden of the debt increases whilst Scottish exports to England become more competitive, whereas if the pound depreciates relative to the dollar then the inverse occurs. The only way to avoid these consequences of exchange rate volatility is to keep using the pound or to attempt to peg the dollar to it, both of which have the same effect of putting Scotland in an informal currency union with England, depriving it of important levers such as control of interest rates, and without the existing system of transfer payments to help make the arrangement workable. The relationship would be akin to that of Germany and one of the smaller states in the dysfunctional Eurozone: were the economic performances of Scotland and the rump UK to diverge significantly then Scotland would find itself stuck with an exchange rate and other policies tailored to the needs of its neighbour, with no recourse to a remedy.
Thinking about it, the Scottish Treasury would likely end up sharing a proportion of UK national debt as part of the carve-up of assets and liabilities, and that would also obviously be denominated in sterling, so probably the best option for Scotland is to float a new currency as soon as possible and then undertake a radical program of deregulation and tight control over spending, not unlike that instituted by Margaret Thatcher. The loss of transfer payments at independence will mean that existing Scottish public spending levels will be hard to sustain anyway, and a programme focussed on increasing Scotland's productivity and giving it sound money should yield more benefits, in terms of the effective reduction of Scotland's sterling-denominated debt pile through currency appreciation, than drawbacks.
Yes, that might do the trick. Independence, followed by Adam Smith.1 -
That's interesting, what would be your rationale for that?Omnium said:
I suspect you're right.HYUFD said:
Biden is still ahead though by 9% after his convention and before Trump's do, had the Democrats picked Sanders I would expect Trump to have been ahead by the end of his convention.Omnium said:
You should be able to run a donkey against Trump and win. The Democrats chose Biden. Ho hum.HYUFD said:
Which would still be higher than the 1% bounce Biden seems to have got even thenSeaShantyIrish2 said:Re polling, one swallow does not a summer make.
Note that there is some wiggle room here.
For example, HYUFD keeps saying Trumpsky got a +4% post-convo bounce in 2016. Yet analysis (see Politico.com) suggest that actual bounce was closer to +2%
NOT a criticism of HYUFD (on this point) but instead just saying, keep a pinch of salt handy at ALL times.
I operate as a charity for US political betting. My only claim to fame is that I didn't oppose Trump in 2016.
If I was a US citizen though I'd be voting Trump, and that just as a not-Biden vote. I'd have voted Hillary last time without a thought.0 -
I think he's done that hasn't he?Casino_Royale said:@Philip_Thompson
Biden should condemn the extreme behaviour of both sides and appeal for calm.
So if he has, what else should he be doing? Appeals for calm aren't major news when the media is used to the shitstorm it is getting from the POTUS and 2020 in general.0 -
The SNP will blame England forevermore.HYUFD said:
Yes, the SNP would blame England for a bad Scexit deal even after independencekle4 said:
Why would you assume independence would prevent the area becoming independent blaming others for its woes and the decisions it makes? Has independence ever prevented the blaming of outside forces?Philip_Thompson said:
That's why I support Scottish independence. Because it will force Scotland to make grown up decisions and simply blaming the English or spending without being liable for taxes will no longer be an option.Black_Rook said:
Well, again, it's not entirely unlike Brexit - difficult but doable, and with a menu of possible choices to be made, none of which might necessarily be described as ideal. Obviously there's going to be a trade-off between bringing more policy levers under Scottish control and parting with some of the conveniences of the current arrangements.CarlottaVance said:
The biggest issue may well turn out to be the sterling denominated debts of individuals and businesses in Scotland, which are owed primarily to institutions based in London. Assuming that the Scottish Parliament post-independence didn't attempt to convert them all to Scottish currency (which, for ease of reference, I'll refer to as dollars) by legislation - which would be a form of default and have very unwelcome consequences - then people in Scotland are going to be stuck with paying down their existing stock of debts in sterling whilst receiving their earnings in dollars.
Thus, if the dollar depreciates relative to the pound then the burden of the debt increases whilst Scottish exports to England become more competitive, whereas if the pound depreciates relative to the dollar then the inverse occurs. The only way to avoid these consequences of exchange rate volatility is to keep using the pound or to attempt to peg the dollar to it, both of which have the same effect of putting Scotland in an informal currency union with England, depriving it of important levers such as control of interest rates, and without the existing system of transfer payments to help make the arrangement workable. The relationship would be akin to that of Germany and one of the smaller states in the dysfunctional Eurozone: were the economic performances of Scotland and the rump UK to diverge significantly then Scotland would find itself stuck with an exchange rate and other policies tailored to the needs of its neighbour, with no recourse to a remedy.
Thinking about it, the Scottish Treasury would likely end up sharing a proportion of UK national debt as part of the carve-up of assets and liabilities, and that would also obviously be denominated in sterling, so probably the best option for Scotland is to float a new currency as soon as possible and then undertake a radical program of deregulation and tight control over spending, not unlike that instituted by Margaret Thatcher. The loss of transfer payments at independence will mean that existing Scottish public spending levels will be hard to sustain anyway, and a programme focussed on increasing Scotland's productivity and giving it sound money should yield more benefits, in terms of the effective reduction of Scotland's sterling-denominated debt pile through currency appreciation, than drawbacks.
Yes, that might do the trick. Independence, followed by Adam Smith.2 -
Spain won't want to make it easy and painless for Scotland to join.Philip_Thompson said:
If the referendum isn't wildcat and is endorsed by the UK Parliament then I don't think Spain will have a problem with it. Spain will have a problem giving succour to a wildcat referendum.Casino_Royale said:
Spain.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?0 -
For 'not Biden'?Casino_Royale said:
That's interesting, what would be your rationale for that?Omnium said:
I suspect you're right.HYUFD said:
Biden is still ahead though by 9% after his convention and before Trump's do, had the Democrats picked Sanders I would expect Trump to have been ahead by the end of his convention.Omnium said:
You should be able to run a donkey against Trump and win. The Democrats chose Biden. Ho hum.HYUFD said:
Which would still be higher than the 1% bounce Biden seems to have got even thenSeaShantyIrish2 said:Re polling, one swallow does not a summer make.
Note that there is some wiggle room here.
For example, HYUFD keeps saying Trumpsky got a +4% post-convo bounce in 2016. Yet analysis (see Politico.com) suggest that actual bounce was closer to +2%
NOT a criticism of HYUFD (on this point) but instead just saying, keep a pinch of salt handy at ALL times.
I operate as a charity for US political betting. My only claim to fame is that I didn't oppose Trump in 2016.
If I was a US citizen though I'd be voting Trump, and that just as a not-Biden vote. I'd have voted Hillary last time without a thought.
0 -
But will the voters accept that as justification post-Scexit?Casino_Royale said:
The SNP will blame England forevermore.HYUFD said:
Yes, the SNP would blame England for a bad Scexit deal even after independencekle4 said:
Why would you assume independence would prevent the area becoming independent blaming others for its woes and the decisions it makes? Has independence ever prevented the blaming of outside forces?Philip_Thompson said:
That's why I support Scottish independence. Because it will force Scotland to make grown up decisions and simply blaming the English or spending without being liable for taxes will no longer be an option.Black_Rook said:
Well, again, it's not entirely unlike Brexit - difficult but doable, and with a menu of possible choices to be made, none of which might necessarily be described as ideal. Obviously there's going to be a trade-off between bringing more policy levers under Scottish control and parting with some of the conveniences of the current arrangements.CarlottaVance said:
The biggest issue may well turn out to be the sterling denominated debts of individuals and businesses in Scotland, which are owed primarily to institutions based in London. Assuming that the Scottish Parliament post-independence didn't attempt to convert them all to Scottish currency (which, for ease of reference, I'll refer to as dollars) by legislation - which would be a form of default and have very unwelcome consequences - then people in Scotland are going to be stuck with paying down their existing stock of debts in sterling whilst receiving their earnings in dollars.
Thus, if the dollar depreciates relative to the pound then the burden of the debt increases whilst Scottish exports to England become more competitive, whereas if the pound depreciates relative to the dollar then the inverse occurs. The only way to avoid these consequences of exchange rate volatility is to keep using the pound or to attempt to peg the dollar to it, both of which have the same effect of putting Scotland in an informal currency union with England, depriving it of important levers such as control of interest rates, and without the existing system of transfer payments to help make the arrangement workable. The relationship would be akin to that of Germany and one of the smaller states in the dysfunctional Eurozone: were the economic performances of Scotland and the rump UK to diverge significantly then Scotland would find itself stuck with an exchange rate and other policies tailored to the needs of its neighbour, with no recourse to a remedy.
Thinking about it, the Scottish Treasury would likely end up sharing a proportion of UK national debt as part of the carve-up of assets and liabilities, and that would also obviously be denominated in sterling, so probably the best option for Scotland is to float a new currency as soon as possible and then undertake a radical program of deregulation and tight control over spending, not unlike that instituted by Margaret Thatcher. The loss of transfer payments at independence will mean that existing Scottish public spending levels will be hard to sustain anyway, and a programme focussed on increasing Scotland's productivity and giving it sound money should yield more benefits, in terms of the effective reduction of Scotland's sterling-denominated debt pile through currency appreciation, than drawbacks.
