Scottish Independence

[Bish bash bosh]

That's generally true.

What about bloody Sunday though?

UHL!

 

[GeminiMoon]

Which Union are you referring to? 1707 or 1603?

The 1707 Union was rescinded when the Scottish Parliament was re-constituted, as indeed the presiding officer said at the opening session. The 1707 Union is already broken. How can you still have a Union of parliaments when you have two separate parliaments? If you read Scottish History you will find a parallel to where we are now in the years between 1603-1707. What you will find is that the present system is unworkable in the long-term. We will either have to go back to the Union of Parliaments, or two separate nations will emerge, it's just a question of when not if.

If you talk about 'preserving the Union' you will play into the Nationalists hands.

Rescinding the 1603 Union is not on the table because the Queen will still be head of State in an independent Scotland.

No no no. We do not have a separate parliament. It's true you have the Scottish Assembly that has a lot of power, but the Parliament of Westminster has the power to overrule anything the Scottish Parliament does. We could take away devolution as easy as we set it up.
The English do not have a separate Parliament for England as you Scots do.

 

[lismore]

No no no. We do not have a separate parliament. It's true you have the Scottish Assembly that has a lot of power, but the Parliament of Westminster has the power to overrule anything the Scottish Parliament does.

Yes, we're back to the stage we were after 1603 and before 1707. E.G when Charles 2nd declared war on the Dutch, it wrecked Scotland's trade, but the parliament did not have the power to say no.

We could take away devolution as easy as we set it up.

Another argument for Independence! Being at the mercy of the Westminster Parliament which is a lot of children trapped in adult's bodies shouting at each other.

 

[Genersis]

Maybe Alex Salmond should be punished for all the genocide the British Empire committed all over the world. It's clearly all his fault. Not the UK government, they've never done any harm to anybody.

The Union Jack=the butcher's apron. Get it down off the pole and into the abattoir where it belongs.

What does this have to do with what i said?
Now apparently i'm blaming Scotland of genocide.

Perhaps Scotland should punish England for the people it killed during the many conflicts England and Scotland had centuries ago.
Or MAYBE, we can forgive and forget all the pointless killing every society since EVER has committed due to stupid human aggression.
After all, the people responsible for these acts are, for the most part, DEAD.

Maybe you should think before throwing around the blame for genocides for no other reason than me saying something that apparently struck a nerve.

Some of the debt we have, IS because we spent MONEY we didn't have in areas ALL OVER the UK, INCLUDING Scotland.
Is that really so hard to just swallow, rather than becoming aggressive and posting stuff that's quite frankly irrelevant?

 

[TemperateSeaIsland]

Maybe Scotland should carry all of the UK debt with them considering it was two Scots, Blair and Brown that sent us down the crapper.

 

[lismore]

Now apparently i'm blaming Scotland of genocide.

No I'm blaiming, I, me, myself, I am accusing the British Empire of genocide, colonialism, organised state piracy. No other nation in the world enslaved so many peoples, on so many continents.

My point was that you are holding Alex Salmond for running up the hideous UK debt. While I am no huge fan of Alex Salmond I don't think he can be held to account for that. It would have to be the Westminster Parliament in London. My sarcastic point is that you might as well blame ALex Salmond for the British Empire's dark existence, you're blaming him for many other failings of the British State.

Is that really so hard to just swallow, rather than becoming aggressive and posting stuff that's quite frankly irrelevant?

Who's aggressive. I didn't post any statements in block capitals. No aggression here.

 

[lismore]

Maybe Scotland should carry all of the UK debt with them considering it was two Scots, Blair and Brown that sent us down the crapper.

They're not Scots, they're British. Look on your passport it does not say 'Republic of Wales'. We're all subjects of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. There is no Scotland or England, Wales or Manx, unless there is a yes vote in the 2014 referendum!

Blair is British
Brown is British
Cameron Is British
Salmond Is British
I am British
You are British

If Scotland votes yes in 2014 my guess is Blair and Brown will not be found with a Scottish Passport.

 

[lismore]

Even if an Independent Scotland made a complete pig's behind of their finances, it's only what the British state has already done on a bigger scale.

