Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Scottish Independence

Options
1…2122232426

Comments

  • Options
    #752
    househero
    Registered Users Posts: 1,094 ✭✭✭househero


    ardmacha wrote: »
    the limitations of the UK model where the poorer parts get poorer and have to be bailed out by handouts.

    Its a good point. Its is 'poorer' because it is controlled by a government with Other priorities.

    A country controlled by any other external power, rarely, if EVER does well. England's empire failed due to this exact conflict of policies.


  • Options
    #753
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    ardmacha wrote: »
    Firstly, this is quite a short term document. Scotland should not decide its future on the basis of 2015 growth rates, but should have a long term perspective.

    Secondly, even the EY document you cite shows that the ROI will have a growth rate 1.1% higher than the UK after 2016, which is quite a significant difference, I'm sure Scotland would settle for that. It also shows that NI will have a growth rate 0.1% lower than the UK generally, which illustrates the limitations of the UK model where the poorer parts get poorer and have to be bailed out by handouts.

    You've totally missed the basis of my post that historically growth rates have been highly correlated between Ireland and the UK and a projected 1.1% growth rate in Ireland's favour above the UK does not contradict that.

    If you'll look at the table you will see Irish and British growth rates are quite highly correlated as one would expect given the reliance of Ireland on the British market.


  • Options
    #754
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    househero wrote: »
    Its a good point. Its is 'poorer' because it is controlled by a government with Other priorities.

    A country controlled by any other external power, rarely, if EVER does well. England's empire failed due to this exact conflict of policies.
    It was controlled by a government with other priorities in the early 20th century when what would become Northern Ireland was considered one of the greatest industrial regions of the world. All while being under British control.


  • Options
    #755
    Scofflaw
    Registered Users Posts: 23,283 ✭✭✭✭Scofflaw


    househero wrote: »
    Its a good point. Its is 'poorer' because it is controlled by a government with Other priorities.

    A country controlled by any other external power, rarely, if EVER does well. England's empire failed due to this exact conflict of policies.

    What? Not a bit. First, the Empire was definitely British, not English. Scottish and Irish people were fairly heavily over-represented in the Imperial apparatus of government and control for their population. Second, the main reason for its failure is generally agreed to have been the effects of the First and Second World War both on UK finances and colonial/domestic expectations.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #756
    sfakiaman
    Registered Users Posts: 737 ✭✭✭sfakiaman


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Why is it Scottish oil and not British?

    A fairly comprehensive article on the continental shelf here.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-20042070

    I would consider that the waters which come under Scottish legal jurisdiction will be Scottish on independence and therefor the resources on and under those waters will be Scottish.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #757
    AlanG
    Registered Users Posts: 1,415 ✭✭✭AlanG


    First Up wrote: »
    an independent Scotland joining the EU would need the agreement of all (28) member states.

    It is also my understanding that no one can join the EU now without committing to a definite plan for joining the Euro. If Scotland applies and wants to stay out of the Euro it would set a precedence the EU would not be happy with.


  • Options
    #758
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    sfakiaman wrote: »
    A fairly comprehensive article on the continental shelf here.

    http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-20042070

    I would consider that the waters which come under Scottish legal jurisdiction will be Scottish on independence and therefor the resources on and under those waters will be Scottish.
    Presumably so but while the oil does seem to lie largely in Scottish waters Scottish independence hasn't happened yet (if it ever will) so it's neither helpful nor accurate to talk about "Scottish" oil when referring to what is in reality British oil.


  • Options
    #759
    sfakiaman
    Registered Users Posts: 737 ✭✭✭sfakiaman


    AlanG wrote: »
    It is also my understanding that no one can join the EU now without committing to a definite plan for joining the Euro. If Scotland applies and wants to stay out of the Euro it would set a precedence the EU would not be happy with.

    Whether you are right or wrong, the problem at the moment is that only the UK government can negotiate with the EU and Westminster will not negotiate on anything until a Yes vote. This allows them to spread uncertainty and confusion. Imagine a case of a divorcing couple where one partner says, you can't be friends with our friends unless they all agree, and you're not allowed to talk to them till after the divorce.


  • Options
    #760
    bobcoffee
    Registered Users Posts: 154 ✭✭bobcoffee


    the Amount of "pro" british reading in this thread has gone beyond levels that it ever should be.

