Deputy Leader of UK calls Scots Extremists

reply to post by reficul


Braveheart was a Hollywood film and has little basis in historical truth.

Bannockburn?

What about Culloden?

But that's the past.
Enough of nonsense like that and it's typical of someone who has probably never even met a genuine Scotsman let alone been there.

I live and interact on a daily basis with Scots people and as a general rule of thumb they are fantastic people.
I visit Scotland on a regular basis and have many very close Scottish friends.
Yes, there are problems with The Union which need addressing but complete dissolution of it is NOT the answer and the last thing we need is people who know absolutely nothing about the relationship spouting utter and complete bollocks and trying to stir things up.

reply to post by jrmcleod


As ignorant as that english guy was for saying what he did, you are equaly as ignorant for thinking that scotland owns all the oil!

please reference me one scottish owned company that produces the oil.

These are not true facts and are the kind of crap the snp have been using for years to try and dupe people into voting for them for independence .

Thinking about this with my ATS provided tin foil hat, Im starting to think that the breaking up of the union would weaken this island enough to allow the EU to swallow us all wholesale.

Maybe this whole debarcle is designed to do just that?

In the end of the day this Island does not have political borders, they are a man made contrivance put in place by an elite few in order for them to maintain control and power.

Screw that!

We are ONE island and one people with thousands of years of shared history. We have intermarried, had children together, fought for each other and worked together all of this time.

Yet the few power mongers still wish to keep us apart using old issues which were made by those self same people in the first place to keep themselves in plush houses.

Those people are not for you or me othis island but out for themselves!

Screw them.

We are a good team together.

I would like to keep it that way.

On top of that, this union or a referundum on it should not be confined to Scotland as we all are a part of it and not just the Scottish!

reply to post by boaby_phet


None of these companies are 'Scottish' or 'English' in the traditional sense. They are owned by shareholders from all round the world who represent NONE of our interests.

They look in to any way in avoiding paying tax and adhering to expensive safety procedures.

Originally posted by jrmcleod
People forget that even though you are told we Scots are subsidised and get better treatment, if it werent for the Union, and Scotland was independent already, the amount of money England would NOT have is far more than we have been subsidised because not only the oil revenue but the business generated through it. That stretches into almost every industry. North Sea oil gave the UK a name as one of the best and most developed countries in the world. It has given them big financial security and power, had an independent Scotland been declared 100 years ago...England would be a dot on the global scale.

Don't hit the hand that feeds you...keep believing that Scotland is subsidised if it makes you feel better but the stark truth is the complete opposite when you remove every penny thats ever been generated in the UK through Oil in the North Sea, Scotland has subsidised England.

edit on 9/1/12 by jrmcleod because: (no reason given)

Scotland is subsidised. The National Office for Statistics can back this up. It is a total joke to think England would be worse off than Scotland should independence happen. Indeed, the notion of independence is currently STOPPING firms from investing in Scotland.

Like i said originally, i love the Union. However, in an move to put this issue to bed once and for all, i genuinely hope you get independence. When it goes wrong, we will welcome you back and we might not even make you say sorry!

I like being part of the union, independence would hurt both Scotland and England...undeniably it would hit Scotland harder though, since SE England is really where all the money in Britain lies, living standards would drop considerably and going in to this century as a fractured little Island with massive economies emerging is not a good idea. The most comical part of Alex Salmond and his independence mantra though, is that he is a big supporter of the EU and would have Scotland join as an independent state

I do think many changes need to be made, Scottish ministers not voting at Westminster on purely English matters, budgets and taxes for both countries need to be fairer etc But breaking the union is not a good idea at all. If Alex gave a damn about Scotland he would start rebuilding our industries.

The truth is were all the same, we just have ancient miseries to blame for our current state of affairs, the UK is much the same where ever you go, Yorkshire hate Lancashire because of the war of the roses, The Welsh hate the English, the Scottish hate the English, yet funnily enough it was Welsh soldiers that helped the English conquer Scotland

It is all hate born centuries ago by people we don't know and not even in our families history any more, how many can trace their family back to Culloden? Yet we are still encouraged to hate over it.

It is human nature to look for the cause of our current predicament, and it is used by others to further their particular agenda, just as the NF blame black people for every ill within the UK, the EDL blame Muslims, the truth is governments cause the problem and then send us on a merry-go-round of blame the other guy, media outlets are used to reinforce the message, contrary to propaganda, Scotland leaving the Union would not be a calamity for either country, neither would staying in the Union, it is just smoke and mirrors to keep us divided and stop us focusing on what the real issues in life are

Originally posted by jrmcleod
Thats presuming Scotland were in the same state as England if we were independent. You cant assume to think RBS and HBOS would fail in a circumstance that is pure speculation.