Cameron or his successor in London will soon be at the EU bail-out fund asking for assistance.

 

[Genersis]

No I'm blaiming, I, me, myself, I am accusing the British Empire of genocide, colonialism, organised state piracy. No other nation in the world enslaved so many peoples, on so many continents.

My point was that you are holding Alex Salmond for running up the hideous UK debt. While I am no huge fan of Alex Salmond I don't think he can be held to account for that. It would have to be the Westminster Parliament in London. My sarcastic point is that you might as well blame ALex Salmond for the British Empire's dark existence, you're blaming him for many other failings of the British State.

No i'm not, i'm saying Scotland is the source of a portion of our debt and it would be incorrect to insist otherwise.
I don't see how you saw that as blaming Scotland for the debt.

Who's aggressive. I didn't post any statements in block capitals. No aggression here.

Bringing genocide pointlessly into a discussion calling our flag a "butcher's apron" seems aggressive to me.

 

[GeminiMoon]

Yes, we're back to the stage we were after 1603 and before 1707. E.G when Charles 2nd declared war on the Dutch, it wrecked Scotland's trade, but the parliament did not have the power to say no.



Another argument for Independence! Being at the mercy of the Westminster Parliament which is a lot of children trapped in adult's bodies shouting at each other.

It's not really an argument for independence because in reality, Westminster would not do that without a very good reason. If the Scots just behave in a good way, then they will not have to worry about those kinds of measures. At least you have your own parliament! We in England do not.

 

[Cromulent]

It's not really an argument for independence because in reality, Westminster would not do that without a very good reason. If the Scots just behave in a good way, then they will not have to worry about those kinds of measures. At least you have your own parliament! We in England do not.

If Westminster unilaterally removed the Scottish assembly, there would be chaos, and it would definitely be the first step towards certain independence.

 

[GeminiMoon]

If Westminster unilaterally removed the Scottish assembly, there would be chaos, and it would definitely be the first step towards certain independence.

My point was that it wouldn't come to that.

 

[lismore]

It's not really an argument for independence because in reality, Westminster would not do that without a very good reason. If the Scots just behave in a good way, then they will not have to worry about those kinds of measures. At least you have your own parliament! We in England do not.

I think the devolution settlement of the 1990s was a temporary measure, as you say it is full of holes. The fact that Scots MPs can vote in Westminster on issues that only effect England is one. I don't think it is workable in the long term. There seems to be nothing but arguments over nothing between Holyrood and Westminster.

The current system is unworkable in the long term, we should all be considering the best way forward for everyone.

 

[lismore]

No i'm not, i'm saying Scotland is the source of a portion of our debt and it would be incorrect to insist otherwise.
I don't see how you saw that as blaming Scotland for the debt.

Because there is no England or Scotland in the real world, just in football. We're all British. Britain has a debt. Scotland contributes or takes nothing towards the UK budget because Scotland doesn't exist. There is no Scottish passport, it's a British passport. We're all British subjects. It's a British debt. I'm not any less British than someone from London, my passport is the same as his.

I know some politicians do try to ride two horses and say we can be proud to be Scottish and British. But it's a foolish statement. Some people do hold dual nationality, but no-one holds Scottish nationality because we are not a country. Britain is the country.

If Scotland were to leave Britain and emerge as a nation, Britain would still exist. There would be two passports, two nations, two sets of accounts. You couldn't blame Scotland for any of the debt because at the moment Scotland declared independence it would be year zero.

Bringing genocide pointlessly into a discussion calling our flag a "butcher's apron" seems aggressive to me.

I was merely pointing out some of the dark deeds done by the British Empire which I think is relevant to this discussion. I once had a conversation with a man from a former British colony and was ashamed of some of the things Britain had done to his people.

I'm not an aggressive person

Have a nice day.

 

[Genersis]

Because there is no England or Scotland in the real world, just in football. We're all British. Britain has a debt. Scotland contributes or takes nothing towards the UK budget because Scotland doesn't exist. There is no Scottish passport, it's a British passport. We're all British subjects. It's a British debt. I'm not any less British than someone from London, my passport is the same as his.

