LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksI know, I like a wee dram now and then, but my point is there is a lot that would need to be reviewed that right now we just take for granted.Originally Posted by herulach
I know, I like a wee dram now and then, but my point is there is a lot that would need to be reviewed that right now we just take for granted.
I'm N. Irish but half my family are first gen immigrants to Scotland. Quite odd to think that they'll get the vote but someone born in Scotland won't. But then, what is fair? Shouldn't it be people who live there NOW? Or ethnically Scottish, whatever that means? Don't think it'll make a huge statistical difference though other than that a lot of the more educated progressive types are likely to have cleared off to sassenach country to find work.
Nearly as odd as my German wife doing jury duty here...
No, your wife lives here, and therefore should be on a jury. Trial by jury is about the person in the street deciding the fate of their peer.
Voting whether Scotland should leave the UK should be for all the UK to decide, and if limited to the Scots should be for all the Scots in the UK, not just those residing currently in Scotland. If people from Scotland have chosen to enjoy the freedom of movement within the UK that union entitles them to, they ought to be able to vote on a decision which would affect that freedom. Salmond won't extend the vote to them, as because you have pointed out, they are (probably, by virtue of their decision to leave) more likely to vote NO, and potentially better able to make a reasoned decision if the reason for leaving was due to high skill set seeking jobs that aren't in Scotland etc. This vote panders to sentimentalism and tribalism, some would say racialism. It is ill conceived and potentially harmful to the UK as a whole. To limit the vote to one small section of the UK is pathetic. The government, is however, taking the view that there are still enough rational people north of the border to shoot the thing down anyway, so as they'd say up there. Nae bother.
NB/ I'm an Englishman living in Scotland for over 9yrs.
My father in law is voting 'YES' - for the reasons mentioned, well, reason...FREEDOM!
My opinion? There are too many unknowns, too much that seems to be "we'll just wing it" and I don't believe for a second that the vote-buying measures taking place up here are in any way affordable for a 'new' country with no international sway.
I'd had conversations with people about this before at work. Consider the current state of things here like free prescriptions, free eye tests, promises of freezing the pension age etc
1) The vote comes out as YES - We have a great year or two after the split then "oops, sorry, we can't afford all this stuff so we're making you worse off than you were before, maybe those nice people below the border can lend us some money or maybe we can sign some document and they'll pay off all our debts"
2) The vote comes out as NO - Westminster slashes all our freebies to make it more fair across the UK, they know there is no fight left to win so can pretty much do whatever they want without the (current) fear of pushing people to vote YES.
We are then bombarded with cries of "oh we want to give you this free stuff but those naughty Englishmen are taking it away, you should have voted YES"
I think it'll come out as option 2, we'll then get lots of cuts, Salmond will blame Westminster, Westminster will shrug and mention we've had it pretty easy for a while so STFU. We all lose. To be fair that's better than option 1 IMO
I think that is exactly the outcome being played for. I would still want to see Scottish MP's being prevented from voting on English matters in parliament though.
Good read OP, kinda sussed it for myself, but interesting to see it laid out, the whole we'll spend almost no money on almost no people but it'll be just as good as the UK armed forces didn't ring true.
One thing that's been bugging through the last round of interviews etc on this; Salmond keeps talking like the new Scotland will have the negotiating power and international clout of the UK. Which it just won't, there's a big difference between being a nation of 60 million with the worlds 6th largest economy occupying a highly strategic position within Europe, possessing nukes, large expeditionary forces with state of the art weapons and a network of foreign territories to ensure deployment anywhere in the world within days and more military and economic alliances than I can count and being a nation of 5 million with ultimately a middling economy(decent per capita, but tiny population), on the periphery of Europe with only small defensive forces and realistically having to start from scratch diplomatically and no-one's going to give them anything for free they're going to be looking out for their own country's interests.
This stuff really matters, it affects what you dinner costs and whether the lights stay on. Salmond's yeah, fine, whatever attitude to it, could have disastrous consequences and even if done well they'll never be able to negotiate the same kind of terms the UK could, it's not a dig at Scotland it's just the reality of independence.
HalloweenJack (04-12-2013),ik9000 (04-12-2013)
and if Scotland dissolves the union how long before the legitimacy of the remaining UK to sit at the security council etc gets questioned? it could have some wider impact on the UK's standing too.
Even if it were just England going alone I think they could hold onto the security council seat, between being a fully paid up member of the "We can end the world" club, the Commonwealth, being America's best friend at the table, good old fashioned political inertia and of course a history of killing really quite a lot of people. That's enough to maintain the status quo barring something very dramatic. The rest of the UK as a whole being in an even better position of course.
I think independence would be a knock for the UK foreign policy wise, the PM will get a solid ribbing in the foreign press but ultimately something that will be forgotten in 2 weeks as most of the world has absolutely no idea the difference between England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, Great Britain, the British Isles and the United Kingdom. The brand will be protected to borrow a business term.
Last edited by chuckskull; 04-12-2013 at 05:50 AM.
The whole point of the fir st post , is that someone has sat down and put serious thought into the numbers - notjust the `ooh shiny toys` , but the ability to actually use them - 12 aircraft? great , so that's 4 for QRA , 2 for training ,2 being serviced, leaving 4 for `other duties`. not with standing the ability to actually have aircrew to fly them or groundcrew to make them fly.
same with the `ooooh shiny` type 23 frigates - ALL the contracts are with the UK MOD in Whitehall - so that means new contracts would have to be negotiated , not with a fleet of 100 aircraft , but with 12 and that's everything , from daily servicing to full overhall , to cleaning the hangers and fueling them. Same with the fig`s - the RN doesn't own its own tugs , so even pulling them into port would need a new contract!
same with training - nothing of that sort exists north of the border , so they would have to either build new (at a huge cost) or apply as a foreign country to get a place on the courses , and would have to pay , up against all the other countries (including the USA amoungst others) who do the same!
Last edited by HalloweenJack; 04-12-2013 at 06:34 PM.
Absolutely spot on, his party is solely to break up the union, their argument just seems to be Scotland's independence and they are making it up as they go along, the cretin himself just wants to be King. I for one will be voting to keep the Union, enough blood was spilled in the making of it. But I fear the hate for all things English(not I) from some of my fellow countrymen is a very dangerous voting incentive.
Agreed - they can't afford 'shiny'.
Realistically I suspect Scotland would militarily be better to follow their neighbour Iceland's model of no standing army, buying in airpower from NATO, and concentrating funds on small coastguard / police type vessels.
better tell that to the Scottish regiment(s) they want to keep!
It's funny that Scotland is getting a vote on this. Why not spin off wales? Ok, granted wales isn't a proper country like scotland, but it is a terrible drain on the UK.
Why should money from the productive parts of the UK go to wales over say Romania? From some data that was able to show Scotland had (one quater) higher employment than the uk:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/St...onomicActivity
It also shows the big divide between Wales and a proper nation. Can us English have a chance to vote them out? Hell we could afford free prescriptions!
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
The problem with that argument is where do you stop? What about Cumbria, or the north east, or cornwall? Hell what about some of the grottier parts of london?
fence of the M25. No, better, the Fortnum line. This was the distance from Fortnum & Mason that they wouldn't deliver too.
Obviously anything south of the River should just be a big park, and the east should be under curfew.
This is kind of my point about Scottish independance, its stupid, might as well draw the lines where you want them.
throw new ArgumentException (String, String, Exception)
Would they impose a curfew on my estate? I wish they would. They were running riot last night until about 5am. Grrrr
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote