Anger over Brexit sparks new grassroots drive for Scottish independence

[aright]

1 hour ago, Scutty said:

This Mac Donald nob ed is a Tory anyway . What makes you believe anything comes out of his mouth ? Hes only thinking of his funds in the Caymen islands .

How do you know he's a Tory? 

You, and I mean you, can tell by reading a list of his qualifications, published papers and work he probably is a know nothing?

What are your qualifications to sit in judgement on him?

 

https://www.gla.ac.uk/schools/business/staff/ronaldmacdonald/ 

[dabhand]

On ‎4‎/‎25‎/‎2019 at 1:13 PM, RuamRudy said:

The majority of Scots? How do you define them? I have posted this many times before, but the majority of people who were born in Scotland voted for independence in the 2014. The referendum failed due to the votes of those who moved to Scotland from elsewhere. 

 

Having nothing better to do until the 'live' footie starts thought I would have a go at looking at this piece of fiction.

 

You may have posted this many times before but it doesn't make it any more accurate than in it's initial publication. It is, in fact, nonsense and can easily be disproved by anyone with a minimal level of arithmetical expertise.

This is based on a Daily Record article that lifts the figures from an Edinburgh University paper prepared, I would guess, by academics who seemingly would struggle passing their Arithmetic O Level.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/independence-referendum-figures-revealed-majority-5408163

 

https://blogs.sps.ed.ac.uk/scottishreferendumstudy/files/2015/03/Scottish-Referendum-Study-27-March-2015.pdf

 

Neither the DR article nor the EU paper gives us the base voting figures for each subset, but the DR article mentions the estimated number of Brits from elsewhere in the UK and living in Scotland at 420k.

(Note that the DR article bandies about the 300k who supposedly voted No, conveniently ignoring the 100k who presumably voted Yes, a net diff of 200k and further away from explaining the final diff of 384k. Possibly thinking that no reader of the DR would notice that to explain the unexplained shortfall as being that of 'Outside UK' voters at a smaller % variance would be quite a stretch. Gullible comes to mind here.)

 

So, using that figure as the total voters for 'Rest of UK' (unlikely, but I'm being kind) and estimating a similar level for 'Outside UK' (again unlikely, but keeping up my 'being kind' attitude) the following can be extrapolated:

Based on actual voting of 3.62m (Y1.618m / N2.002m) we would arrive at the following, based on the DR + EU %'s:

Scotland (76.8%)- 2.78m (Y 1.465m/N 1.315)

Rest of UK (11.6%) - 0.42m (Y 0.105m/N 0.315m)

Outside UK (11.6%) - 0.42m (Y 0.181m/N 0.239m)

Totals would be: Votes - 3.62m (Y 1.751m / N 1.869m) (Note: Actual result was Y 1.618m /N 2.002m)

 

Rather different from the actual result. In fact, to come anywhere near the noted 'Scotland' % share, the 'Outside UK' voting numbers would need to be at a level of over 52% of voters with 'Scotland' at around 36%. Clearly not even remotely plausible.

 

Interestingly, if the 'Scotland' %'s were to be reversed, i.e. Y 47.3% / N 52.7%, the end result would actually be exceedingly adjacent to the actual result. You don't think that they mixed up their %'s do you?

 

One final comment, John Curtice, in his post IndyRef1 comment, noted a YouGov poll that had 'Born in Scotland' Yes voters at 49%. Something to cogitate on, No?

http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2014/09/voted-yes-voted/

 

[malagateddy]

I think more like a very favorable common market or costoms union..., in waiting for full membership if they like …..almost like being and feeling like a E.U. membership [emoji106] ,I think Barnier & co shall be very creative... 

Do you honestly think that the German taxpayers want another eu subsidy junkie state to put their hand out for " manna/money from heaven "
Please..wakey wakey
Ps..I think that in a few weeks time..the cosy " structure " of mep's will change BIG TIME.
Just wait till all these terrible right wing reactionary fascist horrible anti establishment take their seats in brussels.
Can't wsit till the lights dim n the movie starts.
Cheers
Have a great evening[emoji6]

Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Sir Dude]

