What the UK does not want Scotland to know about independance

page: 1
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 12:05 PM
link   
I’ve heard too many ill-informed people grasping to some BS political nonsense spouted by the mainstream media so let me spell it out for you.

Scotland is not a nation of scroungers sucking on the subsidy teet of the UK as they would like you to believe. Scotland has the potential to be one of the richest countries in the world and in fact is heavily subsidizing the UK and has been since the 70's. The rest of the UK will be loose out heavily and they (politicians) know it.

Read on

www.alba.org.uk...

en.wikipedia.org...

I’m not anti-England (far from it) but this whole issue of independence is turing in to a circus with name calling on both sides and I’m surprised at how much is hidden from public knowledge. It is very difficult to separate fact from fiction (or political spin) but at the end of the day I support whatever decision is best for Scotland.

Any further info is appreciated.

I though I would add this also though I take no credit for the content as its just a cut and paste job

THE PROS AND CONS
Independence for Scotland and a chance to break free of centralised government in London. For example, government spending in the UK is directly proportional to the distance from London. London receives by far and away the greatest proportion of public spending (19% of the overall total) whereas Scotland, being furthest away, receives very little (less than 4% of the overall total). Proportionally London should receive 11% and Scotland 9%. London receives more subsidies for transport in one year than Scotland does in 100 years.

Scottish could follow Ireland's example and cut taxes, especially business taxes and so promote it's own economic growth. The UK government effectively prevents this by subsidising companies that wish to set up in the south-east and penalising those that want to set up in Scotland.

Scotland would have a lesser role to play in Europe if it were to gain independence. As it stands it is well represented through it's alliance with the rest of the UK, as an independent country it's representation would be diminished.

It would be expensive for Scotland and the remainder of the UK if independence were to happen as each country would have to develop it's own strategies and policies in areas which are currently shared - such as defence and security.

Relations between England and Scotland are deteriorating, primarily due to the unfavourable treatment Scotland receives from the London based Government.

Scotland is partially independent and already has it's own parliament, laws, healthcare, legal system, education system etc. In such areas Scotland is doing very well, especially in education which since becoming independent from England has become one of the best in the world (1st, 2nd or 6th best depending how you measure it). In some respects Scotland has become a victim of it's own success, education is not only flourishing but is free of charge at all levels. One drawback has been an influx of English students which is stretching resources and is a drain on the Scottish economy.

As an independent country Scotland would have it's own voice in UN, NATO and other organisations.

Scotland and England formed the Union 300 years ago and by and large this has been a successful union with both countries benefiting. Devolution (partial independence) is in it's early stages and it's too soon to judge how successful it will be. Full independence may be a step too far until the success of devolution has been established.

London has established itself in the global markets and represents the whole of the UK. As an independent nation Scotland would have to start from scratch in many areas and certainly in the short term, will lose global trade.

If Scotland became independent it would be comparable to other small, primarily rural countries such as Ireland, Iceland and Norway all of which are successful and if Scotland replicated these successes it would do better being independent.

Financially there are pros and cons both ways. Under the current system Scotland raises about £27 billion in public funds but receives about £40 billion from the government and so is £13 billion a year better off in this respect. However, these are the visible areas of spending such as pensions, social security etc. In the invisible areas such as infrastructure, development, business, investment etc Scotland receives less than England so at the end of the day Scotland loses out by about £4 billion a year.

COULD IT HAPPEN?
The UK government is supposedly democratic and is elected to serve the wishes of the public. More and more it is becoming less democratic and takes many decisions against the wishes of the majority. If it truly were democratic then Scotland would already be independent as this is what the majority of Scots want and have done for many years (57% as opposed to 43%). Politically, the current administration would suffer if Scotland became independent.

WILL IT DESTROY THE UK?
Probably not (but see the part about oil). To some extent Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland already have some independence and this has benefited each country individually and the UK as a whole. Scotland gaining independence wouldn't mean it would sever all ties with England. It's not that it's going to become an island in it's own right and float off somewhere a long way from the rest of the UK.

The Scots and Irish and the Scots and Welsh have a strong and healthy relationship and have done for hundreds of years. These bonds are unlikely to be damaged by independence and if anything, they'll be strengthened as the countries will be in a better position to trade with each other without interference from Westminster (London government).