Every bank in the world was exposed to some degree to the calamity that was the 2007/2008 credit crunch, so it is foolish to assume they wouldn't be in the "same state". Scotland simply could not have afforded to bail out those Banks. The GDP of Scotland in 2009 was a mere £143 Billion, nowhere near large enough to absorb the losses of RBS and HBOS or save them from collapse.

reply to post by jrmcleod


Like I said, I've done this argument to death over the years with anti-English scots (some in my family too!) and the figures simply do not bare this out.

Go ahead and look up the figures for yourself. We bailed you guys out in 1707 and English tax money has flowed North for generations. North Sea oil has only been around since the 1970's and, apart from not all being Scottish, has not generated anywhere near the amount of money you think it has.

Go ahead, tally up the entire money generated from Scotland as an entity, including corp and income taxes, then see how much Scotland spends.

All this fanciful nonsense that Scotland would be a powerhouse and England would dwindle is simply that, nonsense. Both are stronger together, but alone England is in a far better position to survive that Scotland ever will be. Alex Salmond and the SNP will destroy Scotland if independance is gained, mark my words.

Hate the EU now? Just you wait. They will eat you for breakfast.

And, there is no guarantee Scotland would even be in the EU (EU Comissioner has said as much) as it is the UK which holds the membership. Now, this might sound quite nice, "freedom" from England and the EU in one fell swoop? I think you'll find the world a harsh place indeed.

Originally posted by boaby_phet
reply to post by jrmcleod

 

As ignorant as that english guy was for saying what he did, you are equaly as ignorant for thinking that scotland owns all the oil!

I take offence at that. I have, over the years, taken the time to strip out the nationalist furvour and get to the truth of the matter and it is simple arithmetic. I'd hardly call my position an "ignorant" one, as that would imply I am speaking bollocks. Prove me wrong! If you weant to start arguing facts and figures, I am quite happy with that as, from previous experience on this topic, I am pretty clued up.

There's definitely much more oil & gas out there:

New Licences for North Sea Oil Exploration

And the article says:

Energy Minister Charles Hendry said: "Overall within the UK context around 2% of our GDP comes from the oil and gas sector, but that's massively greater in Scotland.

2% is HUGE! Enough money to keep us going for a while.

Then there's the whisky, with record sales over £3 billion in 2011. Got to be a good bit of tax from that. If we could control the tax ourselves on alcohol exports there's a lot more to be made there.

Plus leading the world in renewable energy (you won't find a country in the world with more wind and water to spare!) and the engineering jobs/industries that come with that.

Me, i'd be confident we'd survive. There's plenty of countries with less population that do just fine thank you. My only worry is we'd leave the union only to be swallowed by the EU. But we're getting swallowed by them as part of the union anyway, so might as well go down at least being our OWN country and making our OWN decisions.

It's not like they would suddenly put up a border or anything. It would be just like Northern Ireland and Republic of Ireland.

Maybe one day i'll be watching Scotland losing in the Olympics as an independant nation. And i'll watch us lose with a smile on my face (as we're used to with fitba ).

reply to post by alldaylong


Yes they had a global empire, but that global empire was failing many years before oil was discovered.

My point is, if Scotland was independent in say 1746 (Jacobite Rebellion), the UK empire would still have failed when it did, if it was even to have come into existence with an independent Scotland. England wouldn't have made the oil discoveries. Scotland would have.

Without Scotland as part of the UK, most of the success of the UK financially in the last 60 years or so would have been Scotlands, not Englands. The discovery of oil in the UK allowed the UK to "boom" and the multi different industries and vast amounts of wealth brought in were because of oil discovered in SCOTTISH waters.

England owes Scotland...not the other way around

EPIC FAIL...

Originally posted by TheUnusualSuspect
An independent Scotland is a terrible idea. It would never work. And please, none of the "There's the North Sea oil and gas" rhetoric, because Scotland would go the way of Greece, fact! And one more thing, why would anyone want to break up our country?
A union that works, because in truth, we are all the same, with our history and culture linked together, and genetically the same, because we're the same people, pretty much.
Hell, the rest of Ireland should still be part of the UK. Scotland to leave the union, then join another union? lol it makes no sense.
Yes, The Royal family and The City of London control needs to be done away with, but to break the country up and have one part(Scotland) go and join another political union, is madness.