I know some politicians do try to ride two horses and say we can be proud to be Scottish and British. But it's a foolish statement. Some people do hold dual nationality, but no-one holds Scottish nationality because we are not a country. Britain is the country.

If Scotland were to leave Britain and emerge as a nation, Britain would still exist. There would be two passports, two nations, two sets of accounts. You couldn't blame Scotland for any of the debt because at the moment Scotland declared independence it would be year zero.

Scotland is still a country, albeit, in a union with the other countries which form our United Kingdom; Meaning we share an identity on the world stage.
And that country has, like the rest of the UK, had money spent on it by our government.
If Scotland gains it's independence, that doesn't change the fact that the country has had money pumped into it by the UK, as it was part of the UK.

Do you think Scotland owes nothing to the UK once it leaves the union even when the UK would still be paying off debts generated by Scotland?

I was merely pointing out some of the dark deeds done by the British Empire which I think is relevant to this discussion. I once had a conversation with a man from a former British colony and was ashamed of some of the things Britain had done to his people.

I'm not an aggressive person

Have a nice day.

I guess it's relevant if the ills of our past are one of the reasons you wish Scotland to leave the UK.
Like most, our country's history is filled with stupid amounts of bloodshed and oppression.
I still don't see it's relevancy to my post though, but meh.

 

[lismore]

Scotland is still a country

No it isn't a country. Britain is a country, Scotland is a romantic illusion. If it was a country there would be Scottish passports. Are there Scottish passports?

the UK would still be paying off debts generated by Scotland?

The UK would be paying off debts generated by the UK, at least until the Germans, Arabs or the Chinese bailed the UK government out.

The terrifyingly huge amount of debt the UK has, only a huge economy like the EU or Chinese will be able to save the UK from oblivion.

Like most, our country's history is filled with stupid amounts of bloodshed and oppression.
I still don't see it's relevancy to my post though, but meh.

Unlike most the British Empire covered a huge proportion of the globe, unwanted colonialism on every continent. Few other nations matched it in the scale of the oppression.

 

[Cromulent]

@Lismore, you're using a pretty narrow definition of "country" there. By many definitions, Scotland is a country, even if it is not an independent nation state at present.

@Genersis, if Scotland were to leave the union, it has to be on fair terms. If they're not getting any military hardware, or if the NHS hospitals are going to be gutted and all the MRI machines and cancer drugs taken away, it wouldn't be reasonable to impose a share of the UK debt on them. However, if Scotland are going to benefit from spending on them when they were a part of the UK, it is only right that they shoulder at least some of the debt incurred by that. A fair proportion would have to be decided by taking into account Scotland's cash flow relative to the rest of the UK in the years debt was run up, and whether Scotland would pay for a share of the costs of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, among many other things.

 

[seeking_perfection]

I think Lismore is correct in talking about "country".

Our country is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. That is a fact. That there are unique sections within the country, 'home nations' as we call them in sport, doesn't change this. Just because Scotland used to be an independant nation has no bearing on the current situation. Italy used to be made up of completely distinct principalities but it is now Italy. End of story.

 

[Genersis]

...
@Genersis, if Scotland were to leave the union, it has to be on fair terms. If they're not getting any military hardware, or if the NHS hospitals are going to be gutted and all the MRI machines and cancer drugs taken away, it wouldn't be reasonable to impose a share of the UK debt on them. However, if Scotland are going to benefit from spending on them when they were a part of the UK, it is only right that they shoulder at least some of the debt incurred by that. A fair proportion would have to be decided by taking into account Scotland's cash flow relative to the rest of the UK in the years debt was run up, and whether Scotland would pay for a share of the costs of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, among many other things.

That's what i'm trying to say.
I'm obviously not being very clear.

 

[theFijian]

Hello

You asked me what the UK government spends it's money on, it's a matter of public record, but I gave you a link to a pie chart.

What are you wanting from me now?

Anyone can post links to wikipedia, I was expecting you to have an inkling as to what the figures meant (although we are dealing with SNP economics here)