Yes, that might do the trick. Independence, followed by Adam Smith.0 -
Sounds like project fear to me.Casino_Royale said:
Spain won't want to make it easy and painless for Scotland to join.Philip_Thompson said:
If the referendum isn't wildcat and is endorsed by the UK Parliament then I don't think Spain will have a problem with it. Spain will have a problem giving succour to a wildcat referendum.Casino_Royale said:
Spain.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?0 -
And if we get a great trade deal with the EU no need for Scottish independence then either.Gallowgate said:
There will be no tariffs because Boris is currently negotiating the easiest deal in history with the EU. Nowt to worry about.HYUFD said:
It would mean tariffs on Scottish exports and English exports if we were on WTO terms Brexit and border posts across the Scottish borderGallowgate said:I don’t see how immediate Scottish membership of both the Euro and the EU would give rUK a “bloody nose”. It would be good for them and by extension us.
In all seriousness, who cares if there’s tariffs and border posts? That is what we voted for isn’t it?
Tariffs and border posts would hit Scotland more though as 70% of Scottish exports go to England0 -
Sooner the better for me. If they do not make next year a vote on independence then the SNP will suffer badly. Will take time to organise referendum and then negotiate the split.Omnium said:
What's the dream Scottish Nationalist path now Malcolm?malcolmg said:
Scotland they are mainly in HDU if really sick , only in ICU if on ventilator, as far as I am aware.
The SNP isn't quite what it was. Scottish Nationalism though is very much on the up.
Economically the idea is facing some hurdles.
Diplomatically too - I'm not sure the EU is that keen now.
I imagine you'll be generally of the view to wait a small while. Would you target a 2024 date? (There's a nice 10 year thing that can be sold in Westminster)
(It clashes with a likely GE, and that's not so good)0 -
Absolutely. But it's good to point out that Johnson is not above the normal swing of politics as the grind of actually running an administration takes the toll.kle4 said:
And that would not be remotely unusual.rottenborough said:
Yep. As I have posted several times: Johnson will be seriously behind by next summer.CorrectHorseBattery said:https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/08/21/behind-red-wall-voters-still-love-boris-johnson-government
Internal polling revealed by the Telegraph earlier this week claimed that by next year Labour would be consistently five per cent ahead of the Conservative party due to growing public disillusionment over the party’s competence in Government.
Polling parity soon!0 -
Whether there is a “need” for Scottish Independence is not yours to determine.HYUFD said:
And if we get a great trade deal with the EU no need for Scottish independence then either.Gallowgate said:
There will be no tariffs because Boris is currently negotiating the easiest deal in history with the EU. Nowt to worry about.HYUFD said:
It would mean tariffs on Scottish exports and English exports if we were on WTO terms Brexit and border posts across the Scottish borderGallowgate said:I don’t see how immediate Scottish membership of both the Euro and the EU would give rUK a “bloody nose”. It would be good for them and by extension us.
In all seriousness, who cares if there’s tariffs and border posts? That is what we voted for isn’t it?
Tariffs and border posts would hit Scotland more though as 70% of Scottish exports go to England0 -
Why?Casino_Royale said:
Spain won't want to make it easy and painless for Scotland to join.Philip_Thompson said:
If the referendum isn't wildcat and is endorsed by the UK Parliament then I don't think Spain will have a problem with it. Spain will have a problem giving succour to a wildcat referendum.Casino_Royale said:
Spain.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?0 -
0
-
Not really since they do have a say in those rules at the moment - so the parental "do as you're told" analogy doesn't really work. It's more that they're in a house with one Welsh mate, a NI mate who pops in occasionally and eight English mates.Philip_Thompson said:
If you consider yourself Scottish and not British then the logic makes sense to me. In the EU they'd be one small member of many - in the UK they're one small member next to one that has 90% of the votes.Black_Rook said:
I suppose that might be theoretically possible. Of course, the logic of jumping out of a currency union where you fret constantly about your interests being dominated by your larger neighbour, and into a currency union where your interests will be entirely dictated by those of your many larger partners (and where there's no effective mechanism for fiscal transfers and the ongoing issuance of common debt either) is somewhat questionable. But Edinburgh is the capital of Scotland, not Vulcan.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?
Its like going a young adult going from their parents house into a house share they share with their mates - even if they don't control everything they've not got someone essentially saying "my house, my rules".
Nationalism begets nationalism. If Scotland was still returning mainly Unionist MPs they'd be far more influential at Westminster and part of a national UK conversation, including being far better represented in UK Government and in the official opposition.
Since they've chosen to return almost entirely SNP MPs they've cut themselves out of that thus fuelling the SNPs own arguments.0 -
I see no reason it would not work for a considerable time.Philip_Thompson said:
But will the voters accept that as justification post-Scexit?Casino_Royale said:
The SNP will blame England forevermore.HYUFD said:
Yes, the SNP would blame England for a bad Scexit deal even after independencekle4 said:
Why would you assume independence would prevent the area becoming independent blaming others for its woes and the decisions it makes? Has independence ever prevented the blaming of outside forces?Philip_Thompson said:
That's why I support Scottish independence. Because it will force Scotland to make grown up decisions and simply blaming the English or spending without being liable for taxes will no longer be an option.Black_Rook said:
Well, again, it's not entirely unlike Brexit - difficult but doable, and with a menu of possible choices to be made, none of which might necessarily be described as ideal. Obviously there's going to be a trade-off between bringing more policy levers under Scottish control and parting with some of the conveniences of the current arrangements.CarlottaVance said:
Yes, that might do the trick. Independence, followed by Adam Smith.
Take for example, the usual government response to criticism of blaming the last government. Gordon Brown actually used it 13 years into a Labour administration, and the Tories certainly have used it for the better part of a decade.
Such reasoning would be amplified in a seismically important change like independence (be it Brexit or Sindy), there will no doubt be some level of justification (though the amount disputed) and could well work for a long time. Particularly when it's treated like a rubicon having been crossed.0 -
If Dido's in-tray is empty no harm in adding the Ofqual brief to her portfolio.Foxy said:Dido's troops are not overworked:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/21/england-contact-tracer-i-havent-made-one-call-in-12-weeks0 -
For you, yes.Alistair said:
It is a touching article of faith.Casino_Royale said:
Spain.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?0 -
Relying on getting nonvoters to the polls is a pretty consistent sign of desperation.rottenborough said:0 -
Indeed but that's why I started my post with "if you consider yourself Scottish not British . . . "Casino_Royale said:
Not really since they do have a say in those rules at the moment - so the parental "do as you're told" analogy doesn't really work. It's more that they're in a house with one Welsh mate, a NI mate who pops in occasionally and eight English mates.Philip_Thompson said:
If you consider yourself Scottish and not British then the logic makes sense to me. In the EU they'd be one small member of many - in the UK they're one small member next to one that has 90% of the votes.Black_Rook said:
I suppose that might be theoretically possible. Of course, the logic of jumping out of a currency union where you fret constantly about your interests being dominated by your larger neighbour, and into a currency union where your interests will be entirely dictated by those of your many larger partners (and where there's no effective mechanism for fiscal transfers and the ongoing issuance of common debt either) is somewhat questionable. But Edinburgh is the capital of Scotland, not Vulcan.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?
Its like going a young adult going from their parents house into a house share they share with their mates - even if they don't control everything they've not got someone essentially saying "my house, my rules".
Nationalism begets nationalism. If Scotland was still returning mainly Unionist MPs they'd be far more influential at Westminster and part of a national UK conversation, including being far better represented in UK Government and in the official opposition.
Since they've chosen to return almost entirely SNP MPs they've cut themselves out of that thus fuelling the SNPs own arguments.
Ultimately the Union will survive if people feel British - and if they don't, why should it?0 -
It's not a particularly good analogy. It's more like leaving Mum and Dad's house to go to a not particularly nice boarding school, where you're one of many little snotlets who gets bossed or bullied by a variety of teachers and prefects.Philip_Thompson said:
If you consider yourself Scottish and not British then the logic makes sense to me. In the EU they'd be one small member of many - in the UK they're one small member next to one that has 90% of the votes.Black_Rook said:
I suppose that might be theoretically possible. Of course, the logic of jumping out of a currency union where you fret constantly about your interests being dominated by your larger neighbour, and into a currency union where your interests will be entirely dictated by those of your many larger partners (and where there's no effective mechanism for fiscal transfers and the ongoing issuance of common debt either) is somewhat questionable. But Edinburgh is the capital of Scotland, not Vulcan.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?
Its like going a young adult going from their parents house into a house share they share with their mates - even if they don't control everything they've not got someone essentially saying "my house, my rules".
Independence buys Scotland a lot of power. Joining the EU means giving a lot of it away again. Joining the Euro leaves it weaker as a minuscule fraction of the Eurozone than it is as 8% of the UK. Its debts would be denominated in a currency it did not control, it couldn't print its own money, its interest rates would be set to suit the collective (Germany first, France second, everyone else nowhere,) its exchange rates would be determined by the performance of its larger partners and not of the Scottish economy, and there would be no fiscal transfers to help correct the imbalances in the system.
Now, you might think that all of that's worth it for the advantages of being a part of the EU's inner circle, but that's a lot of compromises to be making.1 -
Remember that certain posters on here advocate for giving a post-independent Scotland as much grievance fuel as possible by trying to “screw them” in negotiations. Seems sensible.0
-
Yeh, but what if they all start believing in QAnon?Foxy said:
Relying on getting nonvoters to the polls is a pretty consistent sign of desperation.rottenborough said:0 -
0
-
If he has, I've missed it.Philip_Thompson said:
I think he's done that hasn't he?Casino_Royale said:@Philip_Thompson
Biden should condemn the extreme behaviour of both sides and appeal for calm.
So if he has, what else should he be doing? Appeals for calm aren't major news when the media is used to the shitstorm it is getting from the POTUS and 2020 in general.
It's important to get a message right that both sides here: his base need to hear he's against federal overreach and police violence but the WWC swing voters in places like Minnesota also need to hear he isn't going to put up with Marxist anarchy either.0 -
Catalonia.Alistair said:
Why?Casino_Royale said:
Spain won't want to make it easy and painless for Scotland to join.Philip_Thompson said:
If the referendum isn't wildcat and is endorsed by the UK Parliament then I don't think Spain will have a problem with it. Spain will have a problem giving succour to a wildcat referendum.Casino_Royale said:
Spain.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?0 -
Fair bunch of tossers on here, wishing every evil possible for Scotland. You personally are not included in that, you are one of the decent ones. Pretty sickening to see the bile spouted on here about Scotland by many though.Gallowgate said:
Sounds like project fear to me.Casino_Royale said:
Spain won't want to make it easy and painless for Scotland to join.Philip_Thompson said:
If the referendum isn't wildcat and is endorsed by the UK Parliament then I don't think Spain will have a problem with it. Spain will have a problem giving succour to a wildcat referendum.Casino_Royale said:
Spain.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?
PS: the same dumb Fcuks then wonder why England is hated across the world.0 -
They are (and there are) also potential Biden voters.rottenborough said:
In my opinion Luntz is whistling in the wind (I admit to not having a very high opinion of him).0 -
Yes, I think so since most Scottish nationalism is fuelled by an inferiority complex vis-a-vis England.Philip_Thompson said:
But will the voters accept that as justification post-Scexit?Casino_Royale said:
The SNP will blame England forevermore.HYUFD said:
Yes, the SNP would blame England for a bad Scexit deal even after independencekle4 said:
Why would you assume independence would prevent the area becoming independent blaming others for its woes and the decisions it makes? Has independence ever prevented the blaming of outside forces?Philip_Thompson said:
That's why I support Scottish independence. Because it will force Scotland to make grown up decisions and simply blaming the English or spending without being liable for taxes will no longer be an option.Black_Rook said:
Well, again, it's not entirely unlike Brexit - difficult but doable, and with a menu of possible choices to be made, none of which might necessarily be described as ideal. Obviously there's going to be a trade-off between bringing more policy levers under Scottish control and parting with some of the conveniences of the current arrangements.CarlottaVance said:
The biggest issue may well turn out to be the sterling denominated debts of individuals and businesses in Scotland, which are owed primarily to institutions based in London. Assuming that the Scottish Parliament post-independence didn't attempt to convert them all to Scottish currency (which, for ease of reference, I'll refer to as dollars) by legislation - which would be a form of default and have very unwelcome consequences - then people in Scotland are going to be stuck with paying down their existing stock of debts in sterling whilst receiving their earnings in dollars.
Thus, if the dollar depreciates relative to the pound then the burden of the debt increases whilst Scottish exports to England become more competitive, whereas if the pound depreciates relative to the dollar then the inverse occurs. The only way to avoid these consequences of exchange rate volatility is to keep using the pound or to attempt to peg the dollar to it, both of which have the same effect of putting Scotland in an informal currency union with England, depriving it of important levers such as control of interest rates, and without the existing system of transfer payments to help make the arrangement workable. The relationship would be akin to that of Germany and one of the smaller states in the dysfunctional Eurozone: were the economic performances of Scotland and the rump UK to diverge significantly then Scotland would find itself stuck with an exchange rate and other policies tailored to the needs of its neighbour, with no recourse to a remedy.
Thinking about it, the Scottish Treasury would likely end up sharing a proportion of UK national debt as part of the carve-up of assets and liabilities, and that would also obviously be denominated in sterling, so probably the best option for Scotland is to float a new currency as soon as possible and then undertake a radical program of deregulation and tight control over spending, not unlike that instituted by Margaret Thatcher. The loss of transfer payments at independence will mean that existing Scottish public spending levels will be hard to sustain anyway, and a programme focussed on increasing Scotland's productivity and giving it sound money should yield more benefits, in terms of the effective reduction of Scotland's sterling-denominated debt pile through currency appreciation, than drawbacks.
Yes, that might do the trick. Independence, followed by Adam Smith.0 -
Indeed.Gallowgate said:
Sounds like project fear to me.Casino_Royale said:
Spain won't want to make it easy and painless for Scotland to join.Philip_Thompson said:
If the referendum isn't wildcat and is endorsed by the UK Parliament then I don't think Spain will have a problem with it. Spain will have a problem giving succour to a wildcat referendum.Casino_Royale said:
Spain.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?
Such arguments won't work with the 45.
The question is whether it's enough to sway soft unionists from last time again.0 -
He didn't write the article.Nigelb said:
They are (and there are) also potential Biden voters.rottenborough said:
In my opinion Luntz is whistling in the wind (I admit to not having a very high opinion of him).0 -
Yes, you'd vote for Trump because he's not Biden?Omnium said:
For 'not Biden'?Casino_Royale said:
That's interesting, what would be your rationale for that?Omnium said:
I suspect you're right.HYUFD said:
Biden is still ahead though by 9% after his convention and before Trump's do, had the Democrats picked Sanders I would expect Trump to have been ahead by the end of his convention.Omnium said:
You should be able to run a donkey against Trump and win. The Democrats chose Biden. Ho hum.HYUFD said:
Which would still be higher than the 1% bounce Biden seems to have got even thenSeaShantyIrish2 said:Re polling, one swallow does not a summer make.
Note that there is some wiggle room here.
For example, HYUFD keeps saying Trumpsky got a +4% post-convo bounce in 2016. Yet analysis (see Politico.com) suggest that actual bounce was closer to +2%
NOT a criticism of HYUFD (on this point) but instead just saying, keep a pinch of salt handy at ALL times.
I operate as a charity for US political betting. My only claim to fame is that I didn't oppose Trump in 2016.
If I was a US citizen though I'd be voting Trump, and that just as a not-Biden vote. I'd have voted Hillary last time without a thought.
Your beef is with Biden??0 -
So if you could choose? 2024 seems a nice date to me - not a rush (10 years).malcolmg said:
Sooner the better for me. If they do not make next year a vote on independence then the SNP will suffer badly. Will take time to organise referendum and then negotiate the split.Omnium said:
What's the dream Scottish Nationalist path now Malcolm?malcolmg said:
Scotland they are mainly in HDU if really sick , only in ICU if on ventilator, as far as I am aware.
The SNP isn't quite what it was. Scottish Nationalism though is very much on the up.
Economically the idea is facing some hurdles.
Diplomatically too - I'm not sure the EU is that keen now.
I imagine you'll be generally of the view to wait a small while. Would you target a 2024 date? (There's a nice 10 year thing that can be sold in Westminster)
(It clashes with a likely GE, and that's not so good)
I really don't want to see Scotland go, but if it is going to do so (and I think that likely) I'd really like you guys to have the best of the winds on your backs.
The covid thing has made this a bit more tricky, but perhaps a little bit of wind is out of the sails all round. Scotland, if it departs, will wish to seek the good wishes of the rest of us, and there's no doubt that you'll have them. No barging on really.
0 -
Maybe they think Biden is a lizard?Casino_Royale said:
Yes, you'd vote for Trump because he's not Biden?Omnium said:
For 'not Biden'?Casino_Royale said:
That's interesting, what would be your rationale for that?Omnium said:
I suspect you're right.HYUFD said:
Biden is still ahead though by 9% after his convention and before Trump's do, had the Democrats picked Sanders I would expect Trump to have been ahead by the end of his convention.Omnium said:
You should be able to run a donkey against Trump and win. The Democrats chose Biden. Ho hum.HYUFD said:
Which would still be higher than the 1% bounce Biden seems to have got even thenSeaShantyIrish2 said:Re polling, one swallow does not a summer make.
Note that there is some wiggle room here.
For example, HYUFD keeps saying Trumpsky got a +4% post-convo bounce in 2016. Yet analysis (see Politico.com) suggest that actual bounce was closer to +2%
NOT a criticism of HYUFD (on this point) but instead just saying, keep a pinch of salt handy at ALL times.
I operate as a charity for US political betting. My only claim to fame is that I didn't oppose Trump in 2016.
If I was a US citizen though I'd be voting Trump, and that just as a not-Biden vote. I'd have voted Hillary last time without a thought.
Your beef is with Biden??0 -
“No because if you are thinking about Catalonia the situation is very very very different to the Scottish situation." Estaban PonsCasino_Royale said:
Catalonia.Alistair said:
Why?Casino_Royale said:
Spain won't want to make it easy and painless for Scotland to join.Philip_Thompson said:
If the referendum isn't wildcat and is endorsed by the UK Parliament then I don't think Spain will have a problem with it. Spain will have a problem giving succour to a wildcat referendum.Casino_Royale said:
Spain.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?0 -
On the “job market” front it looks like the amount of paralegal vacancies is increasing. Encouraging.0
-
Considerable yes - not forever. There's a reason there's a pendulum effect in normal politics - such arguments lose their potency as time goes on.kle4 said:
I see no reason it would not work for a considerable time.Philip_Thompson said:
But will the voters accept that as justification post-Scexit?Casino_Royale said:
The SNP will blame England forevermore.HYUFD said:
Yes, the SNP would blame England for a bad Scexit deal even after independencekle4 said:
Why would you assume independence would prevent the area becoming independent blaming others for its woes and the decisions it makes? Has independence ever prevented the blaming of outside forces?Philip_Thompson said:
That's why I support Scottish independence. Because it will force Scotland to make grown up decisions and simply blaming the English or spending without being liable for taxes will no longer be an option.Black_Rook said:
Well, again, it's not entirely unlike Brexit - difficult but doable, and with a menu of possible choices to be made, none of which might necessarily be described as ideal. Obviously there's going to be a trade-off between bringing more policy levers under Scottish control and parting with some of the conveniences of the current arrangements.CarlottaVance said:
Yes, that might do the trick. Independence, followed by Adam Smith.
