Scottish independence

Taxes we'll save?? Care to explain? All of scotlands taxes go to westminster who then decide to take a chunk of it and give us crumbs back. Scotland will keep 90% of oil reserves and keep all our own taxes. Oh and the uk will need to find another £4bn to maintain trident.

Scotland are a burden eh? Enjoy ukip and tories for the next 100 years
 
Bodicoteblue said:
Mikeyc1986 said:
20% of Europe's fish
 25% of Europe's tidal potential.
The Crown Estate, which owns the sea bed, has awarded leases for just over 1.6 gigawatts of marine projects in the Pentland Firth and Orkney Waters - potentially enough to power 750,000 households.
Scotland boasts 25% of Europe's offshore wind resources.
60% of Europe's oil reserves.

Really? Would Europe vote against scotland? They voted in Croatia in 2013 and they can't offer any of this?
Click to expand...
Errr- the crown estate?
That would be property owned by the sovereign of the UNITED KINGDOM!
Yes vote = no United Kingdom
Would the sea bed be nationalised by a Scottish government?
Click to expand...

Its owned by the queen. And the queen herself takes a cut from it. Independent Scotland will keep the queen as head of state, like the rest of the commenwealth.
 
Mikeyc1986 said:
Taxes we'll save?? Care to explain? All of scotlands taxes go to westminster who then decide to take a chunk of it and give us crumbs back. Scotland will keep 90% of oil reserves and keep all our own taxes. Oh and the uk will need to find another £4bn to maintain trident.

Scotland are a burden eh? Enjoy ukip and tories for the next 100 years
Click to expand...

Your oil is worth £6 Billion a year. Your financial industry who have said to a man that they will fuck off to London as soon you get independence is worth £8 billion a year and employs 7% of the workforce.

At least the £6 billion in oil money will be able to pay for the benefits of all those who will be made unemployed.
 
Mikeyc1986 said:
Bodicoteblue said:
Mikeyc1986 said:
20% of Europe's fish
 25% of Europe's tidal potential.
The Crown Estate, which owns the sea bed, has awarded leases for just over 1.6 gigawatts of marine projects in the Pentland Firth and Orkney Waters - potentially enough to power 750,000 households.
Scotland boasts 25% of Europe's offshore wind resources.
60% of Europe's oil reserves.

Really? Would Europe vote against scotland? They voted in Croatia in 2013 and they can't offer any of this?
Click to expand...
Errr- the crown estate?
That would be property owned by the sovereign of the UNITED KINGDOM!
Yes vote = no United Kingdom
Would the sea bed be nationalised by a Scottish government?
Click to expand...

Its owned by the queen. And the queen herself takes a cut from it. Independent Scotland will keep the queen as head of state, like the rest of the commenwealth.
Click to expand...

Thats the one part of this I really dont understand

Why would the Scots want to keep an English Royal Family ??

As Ive stated on here many time, I cant stand Royalty or anything to do with privilege like the so called landed gentry anfd theyre swathes of Britain

Is Scotland votes yes, to my mind they must take the 80,000 acres of Balmoral and open it up for the Scottish people, it is after all Scotland and at the moment if a Scot sets foot on the place he will be arrested. Wrong Wrong Wrong surely.
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
Does anyone know what happens if the voting is tied?
Click to expand...

A shortbread baking competition hosted and judged by Nick Cairn and shown on more 4
 
My wife is a sweaty and it's been interesting talking to her family back in the very north of Scotland about it. The majority of her family are very much in the "Better Together" camp, her mother claims to be unsure but she is very anti-England and will no doubt vote yes.

I don't think either side has put forward a very convincing argument. The No campaign seem to be using scare tactics and have all of a sudden started looking very needy.

Salmond on the other hand is an arse and is promising the Scottish people things he can't deliver. I firmly believe the Scottish people know this and there is not even a slight chance that he'd win any general election should they become independent.

If I was Scottish my head would be telling me we should maintain the status quo and stay in the Union as it's safer, but my heart would be saying that this is a chance we'll never have again and that come what may, Scotland will be it's own nation.

For what it's worth, from this English man on the other side of world, I hope you vote Yes and good luck to you.
 
mcmanus said:
If the jocks do decide to fuck us off are we then allowed to take the piss out of them more?
Click to expand...