The relationship between England and Scotland is likely to remain strong just as it is with Canada and the US or France and Germany or any two neighbouring democratic countries.

WO GETS THE OIL AND GAS?
This is the big question. These reserves were discovered in the 1970's and pretty much all the UK's oil and gas reserves are in Scottish waters. Prior to the 1970's events in Scottish waters were of Scottish concern and when there were fishing disputes, territorial disputes, oil spills etc it was a case of it being in Scottish waters and therefore something for Scotland to deal with. Upon the discovery of oil and gas the UK government proclaimed Scottish waters to be British waters and for the oil and gas to be directly controlled by London.

This has caused the Scots a great deal of resentment and is one of the many ways they feel the English are plundering their country. Scotland also provides England with other basic commodities such as stone, timber, water and electricity. These are 'taken' from Scotland, if Scotland were independent these surpluses could be sold on the open market.

Known reserves of oil (excluding gas for which I don't know the figures) exceed 1.5 trillion dollars. If Scotland gained independence and were allowed to keep the gas and oil in it's waters it would become one of the richest countries in the world - comparable to the US having a quadrillion dollars of oil reserves.

It's estimated that the UK has 30 years of oil reserves remaining but if these reserves were only needed by a population of 5 million as opposed to 60 million then Scotland would have 360 years of reserves.

With so much oil it would be in a very powerful and strategic position in the world. The result would be that Scotland would be the powerful country in the former UK and that England would lose financially to the tune of about £80 billion a year, or to put it into context, each household would need to pay an additional £100 a week in taxes to make up the shortfall.

It seems extremely unlikely that any UK government would give up the oil and gas reserves, this is after all, what's been keeping the UK economy afloat for the last 3 decades. Without it the UK would have gone bankrupt a long time ago.
edit on 20-1-2012 by Scott495 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 12:09 PM
link   
Is it true Scotland might have to join the Euro?
Good luck with that I say..
edit on 20-1-2012 by starchild10 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 12:14 PM
link   
hi op

ive to much to say but il say this
i was a child in glasgow wen the docks were booming
then thatcher closed them
there was a lot of resentment



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by starchild10
 


Joining the Euro is not mandatory so I would imagine this point will be discussed in abundance during the run up to 2014



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 12:30 PM
link   
Scotland and England is the same tiny island. and we will be even smaller apart.I can understand Ireland wanting independence as it is a separate island.

I think it is all part of a plan though. England is planning on totally pulling out of the E.U to start from scratch and probably doesn't want to affect Scotland by doing so,plus England has a huge oil stash on the Falklands 60 billion barrels worth.which the argies are trying to sink their teeth into but it wont happen.the only downfall is that all our weaponry secrets are revealed to the scotts.they best not start selling them to china.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by SupersonicSerpent
 

LOL we would much rather have English neighbours. UK security would be handles same as you have with French so we would be working together anyway.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by starchild10
Is it true Scotland might have to join the Euro?
Good luck with that I say..
edit on 20-1-2012 by starchild10 because: (no reason given)


No it's not. We don't HAVE to and I don't think we will considering the state of the Euro at the moment, and I certainly don't think the Scottish government are that stupid to do such a thing.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 12:53 PM
link   
Tbh with all of the anti english statements from the jocks on these boards then quite frankly we too should have a referendum of whether we want you in the UK.. I gurantee that vote wouldbe a big f-off to the whiney old jocks for sure!



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 01:15 PM
link   
reply to post by EvanB
 

Actualy read my post m8. There is nothing anti English about it.

The reason England doesnt want a referendum on whether to boot Scotland out is also a very interesting topic and I beleive i have covered that very subject in my post. Do you know how why you dont already have one?
edit on 20-1-2012 by Scott495 because: (no reason given)
edit on 20-1-2012 by Scott495 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 01:23 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 01:31 PM
link   
reply to post by HallamFoe
 


I don't think your comments are helpful.

I am Scottish and live in England!

Scottish Independence is a very big mistake.

The last thing Scotland needs is an economy based on oil.

It's short term and volatile.

There are many other reasons, what about the Faslane Sub base, 1000's work there.

You all are Listening to Alex Salmond's nationalisitic propaganda. He hates England and is a self serving
nasty wee man.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by rigel4
 

True some feel this way but oil will allow Scotland to develop the need to no longer depend on oil. I think also there are other issues like changing taxes to encourage development, other exports and renewables. All in all from what i have gathered we would still be better off. It is however frustrating no one seems to know all the facts or is willing to share them with the rest of us.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 02:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Scott495

If Scotland became independent it would be comparable to other small, primarily rural countries such as Ireland, Iceland and Norway all of which are successful and if Scotland replicated these successes it would do better being independent.


I guess you've not been following the news in the past few years?

btw one of the websites you linked to includes in its name Alba. Which is the gaelic form of Albion. And refers primarily to England
Though it's nowadays used for the Scottish Highlands - which frankly have nothing in common and nothing to gain from being ruled by the sasennachs in Edinburgh



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 02:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Scott495
 



NIce read but i dont know how you can consider Ireland and Iceland a success in the present climate. And many of the Irish are not that keen on the scotish after what the scotish done in northern island.




. The result would be that Scotland would be the powerful country in the former UK


It would not England will remain far richer and the reason being that is contains a mega city that attracts a lot of international trade and it has the sqaure mile. The richest square mile on earth. That is were the UK gets its wealth from. Funnny the coroperation of london (is exempt from tax though...


It would in my eyes be a mistake for scotland to become independent from England. If scotland had left the UK 15 years ago it would be in the same state as Ireland now



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 02:24 PM
link   
Whatever the merits of Scotlands economic potential post UK, whatever the Scottish people want they can have. They just need to decide sooner rather than later. I am not sure you would find too many south of the border shedding a tear if the people decide to leave and at the same time if the people choose to be part of the UNION then I don't think you will see a huge reaction either. I think the people south of the border are quite agnostic on this.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by rigel4
reply to post by HallamFoe
 


I don't think your comments are helpful.

I am Scottish and live in England!

Scottish Independence is a very big mistake.

The last thing Scotland needs is an economy based on oil.

It's short term and volatile.

There are many other reasons, what about the Faslane Sub base, 1000's work there.

You all are Listening to Alex Salmond's nationalisitic propaganda. He hates England and is a self serving
nasty wee man.


What he said.

I'm also a scot living elsewhere in the UK. Scottish independence would be a disaster. The oil is finite and the easy stuff is all gone. I've no doubt following a romantic vote for 'freedom' there would be a great national party. Unfortunately the hangover would last decades.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 03:21 PM
link   
some good points here, keep em comming

Yes i suppose the cut and paste was from a somewhat older source regarding Ireland etc but all countries have their ups and downs and Ireland isnt bankrupt. Lets not forget we all learned lessons from the bankers (shame Ireland didnt have scottish oil to fall back on like London lol).

Interesting point to mention that part of London doesnt pay tax, I read that elswhere in these forums. Maybe we should follow suit and Edinbugh could enjoy the same freedom to encourage growth? The fact we cant decide this ourselves is what chokes Scotland and keeps London on top. Do you think thats fair or am I missing the point?



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 03:25 PM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 

Unfair to dictate tax laws to benefit one part of the country though, I think thats the meat and bones about an independant Scotland so we could do the same. This would have a negative impact on London unfortunatley as there would be competition finally.

I dont doubt England would still be a great country, its just the evidence so far points out that Scotland could also be. Dont forget we have a very established financial centre in Edinburgh also



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 03:29 PM
link   
I'm scottish

Live in scotland

Have lived all over the world.

Hate the independence movement.

Stronger together.

Will leave scotland if it becomes independent.

Think the movement is based on:

1. a romantic ideal
2. an unrealistic expectation of the future economy
3. a lack of understanding of Scotland's true position in the world economy.

Over and out.

Point made.



posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 03:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Scott495
Interesting point to mention that part of London doesnt pay tax,


Only those parts full of unemployed east Europeans claiming benefits - athough even in those places, a majority would be paying taxes.

Of course, if Scotland got independance and provided better benefits, they'd all move to Glasgow





new topics
top topics
 
11
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join