Take for example, the usual government response to criticism of blaming the last government. Gordon Brown actually used it 13 years into a Labour administration, and the Tories certainly have used it for the better part of a decade.
Such reasoning would be amplified in a seismically important change like independence (be it Brexit or Sindy), there will no doubt be some level of justification (though the amount disputed) and could well work for a long time. Particularly when it's treated like a rubicon having been crossed.
Gordon Brown tried to use it 13 years into a Labour administration . . . and the voters said "jog on" and turned to the Opposition.
The Tories used it for the better part of a decade, but have stopped using it already, because it wouldn't be potent anymore. Instead to win the 2019 election there was negligible attacks on the last Labour government and instead Boris managed to rejuvenate the appeal of the party going forwards - gaining an almost unprecedented increase in both share of the vote and number of seats after nearly a decade of governance. If the election campaign had been a campaign against Brown and Blair then Boris would have lost.
Blaming London has worked for nearly a decade and a half for the SNP in Holyrood and they're stronger than ever as a result. Its not losing any potency as its still perceived to bea real issue. Blaming London might work post-independence for a decade or two max, but after that the Scottish voters would demand their own solutions and if the government is still doing that they'll turn to other politicians who offer their own solutions.0 -
That's all they've got. There is no positive vision of Union to sell to the people of Scotland.Gallowgate said:
Sounds like project fear to me.Casino_Royale said:
Spain won't want to make it easy and painless for Scotland to join.Philip_Thompson said:
If the referendum isn't wildcat and is endorsed by the UK Parliament then I don't think Spain will have a problem with it. Spain will have a problem giving succour to a wildcat referendum.Casino_Royale said:
Spain.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?
Or Yorkshire, for that matter.0 -
0
-
I agree it can only survive in the long-term if British identity continues to have purchase.Philip_Thompson said:
Indeed but that's why I started my post with "if you consider yourself Scottish not British . . . "Casino_Royale said:
Not really since they do have a say in those rules at the moment - so the parental "do as you're told" analogy doesn't really work. It's more that they're in a house with one Welsh mate, a NI mate who pops in occasionally and eight English mates.Philip_Thompson said:
If you consider yourself Scottish and not British then the logic makes sense to me. In the EU they'd be one small member of many - in the UK they're one small member next to one that has 90% of the votes.Black_Rook said:
I suppose that might be theoretically possible. Of course, the logic of jumping out of a currency union where you fret constantly about your interests being dominated by your larger neighbour, and into a currency union where your interests will be entirely dictated by those of your many larger partners (and where there's no effective mechanism for fiscal transfers and the ongoing issuance of common debt either) is somewhat questionable. But Edinburgh is the capital of Scotland, not Vulcan.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?
Its like going a young adult going from their parents house into a house share they share with their mates - even if they don't control everything they've not got someone essentially saying "my house, my rules".
Nationalism begets nationalism. If Scotland was still returning mainly Unionist MPs they'd be far more influential at Westminster and part of a national UK conversation, including being far better represented in UK Government and in the official opposition.
Since they've chosen to return almost entirely SNP MPs they've cut themselves out of that thus fuelling the SNPs own arguments.
Ultimately the Union will survive if people feel British - and if they don't, why should it?0 -
Still bit early to be definitive. Though rrend since 1992 has been for limited post-convo bumps.HYUFD said:
Which would still be higher than the 1% bounce Biden seems to have got even thenSeaShantyIrish2 said:Re polling, one swallow does not a summer make.
Note that there is some wiggle room here.
For example, HYUFD keeps saying Trumpsky got a +4% post-convo bounce in 2016. Yet analysis (see Politico.com) suggest that actual bounce was closer to +2%
NOT a criticism of HYUFD (on this point) but instead just saying, keep a pinch of salt handy at ALL times.0 -
So you're quoting one MEP at me.Alistair said:
“No because if you are thinking about Catalonia the situation is very very very different to the Scottish situation." Estaban PonsCasino_Royale said:
Catalonia.Alistair said:
Why?Casino_Royale said:
Spain won't want to make it easy and painless for Scotland to join.Philip_Thompson said:
If the referendum isn't wildcat and is endorsed by the UK Parliament then I don't think Spain will have a problem with it. Spain will have a problem giving succour to a wildcat referendum.Casino_Royale said:
Spain.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?
Ok.1 -
He has, repeatedly. Appeals for calm aren't that interesting though compared to the President of the United States urging that people get shot. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/biden-george-floyd-death-comment/Casino_Royale said:
If he has, I've missed it.Philip_Thompson said:
I think he's done that hasn't he?Casino_Royale said:@Philip_Thompson
Biden should condemn the extreme behaviour of both sides and appeal for calm.
So if he has, what else should he be doing? Appeals for calm aren't major news when the media is used to the shitstorm it is getting from the POTUS and 2020 in general.
It's important to get a message right that both sides here: his base need to hear he's against federal overreach and police violence but the WWC swing voters in places like Minnesota also need to hear he isn't going to put up with Marxist anarchy either.
I urge the protesters to exercise their rights peacefully and safely. But people all across this country are enraged and rightly so. Every day African Americans go about their lives with constant anxiety and trauma of wondering, “Will I be next?” Sounds like an exaggeration but it’s not. These tragedies, these injustices, cut at the very heart of our most sacred of beliefs: that all Americans, equal in rights and in dignity, are part of an ingrained systemic cycle of racism and oppression...throughout every part of our society.0 -
Of course there is a positive vision, it's the whole point of being better together which unions (be they the UK or the EU) will always have as their go to move.SandyRentool said:
That's all they've got. There is no positive vision of Union to sell to the people of Scotland.Gallowgate said:
Sounds like project fear to me.Casino_Royale said:
Spain won't want to make it easy and painless for Scotland to join.Philip_Thompson said:
If the referendum isn't wildcat and is endorsed by the UK Parliament then I don't think Spain will have a problem with it. Spain will have a problem giving succour to a wildcat referendum.Casino_Royale said:
Spain.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?
Or Yorkshire, for that matter.
What may be lacking is sufficiently enthusiastic proponents of the positive vision (in the case of the EU, these mostly emerged after the vote had already occurred). But it's just plain silly to declare there is no possible positive vision, just because it is not used often enough or put well.
The thing about project fears is that it can certainly be overdone and thus become ineffective, but there are things people genuinely should be scared by, but anything negative automatically gets viewed as scaremongering (which is felt to be inherently false) if people have already made up their minds to go the other way.
Project fears only work if enough people still support for positive reasons to be firmed up by concerns. If project fears do not work, it is because the battle was already lost. That's why love bombing likely needs to be relentless.0 -
I don't find it at all surprising that this year there would be no convention bounce - the electorate is already so polarized and energized that the "don't knows" are probably "will never cares"SeaShantyIrish2 said:
Still bit early to be definitive. Though rrend since 1992 has been for limited post-convo bumps.HYUFD said:
Which would still be higher than the 1% bounce Biden seems to have got even thenSeaShantyIrish2 said:Re polling, one swallow does not a summer make.
Note that there is some wiggle room here.
For example, HYUFD keeps saying Trumpsky got a +4% post-convo bounce in 2016. Yet analysis (see Politico.com) suggest that actual bounce was closer to +2%
NOT a criticism of HYUFD (on this point) but instead just saying, keep a pinch of salt handy at ALL times.
Edit: i.e. they are the parts that even Heineken cannot reach0 -
-
Why not give them a postal vote? Oh wait...Foxy said:
Relying on getting nonvoters to the polls is a pretty consistent sign of desperation.rottenborough said:0 -
That Scottish camping photo album should be good...CorrectHorseBattery said:0 -
Can someone explain something to me about the QAnon loons please?
They're still banging on about Hillary and conspiracies like that Hillary kills children. Has nobody told them that its not 2016 anymore and to amend their conspiracies to being about Biden instead?0 -
It worked in 2014.SandyRentool said:
That's all they've got. There is no positive vision of Union to sell to the people of Scotland.Gallowgate said:
Sounds like project fear to me.Casino_Royale said:
Spain won't want to make it easy and painless for Scotland to join.Philip_Thompson said:
If the referendum isn't wildcat and is endorsed by the UK Parliament then I don't think Spain will have a problem with it. Spain will have a problem giving succour to a wildcat referendum.Casino_Royale said:
Spain.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?
Or Yorkshire, for that matter.
It also worked in Quebec in 1995 where it was not love of Canada which saw a 51% No vote but companies starting to move out and fear of the economic damage with the carrot of devomax.
It almost worked in 2016, most of the 48% like me did not vote Remain out of any love of the EU but because we feared the economic damage of leaving it0 -
I found this from RCP interesting:
"The polls show that of the states holding gubernatorial elections in 2021-22, there are 10 Republican governors with job approval ratings related to managing the pandemic are under 45%; seven have approval ratings above 50%. The only Republican governors with strong job approval numbers are those who have been willing to challenge Trump’s handling of the virus."
I read that as saying that, even in GOP states, the population is to the left of Trump.0 -
A decade or two will be enough. Getting over the line is all that matters, it'll be too late to go back after that, what would the SNP care if they lose control 15 years after having achieved their lifetime ambition? The UK will never reform once broken this time.Philip_Thompson said:
Considerable yes - not forever. There's a reason there's a pendulum effect in normal politics - such arguments lose their potency as time goes on.kle4 said:
I see no reason it would not work for a considerable time.Philip_Thompson said:
But will the voters accept that as justification post-Scexit?Casino_Royale said:
The SNP will blame England forevermore.HYUFD said:
Yes, the SNP would blame England for a bad Scexit deal even after independencekle4 said:
Why would you assume independence would prevent the area becoming independent blaming others for its woes and the decisions it makes? Has independence ever prevented the blaming of outside forces?Philip_Thompson said:
That's why I support Scottish independence. Because it will force Scotland to make grown up decisions and simply blaming the English or spending without being liable for taxes will no longer be an option.Black_Rook said:
Well, again, it's not entirely unlike Brexit - difficult but doable, and with a menu of possible choices to be made, none of which might necessarily be described as ideal. Obviously there's going to be a trade-off between bringing more policy levers under Scottish control and parting with some of the conveniences of the current arrangements.CarlottaVance said:
Yes, that might do the trick. Independence, followed by Adam Smith.
Take for example, the usual government response to criticism of blaming the last government. Gordon Brown actually used it 13 years into a Labour administration, and the Tories certainly have used it for the better part of a decade.
Such reasoning would be amplified in a seismically important change like independence (be it Brexit or Sindy), there will no doubt be some level of justification (though the amount disputed) and could well work for a long time. Particularly when it's treated like a rubicon having been crossed.
Gordon Brown tried to use it 13 years into a Labour administration . . . and the voters said "jog on" and turned to the Opposition.
The Tories used it for the better part of a decade, but have stopped using it already, because it wouldn't be potent anymore. Instead to win the 2019 election there was negligible attacks on the last Labour government and instead Boris managed to rejuvenate the appeal of the party going forwards - gaining an almost unprecedented increase in both share of the vote and number of seats after nearly a decade of governance. If the election campaign had been a campaign against Brown and Blair then Boris would have lost.
Blaming London has worked for nearly a decade and a half for the SNP in Holyrood and they're stronger than ever as a result. Its not losing any potency as its still perceived to bea real issue. Blaming London might work post-independence for a decade or two max, but after that the Scottish voters would demand their own solutions and if the government is still doing that they'll turn to other politicians who offer their own solutions.0 -
Most powerful countries are hated, the USSR, the USA, the British Empire, China, Japan, Germany, Israel etc comes with the territorymalcolmg said:
Fair bunch of tossers on here, wishing every evil possible for Scotland. You personally are not included in that, you are one of the decent ones. Pretty sickening to see the bile spouted on here about Scotland by many though.Gallowgate said:
Sounds like project fear to me.Casino_Royale said:
Spain won't want to make it easy and painless for Scotland to join.Philip_Thompson said:
If the referendum isn't wildcat and is endorsed by the UK Parliament then I don't think Spain will have a problem with it. Spain will have a problem giving succour to a wildcat referendum.Casino_Royale said:
Spain.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?
PS: the same dumb Fcuks then wonder why England is hated across the world.0 -
Well the alternative is you making stuff up so I'll go with quoting Spanish political figures for now.Casino_Royale said:
So you're quoting one MEP at me.Alistair said:
“No because if you are thinking about Catalonia the situation is very very very different to the Scottish situation." Estaban PonsCasino_Royale said:
Catalonia.Alistair said:
Why?Casino_Royale said:
Spain won't want to make it easy and painless for Scotland to join.Philip_Thompson said:
If the referendum isn't wildcat and is endorsed by the UK Parliament then I don't think Spain will have a problem with it. Spain will have a problem giving succour to a wildcat referendum.Casino_Royale said:
Spain.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?
Ok.0 -
He tweeted it, which rather implies that he’s adopting the argument.rottenborough said:
He didn't write the article.Nigelb said:
They are (and there are) also potential Biden voters.rottenborough said:
In my opinion Luntz is whistling in the wind (I admit to not having a very high opinion of him).
And my low opinion of him is not based on the article.0 -
You can tell in your heart of hearts you are a Europhile-you missed out France. No self respecting Leaver would miss an opportunity to say France are universally hated!HYUFD said:
Most powerful countries are hated, the USSR, the USA, the British Empire, China, Japan, Germany, Israel etc comes with the territorymalcolmg said:
Fair bunch of tossers on here, wishing every evil possible for Scotland. You personally are not included in that, you are one of the decent ones. Pretty sickening to see the bile spouted on here about Scotland by many though.Gallowgate said:
Sounds like project fear to me.Casino_Royale said:
Spain won't want to make it easy and painless for Scotland to join.Philip_Thompson said:
If the referendum isn't wildcat and is endorsed by the UK Parliament then I don't think Spain will have a problem with it. Spain will have a problem giving succour to a wildcat referendum.Casino_Royale said:
Spain.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?
PS: the same dumb Fcuks then wonder why England is hated across the world.0 -
Partly because Tory idiots have boxed themselves in with a manifesto pledge not to raise VAT or income tax.CorrectHorseBattery said:
0 -
And yet you are now the biggest pompom waver for Bozo's rock-hard no-deal Brexit. Funny old world.HYUFD said:
It worked in 2014.SandyRentool said:
That's all they've got. There is no positive vision of Union to sell to the people of Scotland.Gallowgate said:
Sounds like project fear to me.Casino_Royale said:
Spain won't want to make it easy and painless for Scotland to join.Philip_Thompson said:
If the referendum isn't wildcat and is endorsed by the UK Parliament then I don't think Spain will have a problem with it. Spain will have a problem giving succour to a wildcat referendum.Casino_Royale said:
Spain.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?
Or Yorkshire, for that matter.
It also worked in Quebec in 1995 where it was not love of Canada which saw a 51% No vote but companies starting to move out and fear of the economic damage with the carrot of devomax.
It almost worked in 2016, most of the 48% like me did not vote Remain out of any love of the EU but because we feared the economic damage of leaving it0 -
I would, and I have a very poor view of Trump,Casino_Royale said:
Yes, you'd vote for Trump because he's not Biden?Omnium said:
For 'not Biden'?Casino_Royale said:
That's interesting, what would be your rationale for that?Omnium said:
I suspect you're right.HYUFD said:
Biden is still ahead though by 9% after his convention and before Trump's do, had the Democrats picked Sanders I would expect Trump to have been ahead by the end of his convention.Omnium said:
You should be able to run a donkey against Trump and win. The Democrats chose Biden. Ho hum.HYUFD said:
Which would still be higher than the 1% bounce Biden seems to have got even thenSeaShantyIrish2 said:Re polling, one swallow does not a summer make.
Note that there is some wiggle room here.
For example, HYUFD keeps saying Trumpsky got a +4% post-convo bounce in 2016. Yet analysis (see Politico.com) suggest that actual bounce was closer to +2%
NOT a criticism of HYUFD (on this point) but instead just saying, keep a pinch of salt handy at ALL times.
I operate as a charity for US political betting. My only claim to fame is that I didn't oppose Trump in 2016.
If I was a US citizen though I'd be voting Trump, and that just as a not-Biden vote. I'd have voted Hillary last time without a thought.
Your beef is with Biden??
0 -
Biden is just a puppet of Clinton.Philip_Thompson said:Can someone explain something to me about the QAnon loons please?
They're still banging on about Hillary and conspiracies like that Hillary kills children. Has nobody told them that its not 2016 anymore and to amend their conspiracies to being about Biden instead?
Or something.0 -
France would be hated if they had managed to win a few more wars, apart from Napoleon, instead they are just seen as prissyMexicanpete said:
You can tell in your heart of hearts you are a Europhile-you missed out France. No self respecting Leaver would miss an opportunity to say France are universally hated!HYUFD said:
Most powerful countries are hated, the USSR, the USA, the British Empire, China, Japan, Germany, Israel etc comes with the territorymalcolmg said:
Fair bunch of tossers on here, wishing every evil possible for Scotland. You personally are not included in that, you are one of the decent ones. Pretty sickening to see the bile spouted on here about Scotland by many though.Gallowgate said:
Sounds like project fear to me.Casino_Royale said:
Spain won't want to make it easy and painless for Scotland to join.Philip_Thompson said:
If the referendum isn't wildcat and is endorsed by the UK Parliament then I don't think Spain will have a problem with it. Spain will have a problem giving succour to a wildcat referendum.Casino_Royale said:
Spain.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?
PS: the same dumb Fcuks then wonder why England is hated across the world.0 -
Think about it logically. The Spanish are desperate to avoid giving succour to the Catalonians.Casino_Royale said:
So you're quoting one MEP at me.Alistair said:
“No because if you are thinking about Catalonia the situation is very very very different to the Scottish situation." Estaban PonsCasino_Royale said:
Catalonia.Alistair said:
Why?Casino_Royale said:
Spain won't want to make it easy and painless for Scotland to join.Philip_Thompson said:
If the referendum isn't wildcat and is endorsed by the UK Parliament then I don't think Spain will have a problem with it. Spain will have a problem giving succour to a wildcat referendum.Casino_Royale said:
Spain.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?