Wee Cranky will not get her way and she lost an SNP vote yesterday about her fantasy plans for a currency after independence. She forgets that Westminster will not allow a newly independent Scotland to use pound sterling, maybe the Scottish pound but it would not be guaranteed by the BoE, which is all important ... so it will tank. Secondly, the EU has announced there is no automatic membership on offer if they break away ... and here's why, Brussels does not want to see the fracturing of larger EU states and breakaway regions thinking it's all fine and dandy to do it with no problem ... these politicians that think it is are living in La La Land. The Scots will get short-shift from the likes of Spain that are terrified over the Catalan issue, so no allies there. It is ironically a microcosm of the Brexit issue and they will get the same problems that the UK is facing trying to leave the EU .. just on a smaller scale as their action in both cases cannot be seen to be a success as it will encourage others to do likewise. It is not in the interest of the EU for larger countries to fragment ... and Scotland, if they leave, will taste the bitter-sweet pill themselves. It's not all about Scotland, or the UK ... the bigger picture will not allow for a fantasy fairy-tale ending for Scotland as this sort of thing is unwelcome in other parts of the European Union and not to be encouraged. There does not seem to be enough support in Scotland for this right now and they already got their chance to vote. Brussels wants to see countries fragment like this as much as it wanted to see the UK leave in the first place. Sets a bad precedent for others.

 

The SNP is far from united at the moment and it's beginning to show ... plus it's highly debatable if they can survive properly without the Barnett Formula etc. which would be rescinded in the event of Scottish independence. The North Sea oil would have to be split up between all parts of the UK as it is not just Scotland's plus if you think trying to untangle the UK from Europe is hard then trying to untangle Scotland from the rest of the UK is way more difficult.     

Edited April 28, 2019 by Sir Dude

[malagateddy]

Well said.
But try n educate some of the English/British haters..almost impossible.
Anyway..crackin foto of sturgface.
Rumour has it that the River Clyde tide would not take her out?????[emoji2][emoji2][emoji2]

Wee Cranky will not get her way and she lost an SNP vote yesterday about her fantasy plans for a currency after independence. She forgets that Westminster will not allow a newly independent Scotland to use pound sterling, maybe the Scottish pound but it would not be guaranteed by the BoE, which is all important ... so it will tank. Secondly, the EU has announced there is no automatic membership on offer if they break away ... and here's why, Brussels does not want to see the fracturing of larger EU states and breakaway regions thinking it's all fine and dandy to do it with no problem ... these politicians that think it is are living in La La Land. The Scots will get short-shift from the likes of Spain that are terrified over the Catalan issue, so no allies there. It is ironically a microcosm of the Brexit issue and they will get the same problems that the UK is facing trying to leave the EU .. just on a smaller scale as their action in both cases cannot be seen to be a success as it will encourage others to do likewise. It is not in the interest of the EU for larger countries to fragment ... and Scotland, if they leave, will taste the bitter-sweet pill themselves. It's not all about Scotland, or the UK ... the bigger picture will not allow for a fantasy fairy-tale ending for Scotland as this sort of thing is unwelcome in other parts of the European Union and not to be encouraged. There does not seem to be enough support in Scotland for this right now and they already got their chance to vote. Brussels wants to see countries fragment like this as much as it wanted to see the UK leave in the first place. Sets a bad precedent for others.
 
The SNP is far from united at the moment and it's beginning to show ... plus it's highly debatable if they can survive properly without the Barnett Formula etc. which would be rescinded in the event of Scottish independence. The North Sea oil would have to be split up between all parts of the UK as it is not just Scotland's plus if you think trying to untangle the UK from Europe is hard then trying to untangle Scotland from the rest of the UK is way more difficult.     

Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[mommysboy]

I can't really blame Scotland for wanting to detach itself from Westminster, but there was a referendum a few years ago which was quite conclusive, and in any case surely any future referendum needs unqualified support, ie, a super-majority, or there will be a mess every bit as big as Brexit. Lessons must be learned because it's another 50/50 type issue, with big regions for and against.

[RuamRudy]

14 hours ago, Sir Dude said:

Wee Cranky will not get her way and she lost an SNP vote yesterday about her fantasy plans for a currency after independence. She forgets that Westminster will not allow a newly independent Scotland to use pound sterling, maybe the Scottish pound but it would not be guaranteed by the BoE, which is all important ... so it will tank. Secondly, the EU has announced there is no automatic membership on offer if they break away ... and here's why, Brussels does not want to see the fracturing of larger EU states and breakaway regions thinking it's all fine and dandy to do it with no problem ... these politicians that think it is are living in La La Land. The Scots will get short-shift from the likes of Spain that are terrified over the Catalan issue, so no allies there. It is ironically a microcosm of the Brexit issue and they will get the same problems that the UK is facing trying to leave the EU .. just on a smaller scale as their action in both cases cannot be seen to be a success as it will encourage others to do likewise. It is not in the interest of the EU for larger countries to fragment ... and Scotland, if they leave, will taste the bitter-sweet pill themselves. It's not all about Scotland, or the UK ... the bigger picture will not allow for a fantasy fairy-tale ending for Scotland as this sort of thing is unwelcome in other parts of the European Union and not to be encouraged. There does not seem to be enough support in Scotland for this right now and they already got their chance to vote. Brussels wants to see countries fragment like this as much as it wanted to see the UK leave in the first place. Sets a bad precedent for others.

