Scottish Independence Referendum 2

[maryhilldon]

23 minutes ago, BrianFaePerth said:

Nothing to do with the EU.

 

I know,  they're not in the EU,  they're EEA countries. That was my point.  Couldn't Scotland do similar? 

[BrianFaePerth]

4 minutes ago, maryhilldon said:

I know,  they're not in the EU,  they're EEA countries. That was my point.  Couldn't Scotland do similar? 

Nope. Without oil, Norway was poor, one of the poorest countries in Europe. Their whole standard of living is based on it.  If Scotland could control all the oil in its waters (LOL) and didn’t mismanage it, and could go back in time, then maybe.

 

[alscotoz]

Yeah looks like that ship has sailed and is long over the horizon

[maryhilldon]

26 minutes ago, BrianFaePerth said:

Nope. Without oil, Norway was poor, one of the poorest countries in Europe. Their whole standard of living is based on it.  If Scotland could control all the oil in its waters (LOL) and didn’t mismanage it, and could go back in time, then maybe.

 

Scotland and Norway do have oil though, why you harking back to the 50s?  Why couldn't Scotland have a similar setup to Norway?  That's like saying if Saudi Arabia didn't have oil it would still be a desert wasteland. 

[BrianFaePerth]

7 minutes ago, maryhilldon said:

Scotland and Norway do have oil though, why you harking back to the 50s?  Why couldn't Scotland have a similar setup to Norway?  That's like saying if Saudi Arabia didn't have oil it would still be a desert wasteland. 

Saudi would be a desert wasteland without oil.

Scotland has oil but Westminster controls it. Even if Scotland had full control of it tomorrow, oil is slowly but surely on its way out. They would never build the 50 years of benefits from it that Norway has.

Plus, Scotland would fuck it all up somehow.

[maryhilldon]

7 minutes ago, BrianFaePerth said:

 

Scotland has oil but Westminster controls it. 

Aye, exactly.  Look at the thread title.  What was your point again? 

[BrianFaePerth]

Answering your ridiculous question. Job done.

[maryhilldon]

13 minutes ago, BrianFaePerth said:

 

Plus, Scotland would fuck it all up somehow.

So you're suggesting Scots are uniquely too stupid to manage their own affairs?  Like a mongo kid that isn't allowed to spend his pocket money without an adult being present. 

[maryhilldon]

6 minutes ago, BrianFaePerth said:

Answering your ridiculous question. Job done.

What was my ridiculous question? 

[maryhilldon]

2 minutes ago, rocket_scientist said:

 

I think what he meant by "ridiculous" was the fact that you didn't appreciate the historic nature of the benefits already spent. Independence for Scotland will not be oil-reliant. As Alscotoz says, that ship is a long way gone. 

I realise we've missed the boat in regards to oil revenue (unlike Norway, who have a £trillion pound oil fund).  I never said we'd be reliant on it.  We were discussing EU membership and currency.  Sweden is in the EU but doesn't use the Euro,  Iceland is an EEC country that doesn't use the Euro,  neither country relies on oil but manages just fine.  

[maryhilldon]

1 minute ago, rocket_scientist said:

This was your "ridiculous question", ridiculous for the reasons I gave. 

There were 2 questions there,  can you narrow it down? 

[maryhilldon]

2 minutes ago, rocket_scientist said:

What are you asking now? What do you not understand?

I took you for a pro-indie supporter RS?  Are you just playing devil's advocate? 

[maryhilldon]

4 minutes ago, rocket_scientist said:

Definitely pro independence. Just pointing out that had we done it sooner, we would've been in a better place. Of course Saudi was built on oil. The new Scotland won't be but I have belief enough in our people that we would be successful despite having been raped by the English for over 300 years and particularly in the last 50 over the oil. 

Absolutely. Plenty of countries in Europe with less natural resources than us (oil, fishing, tourism, renewables) do just fine. Fucking pathetic to argue we couldn't thrive on our own eventually. 

[BrianFaePerth]

1 hour ago, maryhilldon said:

So you're suggesting Scots are uniquely too stupid to manage their own affairs?  Like a mongo kid that isn't allowed to spend his pocket money without an adult being present. 

Please, special needs is the correct term nowadays.

[maryhilldon]

11 minutes ago, BrianFaePerth said:

Please, special needs is the correct term nowadays.

I retract it,  it's not nice. 

[caledonia]

6 hours ago, Clydeside_Sheep said:

Check out this article by Jill Stephenson, a Professor emeritus at Edinburgh Uni:

(Its a subscription site but you can get some articles for free)

 

Jill Stevenson is one of the biggest zoomers on twitter

member of the green ink gang ( writing to papers with snpbad daily)

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13415738.outrage-as-one-of-scotlands-top-female-academics-called-new-snp-mp-mhairi-black-a-slut/

[CraigHill]

1 hour ago, caledonia said:

Jill Stevenson is one of the biggest zoomers on twitter

member of the green ink gang ( writing to papers with snpbad daily)

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13415738.outrage-as-one-of-scotlands-top-female-academics-called-new-snp-mp-mhairi-black-a-slut/

Is she a slut?

[Simply Red]

4 hours ago, rocket_scientist said:

Definitely pro independence. Just pointing out that had we done it sooner, we would've been in a better place. Of course Saudi was built on oil. The new Scotland won't be but I have belief enough in our people that we would be successful despite having been raped by the English for over 300 years and particularly in the last 50 over the oil. 

^Agreed

[Clydeside_Sheep]

9 hours ago, maryhilldon said:

What about being an EEC country similar to Norway 

As others have said, being in the EEA means you pay to access EU markets and are essentially just a "rule taker" - you have no say in how laws are drafted and applied.

Thanks to Brexit, we now have the best thing possible - free access to EU markets without tarrifs, while being outside of EU law and regulatory orbit.

 

[Clydeside_Sheep]

6 hours ago, rocket_scientist said:

I have belief enough in our people that we would be successful despite having been raped by the English for over 300 years and particularly in the last 50 over the oil. 

What rubbish.

Remember the motivation on the Scots side for the union of crowns was seeing the move as a bail out for Scotland, after it had gone bankrupt due to the failure of the Darien scheme.  (This occurred when an independent Scotland sought to compete with bigger fish like England, France, Spain etc).

The UK ultimately translated into previously unimaginable wealth and opportunity for Scotland, thanks to the thundering success of the British Empire.

Yes, there is no oil fund, but that's because for decades we have enjoyed other things, including a comprehensive NHS and a hugely generous welfare system.  You can only spend / allocate the money once and it would be a hard sell to claim the NHS and welfare state have been a waste. (even if they could be managed much better).

Thanks to the Union, Scotland enjoys global prominence via the UKs permanent membership of the UN security council, permanent UN veto and G7 membership.  (Sturgeon recently tweeted pointing out that Rep Ireland was to get a shot of a temporary seat on the UN Security Council.  She breathlessly claimed this is what Scotland could emulate.  This is significantly below Scotland's current station, so no thanks.)

Thanks to the Union, Scotland spends ~£2,000 per head more than it could if independent.  (When asked how an independent Scotland would make up this gap - savage cuts, or big tax rises - separatists retreat into the nebulous waffle which they are famed for).

Thanks to the Union, Scotland enjoys 1000s of specialised jobs which also support local communities.  From ship-building and defence jobs on the upper Clyde, to the huge military bases at (eg) RN Faslane, RAF Lossiemouth and elsewhere.

None of this could credibly be portrayed as "being raped".

In every area, the separatist dream amounts to "let's throw away the fish supper, so we can have a couple of chips".

Politicians themselves are the only real beneficiaries, with Nicola Sturgeon cavorting around Europe playing at being the big leader, and Alyn Smith eagerly returning to the glory holes of Brussels.

 

[Clydeside_Sheep]

4 hours ago, caledonia said:

Jill Stevenson is one of the biggest zoomers on twitter

member of the green ink gang ( writing to papers with snpbad daily)

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13415738.outrage-as-one-of-scotlands-top-female-academics-called-new-snp-mp-mhairi-black-a-slut/

So, the state of Scottish education doesn't matter, because she was rude about Mhairi Black? (who is pretty obnoxious, to be fair).

[Bluto10]

indy - lol

banging on about indy while your life passes you by - megalol

[NEM]

5 hours ago, CraigHill said:

Is she a slut?

Unlikely - have you seen that state of her? ?

[BrianFaePerth]

Scotland LOL

Pathetic

[alscotoz]

22 hours ago, BrianFaePerth said:

Saudi would be a desert wasteland without oil.

Scotland has oil but Westminster controls it. Even if Scotland had full control of it tomorrow, oil is slowly but surely on its way out. They would never build the 50 years of benefits from it that Norway has.

Plus, Scotland would fuck it all up somehow.

Agree with second paragraph, not necessarily last sentence.

[BrianFaePerth]

We are talking about the same Scotland whose budget was going to be based on $115/barrel if they got independence. Right before the price went down to $30/barrel.

[Parklife]

5 hours ago, BrianFaePerth said:

We are talking about the same Scotland whose budget was going to be based on $115/barrel if they got independence. Right before the price went down to $30/barrel.

So it's have been good to have managed oil revenues well over the past 40 years and have a fund that could cover fluctuations in the oil price, wouldn't it? 

It'd also be good to be using current oil revenues to invest heavily in the renewables sector and ensure we're at the forefront of that sector. Which, given our geographical advantages, we definitely should be. 

I find the desperation from folk like you ("Scotland would fuck it all up somehow") to slag off Scotland utterly bizarre. People who've been browbeaten in to thinking their countrymen are somehow less capable than those in every other country on earth. 

 

[Dynamo]

End of the day the economy will expand and contract forever. Basing a decision on today's oil price or industry is short sighted. Having the right people in charge will help a country, wherever you are in the world. 

For me it boils down to should the people in Scotland make decisions for Scotland and is that for the best for the country? Yes I think it is. Why would anyone actively promote being subservient to somewhere else? 

Why are English Unionists so keen to keep Scotland though? Always find it remarkable how there's never a logical reason to keep such an apparent drain on resources. 

I'm not an active SNP fan at all. They're simply a vehicle for independence. 

The best thing for independence would be a Labour and Conservative party for Indy, totally separate from their Westminster handlers. 

[Parklife]

 

2 minutes ago, Dynamo said:

The best thing for independence would be a Labour and Conservative party for Indy, totally separate from their Westminster handlers. 

I think a softening of their stance on Indy by Scottish Labour would be a huge vote winner for them too. 

[BrianFaePerth]

34 minutes ago, Parklife said:

So it's have been good to have managed oil revenues well over the past 40 years and have a fund that could cover fluctuations in the oil price, wouldn't it? 

It'd also be good to be using current oil revenues to invest heavily in the renewables sector and ensure we're at the forefront of that sector. Which, given our geographical advantages, we definitely should be. 

I find the desperation from folk like you ("Scotland would fuck it all up somehow") to slag off Scotland utterly bizarre. People who've been browbeaten in to thinking their countrymen are somehow less capable than those in every other country on earth. 

 

Sure it would be nice to have a fund to cover fluctuations, but Scotland wouldn’t have and taxes would have had to be raised. Simple economics. No more blaming Westminster.