Ok.
If Scotland goes independent then how do they do that?
1: Act with impotent rage against newly independent Scotland while not preventing it from becoming independent?
2: Insist that the situation in Scotland is nothing like the situation in Catalonia?
Realpolitik would mean they would need to need to go down route 2, which means they'd want to facilitate making things relatively simple for Scotland to show how different that is to Catalonia and how it was more a unique issue with the UK.0 -
I think the loons would say that the entire Democratic party knows and is protecting HRC from investigation.Philip_Thompson said:Can someone explain something to me about the QAnon loons please?
They're still banging on about Hillary and conspiracies like that Hillary kills children. Has nobody told them that its not 2016 anymore and to amend their conspiracies to being about Biden instead?
Only Trump is prepared to take them on.0 -
No I still would prefer a deal but I also respected the will of the people to leave the EUSandyRentool said:
And yet you are now the biggest pompom waver for Bozo's rock-hard no-deal Brexit. Funny old world.HYUFD said:
It worked in 2014.SandyRentool said:
That's all they've got. There is no positive vision of Union to sell to the people of Scotland.Gallowgate said:
Sounds like project fear to me.Casino_Royale said:
Spain won't want to make it easy and painless for Scotland to join.Philip_Thompson said:
If the referendum isn't wildcat and is endorsed by the UK Parliament then I don't think Spain will have a problem with it. Spain will have a problem giving succour to a wildcat referendum.Casino_Royale said:
Spain.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?
Or Yorkshire, for that matter.
It also worked in Quebec in 1995 where it was not love of Canada which saw a 51% No vote but companies starting to move out and fear of the economic damage with the carrot of devomax.
It almost worked in 2016, most of the 48% like me did not vote Remain out of any love of the EU but because we feared the economic damage of leaving it0 -
Yep, I am sure that they logics, such that there is, is that it is a general smear on all Democrats.rottenborough said:
I think the loons would say that the entire Democratic party knows and is protecting HRC from investigation.Philip_Thompson said:Can someone explain something to me about the QAnon loons please?
They're still banging on about Hillary and conspiracies like that Hillary kills children. Has nobody told them that its not 2016 anymore and to amend their conspiracies to being about Biden instead?
Only Trump is prepared to take them on.0 -
A manifesto promise does not box them in, particularly when incredibly relevant unforeseen circumstances would make justifying ditching said promise very easy to justify. Their own choices and gutlessness are what will constrain their decision-making, not some principled adherence to a manifesto.rottenborough said:
Partly because Tory idiots have boxed themselves in with a manifesto pledge not to raise VAT or income tax.CorrectHorseBattery said:3 -
Precisely. Which is why I support Scottish independence - as I think the UK is already broken post-1997, that "British" no longer has any meaning and that the Scots can in perpetuity within the UK blame London for their problems. But post-independence after a decade or two (which is not that long quite constitutionally) they'll be forced to own their own issues.kle4 said:
A decade or two will be enough. Getting over the line is all that matters, it'll be too late to go back after that, what would the SNP care if they lose control 15 years after having achieved their lifetime ambition? The UK will never reform once broken this time.Philip_Thompson said:
Considerable yes - not forever. There's a reason there's a pendulum effect in normal politics - such arguments lose their potency as time goes on.kle4 said:
I see no reason it would not work for a considerable time.Philip_Thompson said:
But will the voters accept that as justification post-Scexit?Casino_Royale said:
The SNP will blame England forevermore.HYUFD said:
Yes, the SNP would blame England for a bad Scexit deal even after independencekle4 said:
Why would you assume independence would prevent the area becoming independent blaming others for its woes and the decisions it makes? Has independence ever prevented the blaming of outside forces?Philip_Thompson said:
That's why I support Scottish independence. Because it will force Scotland to make grown up decisions and simply blaming the English or spending without being liable for taxes will no longer be an option.Black_Rook said:
Well, again, it's not entirely unlike Brexit - difficult but doable, and with a menu of possible choices to be made, none of which might necessarily be described as ideal. Obviously there's going to be a trade-off between bringing more policy levers under Scottish control and parting with some of the conveniences of the current arrangements.CarlottaVance said:
Yes, that might do the trick. Independence, followed by Adam Smith.
Take for example, the usual government response to criticism of blaming the last government. Gordon Brown actually used it 13 years into a Labour administration, and the Tories certainly have used it for the better part of a decade.
Such reasoning would be amplified in a seismically important change like independence (be it Brexit or Sindy), there will no doubt be some level of justification (though the amount disputed) and could well work for a long time. Particularly when it's treated like a rubicon having been crossed.
Gordon Brown tried to use it 13 years into a Labour administration . . . and the voters said "jog on" and turned to the Opposition.
The Tories used it for the better part of a decade, but have stopped using it already, because it wouldn't be potent anymore. Instead to win the 2019 election there was negligible attacks on the last Labour government and instead Boris managed to rejuvenate the appeal of the party going forwards - gaining an almost unprecedented increase in both share of the vote and number of seats after nearly a decade of governance. If the election campaign had been a campaign against Brown and Blair then Boris would have lost.
Blaming London has worked for nearly a decade and a half for the SNP in Holyrood and they're stronger than ever as a result. Its not losing any potency as its still perceived to bea real issue. Blaming London might work post-independence for a decade or two max, but after that the Scottish voters would demand their own solutions and if the government is still doing that they'll turn to other politicians who offer their own solutions.0 -
But why would you raise taxes during a crash anyway? Cutting them is what you need to do, not raise them!kle4 said:
A manifesto promise does not box them in, particularly when incredibly relevant unforeseen circumstances would make justifying ditching said promise very easy to justify. Their own choices and gutlessness are what will constrain their decision-making, not some principled adherence to a manifesto.rottenborough said:
Partly because Tory idiots have boxed themselves in with a manifesto pledge not to raise VAT or income tax.CorrectHorseBattery said:0 -
Phillip's belief in the healing power of political separation is a wonder to behold.Black_Rook said:
To be fair, the latter problem is the product of the ramshackle architecture of devolution. That's Blair's fault, aided and abetted by all the even more useless Prime Ministers who have followed him and failed to correct the flaws.Philip_Thompson said:
That's why I support Scottish independence. Because it will force Scotland to make grown up decisions and simply blaming the English or spending without being liable for taxes will no longer be an option.Black_Rook said:
Well, again, it's not entirely unlike Brexit - difficult but doable, and with a menu of possible choices to be made, none of which might necessarily be described as ideal. Obviously there's going to be a trade-off between bringing more policy levers under Scottish control and parting with some of the conveniences of the current arrangements.CarlottaVance said:
The biggest issue may well turn out to be the sterling denominated debts of individuals and businesses in Scotland, which are owed primarily to institutions based in London. Assuming that the Scottish Parliament post-independence didn't attempt to convert them all to Scottish currency (which, for ease of reference, I'll refer to as dollars) by legislation - which would be a form of default and have very unwelcome consequences - then people in Scotland are going to be stuck with paying down their existing stock of debts in sterling whilst receiving their earnings in dollars.
Thus, if the dollar depreciates relative to the pound then the burden of the debt increases whilst Scottish exports to England become more competitive, whereas if the pound depreciates relative to the dollar then the inverse occurs. The only way to avoid these consequences of exchange rate volatility is to keep using the pound or to attempt to peg the dollar to it, both of which have the same effect of putting Scotland in an informal currency union with England, depriving it of important levers such as control of interest rates, and without the existing system of transfer payments to help make the arrangement workable. The relationship would be akin to that of Germany and one of the smaller states in the dysfunctional Eurozone: were the economic performances of Scotland and the rump UK to diverge significantly then Scotland would find itself stuck with an exchange rate and other policies tailored to the needs of its neighbour, with no recourse to a remedy.
Thinking about it, the Scottish Treasury would likely end up sharing a proportion of UK national debt as part of the carve-up of assets and liabilities, and that would also obviously be denominated in sterling, so probably the best option for Scotland is to float a new currency as soon as possible and then undertake a radical program of deregulation and tight control over spending, not unlike that instituted by Margaret Thatcher. The loss of transfer payments at independence will mean that existing Scottish public spending levels will be hard to sustain anyway, and a programme focussed on increasing Scotland's productivity and giving it sound money should yield more benefits, in terms of the effective reduction of Scotland's sterling-denominated debt pile through currency appreciation, than drawbacks.
Yes, that might do the trick. Independence, followed by Adam Smith.
As to blaming the English, well, it's easy and it's popular, isn't it? I imagine that some people in Scotland will still be blaming England for every problem that befalls them in a thousand years' time.1 -
Thanks, nice to see an intelligent decent post , most on here only wish us ill and are praying we end up destitute and wrecked, extremely sad.Omnium said:
So if you could choose? 2024 seems a nice date to me - not a rush (10 years).malcolmg said:
Sooner the better for me. If they do not make next year a vote on independence then the SNP will suffer badly. Will take time to organise referendum and then negotiate the split.Omnium said:
What's the dream Scottish Nationalist path now Malcolm?malcolmg said:
Scotland they are mainly in HDU if really sick , only in ICU if on ventilator, as far as I am aware.
The SNP isn't quite what it was. Scottish Nationalism though is very much on the up.
Economically the idea is facing some hurdles.
Diplomatically too - I'm not sure the EU is that keen now.
I imagine you'll be generally of the view to wait a small while. Would you target a 2024 date? (There's a nice 10 year thing that can be sold in Westminster)
(It clashes with a likely GE, and that's not so good)
I really don't want to see Scotland go, but if it is going to do so (and I think that likely) I'd really like you guys to have the best of the winds on your backs.
The covid thing has made this a bit more tricky, but perhaps a little bit of wind is out of the sails all round. Scotland, if it departs, will wish to seek the good wishes of the rest of us, and there's no doubt that you'll have them. No barging on really.0 -
They will still blame England, we will still be their closest neighbours so any economic problems will be England's fault for exploiting their smaller neighbour, the SNP will ensure it, that is their raison d'etre, hatred of EnglandPhilip_Thompson said:
Precisely. Which is why I support Scottish independence - as I think the UK is already broken post-1997, that "British" no longer has any meaning and that the Scots can in perpetuity within the UK blame London for their problems. But post-independence after a decade or two (which is not that long quite constitutionally) they'll be forced to own their own issues.kle4 said:
A decade or two will be enough. Getting over the line is all that matters, it'll be too late to go back after that, what would the SNP care if they lose control 15 years after having achieved their lifetime ambition? The UK will never reform once broken this time.Philip_Thompson said:
Considerable yes - not forever. There's a reason there's a pendulum effect in normal politics - such arguments lose their potency as time goes on.kle4 said:
I see no reason it would not work for a considerable time.Philip_Thompson said:
But will the voters accept that as justification post-Scexit?Casino_Royale said:
The SNP will blame England forevermore.HYUFD said:
Yes, the SNP would blame England for a bad Scexit deal even after independencekle4 said:
Why would you assume independence would prevent the area becoming independent blaming others for its woes and the decisions it makes? Has independence ever prevented the blaming of outside forces?Philip_Thompson said:
That's why I support Scottish independence. Because it will force Scotland to make grown up decisions and simply blaming the English or spending without being liable for taxes will no longer be an option.Black_Rook said:
Well, again, it's not entirely unlike Brexit - difficult but doable, and with a menu of possible choices to be made, none of which might necessarily be described as ideal. Obviously there's going to be a trade-off between bringing more policy levers under Scottish control and parting with some of the conveniences of the current arrangements.CarlottaVance said:
Yes, that might do the trick. Independence, followed by Adam Smith.
Take for example, the usual government response to criticism of blaming the last government. Gordon Brown actually used it 13 years into a Labour administration, and the Tories certainly have used it for the better part of a decade.
Such reasoning would be amplified in a seismically important change like independence (be it Brexit or Sindy), there will no doubt be some level of justification (though the amount disputed) and could well work for a long time. Particularly when it's treated like a rubicon having been crossed.
Gordon Brown tried to use it 13 years into a Labour administration . . . and the voters said "jog on" and turned to the Opposition.
The Tories used it for the better part of a decade, but have stopped using it already, because it wouldn't be potent anymore. Instead to win the 2019 election there was negligible attacks on the last Labour government and instead Boris managed to rejuvenate the appeal of the party going forwards - gaining an almost unprecedented increase in both share of the vote and number of seats after nearly a decade of governance. If the election campaign had been a campaign against Brown and Blair then Boris would have lost.
Blaming London has worked for nearly a decade and a half for the SNP in Holyrood and they're stronger than ever as a result. Its not losing any potency as its still perceived to bea real issue. Blaming London might work post-independence for a decade or two max, but after that the Scottish voters would demand their own solutions and if the government is still doing that they'll turn to other politicians who offer their own solutions.0 -
Scotland can go as long as it pays its own way cheerio.
I'll be missing you0 -
If correct, that is some bounce back. I suspect though that it was the Swinsongasm as Prorogation and No Deal were on the cards, before the rug was pulled due to the "Oven ready" Deal.CorrectHorseBattery said:0 -
Unbelievable Scotland fastest rise in Covid 19 in Europe thanks for coming Sturgeon0
-
I don’t know about most, malcolm. Certainly the loudest voices.malcolmg said:
Thanks, nice to see an intelligent decent post , most on here only wish us ill and are praying we end up destitute and wrecked, extremely sad.Omnium said:
So if you could choose? 2024 seems a nice date to me - not a rush (10 years).malcolmg said:
Sooner the better for me. If they do not make next year a vote on independence then the SNP will suffer badly. Will take time to organise referendum and then negotiate the split.Omnium said:
What's the dream Scottish Nationalist path now Malcolm?malcolmg said:
Scotland they are mainly in HDU if really sick , only in ICU if on ventilator, as far as I am aware.
The SNP isn't quite what it was. Scottish Nationalism though is very much on the up.
Economically the idea is facing some hurdles.
Diplomatically too - I'm not sure the EU is that keen now.
I imagine you'll be generally of the view to wait a small while. Would you target a 2024 date? (There's a nice 10 year thing that can be sold in Westminster)
(It clashes with a likely GE, and that's not so good)
I really don't want to see Scotland go, but if it is going to do so (and I think that likely) I'd really like you guys to have the best of the winds on your backs.
The covid thing has made this a bit more tricky, but perhaps a little bit of wind is out of the sails all round. Scotland, if it departs, will wish to seek the good wishes of the rest of us, and there's no doubt that you'll have them. No barging on really.
I don’t want to see Scottish independence, either, but that is no reason to deny another referendum, if that’s the democratic will of Scotland. Nor is it reason to seek anything but a cooperative relationship, should Scotland become independent.0 -
Which is why you are and will forever be a tory in name only. No true Conservative would "respect the will of the people" as expressed in something as unBritish and as profoundly incompatible with the constitution as a referendum. They might think for other reasons that leaving the EU was a good thing and that the Crown in Parliament should cause it to happen, but that's not the point.HYUFD said:
No I still would prefer a deal but I also respected the will of the people to leave the EUSandyRentool said:
And yet you are now the biggest pompom waver for Bozo's rock-hard no-deal Brexit. Funny old world.HYUFD said:
It worked in 2014.SandyRentool said:
That's all they've got. There is no positive vision of Union to sell to the people of Scotland.Gallowgate said:
Sounds like project fear to me.Casino_Royale said:
Spain won't want to make it easy and painless for Scotland to join.Philip_Thompson said:
If the referendum isn't wildcat and is endorsed by the UK Parliament then I don't think Spain will have a problem with it. Spain will have a problem giving succour to a wildcat referendum.Casino_Royale said:
Spain.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?
Or Yorkshire, for that matter.
It also worked in Quebec in 1995 where it was not love of Canada which saw a 51% No vote but companies starting to move out and fear of the economic damage with the carrot of devomax.
It almost worked in 2016, most of the 48% like me did not vote Remain out of any love of the EU but because we feared the economic damage of leaving it0 -
Are there any non-Scots here besides myself who want Scotland to go independent?
I'm guessing maybe Beibheirli_C but I'm not sure about her.0 -
Well they also won a majority in Parliament to deliver Brexit last year and it was delivered.IshmaelZ said:
Which is why you are and will forever be a tory in name only. No true Conservative would "respect the will of the people" as expressed in something as unBritish and as profoundly incompatible with the constitution as a referendum. They might think for other reasons that leaving the EU was a good thing and that the Crown in Parliament should cause it to happen, but that's not the point.HYUFD said:
No I still would prefer a deal but I also respected the will of the people to leave the EUSandyRentool said:
And yet you are now the biggest pompom waver for Bozo's rock-hard no-deal Brexit. Funny old world.HYUFD said:
It worked in 2014.SandyRentool said:
That's all they've got. There is no positive vision of Union to sell to the people of Scotland.Gallowgate said:
Sounds like project fear to me.Casino_Royale said:
Spain won't want to make it easy and painless for Scotland to join.Philip_Thompson said:
If the referendum isn't wildcat and is endorsed by the UK Parliament then I don't think Spain will have a problem with it. Spain will have a problem giving succour to a wildcat referendum.Casino_Royale said:
Spain.Philip_Thompson said:
Couldn't Scotland simply jump straight to #2?rcs1000 said:
Actually, a mix of two and three is probably the easiest option of all for an independent Scotland. The Scottish Groat would be pegged one-to-one with the Euro, and the ECB (on the basis that Scotland would be joining the EU in due course) could help support the peg.rottenborough said:
Is there not a way around #2?rcs1000 said:
Number (3) is possible, but difficult. And it would require the support of the IMF and the World Bank.CarlottaVance said:
It takes unanimity to join the EU and it takes unanimity to amend the EU treaties (including the single currency rules).
So with the unique nature of Scotland leaving the UK and rejoining the EU could it not simply seek to jump straight from Britain & the pound to ending a transition period immediately in the EU & the Euro?
That would take unanimous agreement but so does simply joining in the first place. And if the EU decides it wants to facilitate Scottish membership of the EU (and inflict a bloody nose upon the UK) they could simply agree to it could they not?
Or Yorkshire, for that matter.
It also worked in Quebec in 1995 where it was not love of Canada which saw a 51% No vote but companies starting to move out and fear of the economic damage with the carrot of devomax.
It almost worked in 2016, most of the 48% like me did not vote Remain out of any love of the EU but because we feared the economic damage of leaving it
0 -
Glad I am not going to Aberdeen or Coupar Angus for my holiday. I will have to ask malcolmg to check on my investment properties there.0
-
There may be good or bad reasons for doing specific things at the present moment. The point was a fear of breaching a manifesto promise (or indeed for other matters upsetting the grey vote) would be an excuse to dodge certain options, not a good reason.Philip_Thompson said:
But why would you raise taxes during a crash anyway? Cutting them is what you need to do, not raise them!kle4 said:
A manifesto promise does not box them in, particularly when incredibly relevant unforeseen circumstances would make justifying ditching said promise very easy to justify. Their own choices and gutlessness are what will constrain their decision-making, not some principled adherence to a manifesto.rottenborough said:
Partly because Tory idiots have boxed themselves in with a manifesto pledge not to raise VAT or income tax.CorrectHorseBattery said:0 -
malcolm, I think there are a fair few on this site who believe firmly in self-determination. I for one think it silly for Westminster to talk about not allowing another referendum when the SNP is so dominant in Scotland and is calling for one. And even without neighbourly goodwill, it would simply be in England's self-interest to have a prosperous and happy Scotland on its doorstep post independence.malcolmg said:
Thanks, nice to see an intelligent decent post , most on here only wish us ill and are praying we end up destitute and wrecked, extremely sad.Omnium said:
So if you could choose? 2024 seems a nice date to me - not a rush (10 years).malcolmg said:
Sooner the better for me. If they do not make next year a vote on independence then the SNP will suffer badly. Will take time to organise referendum and then negotiate the split.Omnium said:
What's the dream Scottish Nationalist path now Malcolm?malcolmg said:
Scotland they are mainly in HDU if really sick , only in ICU if on ventilator, as far as I am aware.
The SNP isn't quite what it was. Scottish Nationalism though is very much on the up.
Economically the idea is facing some hurdles.
Diplomatically too - I'm not sure the EU is that keen now.
I imagine you'll be generally of the view to wait a small while. Would you target a 2024 date? (There's a nice 10 year thing that can be sold in Westminster)
(It clashes with a likely GE, and that's not so good)
I really don't want to see Scotland go, but if it is going to do so (and I think that likely) I'd really like you guys to have the best of the winds on your backs.
The covid thing has made this a bit more tricky, but perhaps a little bit of wind is out of the sails all round. Scotland, if it departs, will wish to seek the good wishes of the rest of us, and there's no doubt that you'll have them. No barging on really.0 -
If Scotland goes English and Scottish relations will be at their lowest since Bannockburn and Flodden, with tariffs and border posts across the Borders most likely given the UK will likely be out of the single market and customs union by thenNigelb said:
I don’t know about most, malcolm. Certainly the loudest voices.malcolmg said:
Thanks, nice to see an intelligent decent post , most on here only wish us ill and are praying we end up destitute and wrecked, extremely sad.Omnium said:
So if you could choose? 2024 seems a nice date to me - not a rush (10 years).malcolmg said:
Sooner the better for me. If they do not make next year a vote on independence then the SNP will suffer badly. Will take time to organise referendum and then negotiate the split.Omnium said:
What's the dream Scottish Nationalist path now Malcolm?malcolmg said:
Scotland they are mainly in HDU if really sick , only in ICU if on ventilator, as far as I am aware.
The SNP isn't quite what it was. Scottish Nationalism though is very much on the up.
Economically the idea is facing some hurdles.
Diplomatically too - I'm not sure the EU is that keen now.
I imagine you'll be generally of the view to wait a small while. Would you target a 2024 date? (There's a nice 10 year thing that can be sold in Westminster)
(It clashes with a likely GE, and that's not so good)
I really don't want to see Scotland go, but if it is going to do so (and I think that likely) I'd really like you guys to have the best of the winds on your backs.
The covid thing has made this a bit more tricky, but perhaps a little bit of wind is out of the sails all round. Scotland, if it departs, will wish to seek the good wishes of the rest of us, and there's no doubt that you'll have them. No barging on really.
I don’t want to see Scottish independence, either, but that is no reason to deny another referendum, if that’s the democratic will of Scotland. Nor is it reason to seek anything but a cooperative relationship, should Scotland become independent.0 -
Plenty.Philip_Thompson said:Are there any non-Scots here besides myself who want Scotland to go independent?
I'm guessing maybe Beibheirli_C but I'm not sure about her.0 -
If Scotland was granted indyref2 and voted Yes London would correctly treat Edinburgh in as tough a manner as Brussels has treated London, no favours and as a foreign powerTimT said:
malcolm, I think there are a fair few on this site who believe firmly in self-determination. I for one think it silly for Westminster to talk about not allowing another referendum when the SNP is so dominant in Scotland and is calling for one. And even without neighbourly goodwill, it would simply be in England's self-interest to have a prosperous and happy Scotland on its doorstep post independence.malcolmg said:
Thanks, nice to see an intelligent decent post , most on here only wish us ill and are praying we end up destitute and wrecked, extremely sad.Omnium said:
So if you could choose? 2024 seems a nice date to me - not a rush (10 years).malcolmg said:
Sooner the better for me. If they do not make next year a vote on independence then the SNP will suffer badly. Will take time to organise referendum and then negotiate the split.Omnium said:
What's the dream Scottish Nationalist path now Malcolm?malcolmg said:
Scotland they are mainly in HDU if really sick , only in ICU if on ventilator, as far as I am aware.
The SNP isn't quite what it was. Scottish Nationalism though is very much on the up.
Economically the idea is facing some hurdles.
Diplomatically too - I'm not sure the EU is that keen now.
I imagine you'll be generally of the view to wait a small while. Would you target a 2024 date? (There's a nice 10 year thing that can be sold in Westminster)
(It clashes with a likely GE, and that's not so good)
I really don't want to see Scotland go, but if it is going to do so (and I think that likely) I'd really like you guys to have the best of the winds on your backs.
The covid thing has made this a bit more tricky, but perhaps a little bit of wind is out of the sails all round. Scotland, if it departs, will wish to seek the good wishes of the rest of us, and there's no doubt that you'll have them. No barging on really.0 -
If I lived there, I would vote for independence.Philip_Thompson said:Are there any non-Scots here besides myself who want Scotland to go independent?
I'm guessing maybe Beibheirli_C but I'm not sure about her.
However, losing 50-odd anti-Tory MPs is a bit of a downer.0 -
I hadn't noticed many, sorry if that's the case. You?kle4 said:
Plenty.Philip_Thompson said:Are there any non-Scots here besides myself who want Scotland to go independent?
I'm guessing maybe Beibheirli_C but I'm not sure about her.0 -
That is the one consolation, easier to get more Tory victories and crushing of Labour however I still put the Union firstSandyRentool said:
If I lived there, I would vote for independence.Philip_Thompson said:Are there any non-Scots here besides myself who want Scotland to go independent?
I'm guessing maybe Beibheirli_C but I'm not sure about her.
However, losing 50-odd anti-Tory MPs is a bit of a downer.0 -
Why, and why would that be correct rather than idiotic?HYUFD said:
If Scotland was granted indyref2 and voted Yes London would correctly treat Edinburgh in as tough a manner as Brussels has treated London, no favours and as a foreign powerTimT said:
malcolm, I think there are a fair few on this site who believe firmly in self-determination. I for one think it silly for Westminster to talk about not allowing another referendum when the SNP is so dominant in Scotland and is calling for one. And even without neighbourly goodwill, it would simply be in England's self-interest to have a prosperous and happy Scotland on its doorstep post independence.malcolmg said:
Thanks, nice to see an intelligent decent post , most on here only wish us ill and are praying we end up destitute and wrecked, extremely sad.Omnium said:
So if you could choose? 2024 seems a nice date to me - not a rush (10 years).malcolmg said:
Sooner the better for me. If they do not make next year a vote on independence then the SNP will suffer badly. Will take time to organise referendum and then negotiate the split.Omnium said:
What's the dream Scottish Nationalist path now Malcolm?malcolmg said:
Scotland they are mainly in HDU if really sick , only in ICU if on ventilator, as far as I am aware.
The SNP isn't quite what it was. Scottish Nationalism though is very much on the up.
Economically the idea is facing some hurdles.
Diplomatically too - I'm not sure the EU is that keen now.
I imagine you'll be generally of the view to wait a small while. Would you target a 2024 date? (There's a nice 10 year thing that can be sold in Westminster)
(It clashes with a likely GE, and that's not so good)
I really don't want to see Scotland go, but if it is going to do so (and I think that likely) I'd really like you guys to have the best of the winds on your backs.
The covid thing has made this a bit more tricky, but perhaps a little bit of wind is out of the sails all round. Scotland, if it departs, will wish to seek the good wishes of the rest of us, and there's no doubt that you'll have them. No barging on really.0 -
Yes please get rid of ScotSandyRentool said:
If I lived there, I would vote for independence.Philip_Thompson said:Are there any non-Scots here besides myself who want Scotland to go independent?
I'm guessing maybe Beibheirli_C but I'm not sure about her.
However, losing 50-odd anti-Tory MPs is a bit of a downer.SandyRentool said:
If I lived there, I would vote for independence.Philip_Thompson said:Are there any non-Scots here besides myself who want Scotland to go independent?
I'm guessing maybe Beibheirli_C but I'm not sure about her.
However, losing 50-odd anti-Tory MPs is a bit of a downer.</blockquo
Yes please get rid of Scotland now, millstone on this country since 1707!0 -
I am quite happy for them to do so, and wish them well. Lovely country.Philip_Thompson said:Are there any non-Scots here besides myself who want Scotland to go independent?
I'm guessing maybe Beibheirli_C but I'm not sure about her.0 -
My mobile is being weighed down by Scotland. Please get rid of it0
This discussion has been closed.