 

The SNP is far from united at the moment and it's beginning to show ... plus it's highly debatable if they can survive properly without the Barnett Formula etc. which would be rescinded in the event of Scottish independence. The North Sea oil would have to be split up between all parts of the UK as it is not just Scotland's plus if you think trying to untangle the UK from Europe is hard then trying to untangle Scotland from the rest of the UK is way more difficult.     

So much is incorrect in your post and has been debunked repeatedly. I assume that you are not too familiar with Scottish politics? I am not sure I want to go back through the process of picking up on all you got so terribly wrong, so I will leave you to stew in your ignorance with this clear example of the dire straits the SNP currently finds itself in. 

[Sir Dude]

4 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

So much is incorrect in your post and has been debunked repeatedly. I assume that you are not too familiar with Scottish politics? I am not sure I want to go back through the process of picking up on all you got so terribly wrong, so I will leave you to stew in your ignorance with this clear example of the dire straits the SNP currently finds itself in. 

Would expect nothing less from the resident one who has watched Braveheart too many times. Cute response, there's arrogance, insults and an underlying current of complacency nicely woven into it. 

[david555]

Mutual freedoms comes in mind ...

[RuamRudy]

Would expect nothing less from the resident one who has watched Braveheart too many times. Cute response, there's arrogance, insults and an underlying current of complacency nicely woven into it. 

Again you are making so many fundamental errors in your interpretations. Insults? Really? Care to elaborate on that claim?

As for the Braveheart dig, it's been done to death on these boards. Please try to be a little bit original.

Sent from my SM-G975F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[RuamRudy]

On 4/27/2019 at 10:41 PM, nauseus said:

 Better leave it til Monday then.  

Well predicted!

 

So the data is a little hard to come by, especially as it is a moving and incomplete target, but what I can find for 2015/16 is that Scotland directly generated just shy of GBP 54 billion for the exchequer (table S1).

 

In the same period the amount spent by the Scottish Government (money from Westminster but spent by Holyrood) was GBP 29 billion (table 1). Also during this period, Westminster claims to have spent GBP 40 billion on Scotland - although how this figure is arrived at is not so transparent as far as I can see, and includes a share of certain projects that do not directly benefit Scotland, such as HS2, Crossrail, the London sewer upgrades, etc. 

 

This means that, according to the data above, Scotland would have a deficit of GBP 15 billion. However there are many things to take into account:

 

Firstly, the generated value of 54 billion is incorrect - it does not include the taxes raised from exported goods which depart the UK from non Scottish ports (and most Scottish exports fall into this category), it does not include VAT income, which is not categorised by region, nor does it include oil and gas revenue for production that is landed outside of Scotland. 

 

So it can be safely assumed that Scotland generates more than 54 billion, but how much more remains unclear.

 

As for the Westminster spend, the spending decisions of a Scottish government will be radically different, I would hope. Also, the Scottish share of the projects mentioned above would be dropped; Trident would be someone else's problem etc etc.  

[RuamRudy]

1 hour ago, david555 said:

Mutual freedoms comes in mind ...

 

For too long the whole of the UK has allowed the NF and EDL to besmirch the notion of English patriotism. This guy has it right, I think:

 

I’m proud to be English, so let’s take patriotism back from the far-Right

 

"Within the politics of the UK, the English are the baddies. But the working class of England were subjugated by the same kings, queens and prime ministers who bedevilled Scotland, Wales and Ireland. When I go to other home nations, I shouldn’t feel like some footman from the Palace there to speak for the monarch. Only in generating an open, people’s Englishness do we start to recalibrate our relationship with other countries, but more importantly with ourselves. "

[sandyf]

On 4/28/2019 at 10:06 AM, malagateddy said:

The Unionist/Royalist Business Community will rather easily expose any snp economic blueprint re independence for what it is..utter claptrap..full of maybe's if we do this or that etc etc.
One thing is a certainty..massive business and personal tax increases; along with massive council tax increases.
Do you honestly believe that people would vote for something that would take over 65% of their salary or wages..
I do not think so.


Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

 

You are obviously party to the proposals being drawn up so I wonder why someone in such a position is making comments on this forum.

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

Well predicted!

 

So the data is a little hard to come by, especially as it is a moving and incomplete target, but what I can find for 2015/16 is that Scotland directly generated just shy of GBP 54 billion for the exchequer (table S1).

 

In the same period the amount spent by the Scottish Government (money from Westminster but spent by Holyrood) was GBP 29 billion (table 1). Also during this period, Westminster claims to have spent GBP 40 billion on Scotland - although how this figure is arrived at is not so transparent as far as I can see, and includes a share of certain projects that do not directly benefit Scotland, such as HS2, Crossrail, the London sewer upgrades, etc. 

 

This means that, according to the data above, Scotland would have a deficit of GBP 15 billion. However there are many things to take into account:

 

Firstly, the generated value of 54 billion is incorrect - it does not include the taxes raised from exported goods which depart the UK from non Scottish ports (and most Scottish exports fall into this category), it does not include VAT income, which is not categorised by region, nor does it include oil and gas revenue for production that is landed outside of Scotland. 

 

So it can be safely assumed that Scotland generates more than 54 billion, but how much more remains unclear.

 

As for the Westminster spend, the spending decisions of a Scottish government will be radically different, I would hope. Also, the Scottish share of the projects mentioned above would be dropped; Trident would be someone else's problem etc etc.  

Thanks for the reply. It will be interesting to see how much better off an independent Scotland would be if it chooses that road. I've read cases for and against Scotland being wealthier in that case.

 

There are obviously at least two camps of Scots. None of my Scottish friends are pro independence from the UK. Not a one of them. I still hope that Scotland chooses the UK over the EU. MHO of course.

 

[RuamRudy]

At first sight, this seems a moot point - a majority of MPs in England seeking English independence would surely be all that was needed. But add to this EVEL and any move for English independence would be for English MPs to decide alone. Scottish, Welsh or NI MPs would be prevented from participating in the vote. 

 

 

[david555]

30 minutes ago, nauseus said:

Thanks for the reply. It will be interesting to see how much better off an independent Scotland would be if it chooses that road. I've read cases for and against Scotland being wealthier in that case.

 

There are obviously at least two camps of Scots. None of my Scottish friends are pro independence from the UK. Not a one of them. I still hope that Scotland chooses the UK over the EU. MHO of course.

 

I am sure you can find amongst Pure Brits same thing …, some against Brexit and same in favor ….. total split U.K. total split opinions ….. the reason …. Brexit !! ...also most the reason  for the Scottish independence wishes  

[aright]

40 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

At first sight, this seems a moot point - a majority of MPs in England seeking English independence would surely be all that was needed. But add to this EVEL and any move for English independence would be for English MPs to decide alone. Scottish, Welsh or NI MPs would be prevented from participating in the vote. 

 

 

Putting Section 30 aside...…...mainly because I don't have an answer, I cannot see how the PM could refuse another referendum if polls show a significant number of Scots want it. At the moment polls show more than 50% of the electorate either don't want a referendum in the next decade or ever and as I pointed out in an earlier post the SNP have spent a lifetime advocating independence and the remain camp have not started theirs yet.

Wouldn't it be better to campaign for Scotland to stay in the UK, so no need for section 30, but to be given more powers to set tax rates, sign international treaties, more say over agriculture, fisheries and employment etc.? In the same way I would have voted remain in the Brexit referendum had the EU offered concessions in response to our concerns.

 

 

[malagateddy]

Not party to any proposals..I reside in Thailand.
Just basuc common sense old boy.
Have a lovely evening[emoji6]

You are obviously party to the proposals being drawn up so I wonder why someone in such a position is making comments on this forum.

Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Guest]

On 4/26/2019 at 12:52 PM, dick dasterdly said:

Getting back on topic.....  Scotland has every right to vote against remaining a part of the uk as a result of the brexit referendum.

 

It would be a shame, but they have every right to do so.

It's actually quite nice to know that you can now feel what we Europeans feel of UK and Brexit.

 

It's indeed a shame, but you do have your every right to do so. 

 

Naturally it's far easier for the Scotch to leave UK as they do have a defined destination within EU in their minds. 

[Scott]

Continuing to post the same meme over and over again will earn a suspension.   It's trolling and spamming.  

 

[sandyf]

3 hours ago, malagateddy said:

Not party to any proposals..I reside in Thailand.
Just basuc common sense old boy.
Have a lovely evening

 

Sent from my SM-G7102 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

 

About 60 countries have already kicked English rule into touch and made their own way in the world, USA being the first and New Zealand the most recent in 1987.

No doubt your common sense will be telling us that they all got it wrong.

[evadgib]

37 minutes ago, sandyf said:

About 60 countries have already kicked English rule into touch and made their own way in the world, USA being the first and New Zealand the most recent in 1987.