Hopefully we will have rounded em all up and England, Wales and Northern Ireland will be a "Scots free zone" So there will be no-one left to take the piss out of.

However there's no chance that normal middle of the road Scots are going to vote yes imo.

We'll be stuck with em for another 350 years or whatever it is!!!!lol
 
denislawsbackheel said:
hgblue said:
Why the hell should the rest of the UK allow a foreign country to use the same currency?
Click to expand...

Any country can use any freely tradable currency.
Hence Zimbabwe use the US dollar.
Click to expand...

Yes but Zimbabwe are unique aren't they.

They are run by a basket case of an individual, there existence is due to trying to overthrow a colonial power, there population would rather get high or drunk than work.

I mean where are you gonna get circumstances like that ever again
 
Zimbabwe is not unique. Any country can use another country's currency, but they lose control of their own ability to print it when they want to! There are SIX countries that officially use it, with the USA and Zimbabwe being only two of them....and that doesn't even count the US territories that use it and all the other countries where it is an unofficial currency that is freely usable.
 
ChicagoBlue said:
Zimbabwe is not unique. Any country can use another country's currency, but they lose control of their own ability to print it when they want to! There are SIX countries that officially use it, with the USA and Zimbabwe being only two of them....and that doesn't even count the US territories that use it and all the other countries where it is an unofficial currency that is freely usable.
Click to expand...

I'm sure your right. However my post was humerous not serious
 
TTTCITYBHOY said:
SWP's back said:
Piss off Scotland
Click to expand...

Good input into the thread,fukn not.
I'm not getting involved in the yes/no shit.
But some of the anti Scots posts on here are a fukn disgrace.
Let them fuk off,wasters,scroungers.
Hadrians wall,junkies,gingers blah blah fukn blah.
It's actually 2014 up here as well you know.
We have electricity,wear trousers not kilts,apart from the fukn. "Tartan army"...sad cunts. :)
We're only 100 miles from Manchester ffs.
Get a grip some of you eh.
Click to expand...
Yep, as I say, piss off Scotland.

Full of moaning twats taking up all the media coverage, especially Salmond.
 
stony said:
Mikeyc1986 said:
Taxes we'll save?? Care to explain? All of scotlands taxes go to westminster who then decide to take a chunk of it and give us crumbs back. Scotland will keep 90% of oil reserves and keep all our own taxes. Oh and the uk will need to find another £4bn to maintain trident.

Scotland are a burden eh? Enjoy ukip and tories for the next 100 years
Click to expand...

Your oil is worth £6 Billion a year. Your financial industry who have said to a man that they will fuck off to London as soon you get independence is worth £8 billion a year and employs 7% of the workforce.

At least the £6 billion in oil money will be able to pay for the benefits of all those who will be made unemployed.
Click to expand...


Nope....they will only relocate their head office which can , in some cases like Boots the Chemists who relocated their head office to Guernsey (or Jersey) simply be a small office and a desk and a PO address. The Financial Institutions won't (and probably couldn't in the case of RBS) afford to make all those people redundant, lose all the expertise and have to buy new office premises in the South
 
. The ''yes'' campaign offers the chance to be free of the black hole of westminster. Cameron begging for a 'no' vote for the sake of 'unity' is hard to take seriously, the leader of a party whose policies have divided the country like never before is saddled with that , no matter how much hand-wringing and grovelling he does.
The Labour party did sweet fa to address the problem of over-centralisation, they abandoned the principles on which the party was formed and became just another bunch of politicians with their snouts in the trough, so Brown and his plea for the no vote is predictable but not worth a carrot.
The 'no' campaign seems to grow more hysterical every passing day, even more than in an election campaign, with speculation presented as facts, in lurid head-lines in the press and on t.v. Personal attacks on Salmond and his staff follow the US model of throwing shit and hope enough sticks, innuendo and smokescreens masking the
lack of solid evidence. The desperate promises of '' give us another chance, we've reformed'' are about as believable as an MP's expenses claim.
The level of anti-Scottish rhetoric on BM is quite intense, but then tribalism has never gone away, if Wales was
voting on devolution no doubt the same bigotry would be expressed in similar fashion.
The only thing that is certain, is that the 'no' campaigners are following the usual practise of ''what's in it for
me'' and pretending to care about the Scottish people is a transparent lie.
 