    British Empire is not British first... it is english first deal with it.
    Oil is a major part of the process and discussing it has plenty of value.
    If you guys can not see the above as something as worth (regardless of being true or not).
    Then I recommend picking up a history book and start were ever you want in ENGLISH history.

    Mind you I have seen "british" school history books, so if your learning from them and still are lost I am not surprised.
    Plenty of history missing from them and I doubt much has changed in the last 10 years.


  • Options
    #761
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    bobcoffee wrote: »
    the Amount of "pro" british reading in this thread has gone beyond levels that it ever should be.

    British Empire is not British first... it is english first deal with it.
    Oil is a major part of the process and discussing it has plenty of value.
    If you guys can not see the above as something as worth (regardless of being true or not).
    Then I recommend picking up a history book and start were ever you want in ENGLISH history.

    Mind you I have seen "british" school history books, so if your learning from them and still are lost I am not surprised.
    Plenty of history missing from them and I doubt much has changed in the last 10 years.

    I can see Scottish history will go the way of Irish history.

    "Please sir, it wasn't us, it was those nasty big boys over there".


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #762
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    I can see Scottish history will go the way of Irish history.

    "Please sir, it wasn't us, it was those nasty big boys over there".

    Are you suggesting that the Scots should bugger up their economic future to avenge Cullodon or the Clearances?

    Smart.


  • Options
    #763
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    First Up wrote: »
    Are you suggesting that the Scots should bugger up their economic future to avenge Cullodon or the Clearances?

    Smart.

    The Scots can do what they like, but to try and pretend the Scots are/were not an intrinsic part of Britain and all that entails, especially empire, is ridiculous in the extreme.


  • Options
    #764
    MakeMyFriend
    Registered Users Posts: 31 ✭MakeMyFriend


    househero wrote: »
    A vote will sort this very question out. But no you are wrong. Scotland is its own country under the rule of an outside power and it is the Scottish people who have the rights of Scottish oil, not the English.

    Right but as of now, it's part of the UK, so it's "British" (it's ****ing oil, not your aunt), doesn't matter what YOU want. Those are just the facts as of now.


  • Options
    #765
    Godge
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,727 ✭✭✭✭Godge


    househero wrote: »
    A vote will sort this very question out. But no you are wrong. Scotland is its own country under the rule of an outside power and it is the Scottish people who have the rights of Scottish oil, not the English.

    I thought this was clarified already and it is clear in law that Scotland is not its own country.
    Scofflaw wrote: »
    Only geographically. The "Great Britain" in the name of the UK is actually the united kingdom formed by the union of the Scottish and English crowns in 1707. Scottish independence consists of 'dividing' the crowns again, making England and Scotland separate kingdoms as they were before the Act of Union.

    That division means there is no united kingdom of Great Britain any more. That entity ceases to exist, and that is the entity that forms part of the UK's name.



    Northern Ireland is the remaining part of the Kingdom of Ireland. The current UK is formed of the united crowns of Scotland and England as Great Britain (1707), united in turn with the crown of Ireland (1801) as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. The fact that the 26 counties had left the UK was recognised by the addition of "Northern" in 1927.

    Wales doesn't get a mention because it's (a) a principality not a kingdom, and (b) was annexed.

    cordially,
    Scofflaw


  • Options
    #766
    MakeMyFriend
    Registered Users Posts: 31 ✭MakeMyFriend


    bobcoffee wrote: »
    the Amount of "pro" british reading in this thread has gone beyond levels that it ever should be.

    British Empire is not British first... it is english first deal with it.
    Oil is a major part of the process and discussing it has plenty of value.
    If you guys can not see the above as something as worth (regardless of being true or not).
    Then I recommend picking up a history book and start were ever you want in ENGLISH history.

    Mind you I have seen "british" school history books, so if your learning from them and still are lost I am not surprised.
    Plenty of history missing from them and I doubt much has changed in the last 10 years.

    Don't confuse "pro-British" with anti-nationalism and anti-separatism. Not accusing you, it's just when I say I'm against independence for example, people assume I'm a Unionist. When in fact I hate most of the Better Together lot. "Britain is a proud union"/"Britain is great". No it isn't, it's rubbish, corrupt and broken. Go away.