No doubt your common sense will be telling us that they all got it wrong.

British (ALL of it inc the whole of Ireland prior to 1921)!

[Chomper Higgot]

4 hours ago, evadgib said:

British (ALL of it inc the whole of Ireland prior to 1921)!

Odd objection for someone posting an English Nationalist Poetical banner as his Avatar.

[RuamRudy]

13 hours ago, aright said:

Putting Section 30 aside...…...mainly because I don't have an answer, I cannot see how the PM could refuse another referendum if polls show a significant number of Scots want it. At the moment polls show more than 50% of the electorate either don't want a referendum in the next decade or ever and as I pointed out in an earlier post the SNP have spent a lifetime advocating independence and the remain camp have not started theirs yet.

Wouldn't it be better to campaign for Scotland to stay in the UK, so no need for section 30, but to be given more powers to set tax rates, sign international treaties, more say over agriculture, fisheries and employment etc.? In the same way I would have voted remain in the Brexit referendum had the EU offered concessions in response to our concerns.

 

 

Immediately prior to the 2014 referendum Gordon Brown, with the full authority of Better Together and de facto approval of the UK government, promised that if Scotland rejected independence we would get federalism in all but name. The day after the vote EVEL was pushed through parliament and every other promise made by the ridiculously title 'The Vow' has been either watered down or ditched. I see no reason to trust Westminster now when they reneged on their promises the very next day.

 

Since then the SNP administration at Holyrood has received 2 electoral mandates and an MSP backed mandate to pursue another referendum. The reality is that there should be no need to seek Westminster approval. The Scottish people are sovereign. 

[evadgib]

4 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Odd objection for someone posting an English Nationalist Poetical banner as his Avatar.

The post preceded the change of avatar but as usual you've gone for poster rather than content, not least because the latter was a slam dunk????

Edited April 30, 2019 by evadgib

[sandyf]

9 hours ago, evadgib said:

British (ALL of it inc the whole of Ireland prior to 1921)!

Only when it suits, but feel free to believe that the other nations have any say in what the union does.

 

[evadgib]

12 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Only when it suits, but feel free to believe that the other nations have any say in what the union does.

 

The largest and most influential of which lack their own Parliament while the tail(s) wag the dog.

I don't recall any internal support in this field from any of the others.

Edited April 30, 2019 by evadgib

[RuamRudy]

13 minutes ago, evadgib said:

The largest and most influential of which lack their own Parliament while the tail(s) wag the dog.

I don't recall any form of domestic support from within the union to correct this.

I agree with your first point - there should be an English parliament (although was that not offered previously and rejected by the electorate?). But in a union of equals, how can you have a tail wagging the dog scenario? Or do you acknowledge that we are not all equal? And even so - when have such instances occurred? 

 

Edited April 30, 2019 by RuamRudy

[evadgib]

1 minute ago, RuamRudy said:

I agree with your first point - there should be an English parliament (although was that not offered and rejected by the electorate?). But in a union of equals, how can you have a tail wagging the dog scenario? Or do you acknowledge that we are not all equal? And even so - when have such instances occurred? 

 

You know full well what I mean RR ????

[RuamRudy]

3 minutes ago, evadgib said:

You know full well what I mean RR ????

Seriously, I am not trying to be difficult but I think you have hit the nail on the head with post 177.

 

I don't want to put words in your mouth, but my understanding from your post is that you think that as England makes up 85% of the population of the UK, then they should make the bulk of decisions for the direction of the UK. If that is indeed your position, I can wholeheartedly understand why you might feel that way. It is seemingly logical that the majority in any country should take the helm.

 

But the UK is not a country, and this is why the UK does not work as a union. Successive governments have tried damned hard to eradicate the national identities of the respective countries, presumably in the vain hope of us all rallying round the Union Flag and eschewing any feeling of regional identity, but that hasn't happened. Even now you can travel 15 miles from one town to another and find a subtly different accent - we are too parochial.

 

Look at Russia in contrast - I lived there for quite a few years and never ceased to be amazed at how little variation in accents there is from one side of the country to the other, one of the effects of Stalin's constant mass relocation of people.

 

In Scotland and Wales there has been no such mass integration of incomers, and there is an increasing feeling of difference from England, and a sense that we are, at best, an afterthought. We can argue as to whether they are indeed treated as afterthoughts, but that doesn't negate the fact that, for many, this feeling is prevalent. 

 

The status quo is not healthy for any of the member countries - England included. Federalism might have been the answer a few years ago but the boat was missed in 2014 and the lies told and promises broken have soured too many people north of the border to ever trust our politicians again.