bellbuzzer said:
. The ''yes'' campaign offers the chance to be free of the black hole of westminster. Cameron begging for a 'no' vote for the sake of 'unity' is hard to take seriously, the leader of a party whose policies have divided the country like never before is saddled with that , no matter how much hand-wringing and grovelling he does.
The Labour party did sweet fa to address the problem of over-centralisation, they abandoned the principles on which the party was formed and became just another bunch of politicians with their snouts in the trough, so Brown and his plea for the no vote is predictable but not worth a carrot.
The 'no' campaign seems to grow more hysterical every passing day, even more than in an election campaign, with speculation presented as facts, in lurid head-lines in the press and on t.v. Personal attacks on Salmond and his staff follow the US model of throwing shit and hope enough sticks, innuendo and smokescreens masking the
lack of solid evidence. The desperate promises of '' give us another chance, we've reformed'' are about as believable as an MP's expenses claim.
The level of anti-Scottish rhetoric on BM is quite intense, but then tribalism has never gone away, if Wales was
voting on devolution no doubt the same bigotry would be expressed in similar fashion.
The only thing that is certain, is that the 'no' campaigners are following the usual practise of ''what's in it for
me'' and pretending to care about the Scottish people is a transparent lie.
Click to expand...

Like the Scottish parliament? Labour perhaps underestimated that this would not be enough for Scotland and Cameron should have put the devomax option on the referendum instead of being sure that the yes campaign would die a death, this should have been beyond political posturing and a genuine referendum on what the Scottish people want. Instead you've got a yes campaign who didn't expect to have a chance and sp didn't come up with any real policy which has left them making it up as they go along - and it shows - and a no campaign who are scrambling to offer what should have been on the ballot paper in the first place.

There is no more anti Scottish rhetoric as anti English in this debate, a forum populated by majority English people will likely show a greater level of anti Scottish sentiment, your point on the matter seems somewhat designed to create trouble.
 
bellbuzzer said:
. The ''yes'' campaign offers the chance to be free of the black hole of westminster. Cameron begging for a 'no' vote for the sake of 'unity' is hard to take seriously, the leader of a party whose policies have divided the country like never before is saddled with that , no matter how much hand-wringing and grovelling he does.
The Labour party did sweet fa to address the problem of over-centralisation, they abandoned the principles on which the party was formed and became just another bunch of politicians with their snouts in the trough, so Brown and his plea for the no vote is predictable but not worth a carrot.
The 'no' campaign seems to grow more hysterical every passing day, even more than in an election campaign, with speculation presented as facts, in lurid head-lines in the press and on t.v. Personal attacks on Salmond and his staff follow the US model of throwing shit and hope enough sticks, innuendo and smokescreens masking the
lack of solid evidence. The desperate promises of '' give us another chance, we've reformed'' are about as believable as an MP's expenses claim.
The level of anti-Scottish rhetoric on BM is quite intense, but then tribalism has never gone away, if Wales was
voting on devolution no doubt the same bigotry would be expressed in similar fashion.
The only thing that is certain, is that the 'no' campaigners are following the usual practise of ''what's in it for
me'' and pretending to care about the Scottish people is a transparent lie.
Click to expand...

Really? I think there have been many valid points raised on the issue.

If a Scotsman hates the English so much he wants to vote for independence - that's fine, I can understand it - however for long periods of this campaign it has appeared that it was a foregone conclusion the No vote would win, and so the unpopular Westminster leaders (and they are unpopular all over the country, not just in the heads of the Scots) decided to stay out of it - why risk causing a drop in the polls due to them being a bunch of t**ts..

As soon as polls suggested it wasn't going to be straightforward, the politicians and businesses have had to react, because their careers and livelihoods are suddenly "at-risk". They have realized, possibly too late, that changes will affect them and they need to consider what to do in the event of a Yes vote. This affects everyone else in the UK which is why it has suddenly become headline news south of the border. However the Yes campaign are making some key promises (EU membership, currency) and exaggerations (oil reserves) that INDEPENDENT analysts are saying cannot be confirmed as definite. The No campaign are simply pointing this out, but are being accused of "scaremongering" which is what politicians do when they cannot produce a counter-argument.

Personally I don't care which way you go, but if you do become a separate country, whilst I believe there will be a period of support from the rest of the union, there will be a desire to see ties split as quickly as possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top