Why would Scotland go the way of Greece? Greece went t*ts up due to incredible overspending, government corruption and extremely lax tax collection. Stating your opinion does not make it "fact".

reply to post by Nammu


This is also forgetting that we have one of the worlds best populations for Ship Building. An industry that died that would surely be rejuvenated.

Scotland would manege perfectly fine, England would lose out...that's why Mr Cameron and his side-kick don't want Scotland to depart and they'll do almost anything to prevent it.

reply to post by stumason


Yes maybe you have done this argument but you are unable to tell what would have happened in a different time line. It is utter speculation, nothing more.

If Scotland WERE independent at the turn of the centuary, how do you know we wouldnt have incorporated out own competition laws to prevent companies getting to this size.

Your argument is also based on Scotland only turning around X billions today, but if we were independent for the last 100 years, our coffers would be far richer than many other countries, including Englands.

Its all speculation but until independence is put up for referendum, i will support it because i want a chance at living in MY country with the opportunity to shape it. I do not want to be part of the War machine and control machine that is No10...maybe you do...i dont and many other Scots dont

reply to post by jrmcleod


Yeah there was a reason why the Tories screwed us over in the Maggie years, destroyed our major ship building, coal mining and steel industries (and done the same to Northern England as well), to keep us dependant on London.

Just found this fact on Wiki as well:

Today, Scotland produces 28% of Europe’s PCs; more than seven per cent of the world’s PCs; and 29% of Europe’s notebooks

Wow! Didn't know that.

If only we could sort the midges out and increase tourism

Originally posted by jrmcleod
reply to post by Nammu

 

This is also forgetting that we have one of the worlds best populations for Ship Building. An industry that died that would surely be rejuvenated.

Scotland would manege perfectly fine, England would lose out...that's why Mr Cameron and his side-kick don't want Scotland to depart and they'll do almost anything to prevent it.

The high labour costs would make Scottish Shipyards uneconomic. Thats how they lost business in the first place.
I take you you know that David Cameron's father Donald Cameron is a Scot?

Originally posted by jrmcleod
reply to post by alldaylong

 

Yes they had a global empire, but that global empire was failing many years before oil was discovered.

My point is, if Scotland was independent in say 1746 (Jacobite Rebellion), the UK empire would still have failed when it did, if it was even to have come into existence with an independent Scotland. England wouldn't have made the oil discoveries. Scotland would have.

Without Scotland as part of the UK, most of the success of the UK financially in the last 60 years or so would have been Scotlands, not Englands. The discovery of oil in the UK allowed the UK to "boom" and the multi different industries and vast amounts of wealth brought in were because of oil discovered in SCOTTISH waters.

England owes Scotland...not the other way around

EPIC FAIL...

That would make this entire thread obsolete! The Jacobite Rebellion was effectively sponsored by the Tories. If it had succeeded, Scotland would still love the Tories today and there wouldn't be talk of secession.

reply to post by jrmcleod


Ship building?

How on earth are you going to do that?

Who is going to finance it?
Where is the skill base?

Heavy engineering in Scotland is dead and buried, exactly the same as N.E. England.
And it was done deliberately to ensure we had no power or influence over London.

Who is going to fund any future developments in the North Sea?
And as North Sea oil runs out The Falklands fields will come on line.
Scotland will get zip from that.

The EU cares nothng for Scottish culture, heritage or well being and is moving rapidly towards full Union with Brussels dictating almost every aspect of government. Salmon has committed to full participation in the EU.
The EU will devour Scotland.
Scotland will become nothing but a distant memory in history books - and that will be the biggest betrayal of Scotland there has ever been.

Originally posted by alldaylong

Originally posted by jrmcleod
reply to post by Nammu

 

This is also forgetting that we have one of the worlds best populations for Ship Building. An industry that died that would surely be rejuvenated.

Scotland would manege perfectly fine, England would lose out...that's why Mr Cameron and his side-kick don't want Scotland to depart and they'll do almost anything to prevent it.

The high labour costs would make Scottish Shipyards uneconomic. Thats how they lost business in the first place.
I take you you know that David Cameron's father Donald Cameron is a Scot?

Just because your a scot, doesnt mean you want independence....

Yes there were high labour costs and would be today but other incentives would be used...come on, you cant genuinely believe that ALL industry goes to poorly paid people...

reply to post by jrmcleod


Still dancing around the issue of maritime boundaries, I see...

FACT: Depending on which method is used to delineate a Scottish/English maritime border, up to 50% of proven fields would reside within English waters. Scotland wouldn't automatically get every field and control of the North Sea, there is such a thing as a border you know.