  • Options
    #767
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    MakeMyFriend wrote: »
    Don't confuse "pro-British" with anti-nationalism and anti-separatism. Not accusing you, it's just when I say I'm against independence for example, people assume I'm a Unionist. When in fact I hate most of the Better Together lot. "Britain is a proud union"/"Britain is great". No it isn't, it's rubbish, corrupt and broken. Go away.

    I am considerably better disposed towards Scotland than England, or the UK as a whole. That's why I don't want to see them do something stupid


  • Options
    #768
    Broxi_Bear_Eire
    Registered Users Posts: 6,704 ✭✭✭Broxi_Bear_Eire


    MakeMyFriend wrote: »
    Don't confuse "pro-British" with anti-nationalism and anti-separatism. Not accusing you, it's just when I say I'm against independence for example, people assume I'm a Unionist. When in fact I hate most of the Better Together lot. "Britain is a proud union"/"Britain is great". No it isn't, it's rubbish, corrupt and broken. Go away.

    But yet you want Scotland to remain part of this rubbish, broken and corrupt union. Excuse me if I am picking you up wrong but is that what you are saying


  • Options
    #769
    bobcoffee
    Registered Users Posts: 154 ✭✭bobcoffee


    Well it then comes back to look at our government and their corruption, good chance Scotland will have to deal with that kind of mess.
    Independence will leave an opening for "loopholes" and other madness that plagues our country.
    EU done a report recently that states what happened to Ireland (crisis) was against human rights but what is done is done kind of attitude.

    So while there might be some benefits to "freedom" there are plenty of negatives too.
    See that leader, some spanish guy in the EU (one of the top dogs).
    Well he is sure going to make things difficult, believe he been on the news within the last 2 days ranting about a few things.

    Independence done right is what is needed, what is the chances of that going to happen?
    Sure plenty on these forums don't don't see any problems with the regime that has been in place since 9/11.


  • Options
    #770
    Broxi_Bear_Eire
    Registered Users Posts: 6,704 ✭✭✭Broxi_Bear_Eire


    bobcoffee wrote: »
    Well it then comes back to look at our government and their corruption, good chance Scotland will have to deal with that kind of mess.
    Independence will leave an opening for "loopholes" and other madness that plagues our country.
    EU done a report recently that states what happened to Ireland (crisis) was against human rights but what is done is done kind of attitude.

    So while there might be some benefits to "freedom" there are plenty of negatives too.
    See that leader, some spanish guy in the EU (one of the top dogs).
    Well he is sure going to make things difficult, believe he been on the news within the last 2 days ranting about a few things.

    Independence done right is what is needed, what is the chances of that going to happen?
    Sure plenty on these forums don't don't see any problems with the regime that has been in place since 9/11.

    You could be right but you could be wrong I believe Scotland has a right to make its own mistakes. Maybe the politicians there will be looking at the mess places like here have made and go out there way to avoid them. Not doing anything could be the worst one the ordinary people make


  • Options
    #771
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    bobcoffee wrote: »
    Well it then comes back to look at our government and their corruption, good chance Scotland will have to deal with that kind of mess.
    Independence will leave an opening for "loopholes" and other madness that plagues our country.
    EU done a report recently that states what happened to Ireland (crisis) was against human rights but what is done is done kind of attitude.

    So while there might be some benefits to "freedom" there are plenty of negatives too.
    See that leader, some spanish guy in the EU (one of the top dogs).
    Well he is sure going to make things difficult, believe he been on the news within the last 2 days ranting about a few things.

    Independence done right is what is needed, what is the chances of that going to happen?
    Sure plenty on these forums don't don't see any problems with the regime that has been in place since 9/11.

    I'm waiting for the code breakers to report back before thinking about answering that one.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #772
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »
    You could be right but you could be wrong I believe Scotland has a right to make its own mistakes. Maybe the politicians there will be looking at the mess places like here have made and go out there way to avoid them. Not doing anything could be the worst one the ordinary people make

    I know it's nice to have a rant but could you elaborate on statements like "mess places like here have made" so we know what you are talking about?
    If I want slogans I can look at graffiti but a debate needs a bit more.


  • Options
    #773
    Broxi_Bear_Eire
    Registered Users Posts: 6,704 ✭✭✭Broxi_Bear_Eire


    First Up wrote: »
    I know it's nice to have a rant but could you elaborate on statements like "mess places like here have made" so we know what you are talking about?
    If I want slogans I can look at graffiti but a debate needs a bit more.

    Oh get off yer high horse I was distracted by my baby grandson crying. Debate that


  • Options
    #774
    First Up
    Registered Users Posts: 14,822 ✭✭✭✭First Up


    Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »
    Oh get off yer high horse I was distracted by my baby grandson crying. Debate that

    Better excuse than some.


  • Options
    #775
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »
    But yet you want Scotland to remain part of this rubbish, broken and corrupt union. Excuse me if I am picking you up wrong but is that what you are saying
    Do you have anything to back that up? Last time I checked the United Kingdom was in possession of
    1. The most powerful Military in Western Europe.
    2. The Second most powerful navy in the world.
    3. International military bases and a constant military presence in every continent in the world.
    4. One of three financial centres in the world, London. The other two being New York and Tokyo.
    5. A permanent seat on the UN security council.
    6. Historical and familial connections with many powerful countries including Canada and Australia.
    7. A stable currency.
    8. The ability and opportunity to project their culture across the entire planet through the dominance of the English language.
    9. A permanent stock of armed Nuclear weapons.
    10. Closest operational ally of the world's only remaining Superpower which guarantees British protection from outside threats without having to sacrifice their economy to build up a needlessly large military.
    All that combined together sounds like a Great Power to me, I don't see a broken Union.


  • Options
    #776
    MakeMyFriend
    Registered Users Posts: 31 ✭MakeMyFriend


    Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »
    But yet you want Scotland to remain part of this rubbish, broken and corrupt union. Excuse me if I am picking you up wrong but is that what you are saying
    Because going independent will do nothing but set the economy back, we'll still have the same parties, as well, for example, Scotland voted no for the AV system ... yeah. But fundamentally it makes absolutely no sense on a cultural level, England and Scotland aren't even remotely different let's be honest, so what is the point? Why not sort all these issues inside the UK, and not outside? Clearly it benefits more people. Because of separatism, us and them mentality, nationalism, "We "Scots" do this, those "English" do that", why am I being bunched together with Scottish people but not the English, in the eyes of some people? I don't like being told who I'm apart of and who I'm not.


  • Options
    #777
    A Dub in Glasgo
    Registered Users Posts: 17,026 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    Scotland's economy has been set back quite a bit already


  • Options
    #778
    Broxi_Bear_Eire
    Registered Users Posts: 6,704 ✭✭✭Broxi_Bear_Eire


    First Up wrote: »
    Better excuse than some.

    Really if I hadn't wanted to answer you I would have ignored you totally believe it or not some of us have a life away from the internet. Really how far up your arse is your head


  • Options
    #779
    Broxi_Bear_Eire
    Registered Users Posts: 6,704 ✭✭✭Broxi_Bear_Eire


    Iwasfrozen wrote: »
    Do you have anything to back that up? Last time I checked the United Kingdom was in possession of
    1. The most powerful Military in Western Europe.
    2. The Second most powerful navy in the world.
    3. International military bases and a constant military presence in every continent in the world.
    4. One of three financial centres in the world, London. The other two being New York and Tokyo.
    5. A permanent seat on the UN security council.
    6. Historical and familial connections with many powerful countries including Canada and Australia.
    7. A stable currency.
    8. The ability and opportunity to project their culture across the entire planet through the dominance of the English language.
    9. A permanent stock of armed Nuclear weapons.
    10. Closest operational ally of the world's only remaining Superpower which guarantees British protection from outside threats without having to sacrifice their economy to build up a needlessly large military.
    All that combined together sounds like a Great Power to me, I don't see a broken Union.

    Really you should read the post I was replying to before jumping in with both feet.


  • Options
    #780
    Iwasfrozen
    Registered Users Posts: 16,250 ✭✭✭✭Iwasfrozen


    Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »
    Really you should read the post I was replying to before jumping in with both feet.
    I did. And not only did I read it I even highlighted a section. Didn't you see it?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #781
    TireeTerror
    Registered Users Posts: 2,271 ✭✭✭TireeTerror


    Alba Gu Brath!!!!


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement