1 hour ago, Kwasaki said:

I respect your post. 

A United Kingdom is what I see as a good future now we are out of the mafia club,  maybe Scotland see's England as the mafia. ????

No no, that's the Kray brothers you're thinking of! The family and friendship ties between all the home countries are vast. One main issue we have though, is that you keep on electing self-important public schoolboys to rule us all. Friendship will be better maintained at a mutually respectful distance.

16 minutes ago, Nigel Garvie said:

No no, that's the Kray brothers you're thinking of! The family and friendship ties between all the home countries are vast. One main issue we have though, is that you keep on electing self-important public schoolboys to rule us all. Friendship will be better maintained at a mutually respectful distance.

I only ever voted for Screaming Lord Sutch, not Blair, Cameron or TM. ????

1 hour ago, evadgib said:

???????????????????????????? at 55M dwarfs the others whether @Nigel Garvie likes it or not (yet lacks it's own Parliament!) 

 

I know of course what the population of England and many other countries is. This is just a matter of fact which I neither like nor dislike. Many smaller countries -Portugal, Denmark, etc live happily next to larger neighbours. I do get the impression though that some posters here are resentful that Germany has a population of c. 84M, significantly more than England, which seems a bit silly to me.

 

Ahh the Commonwealth, HRH, etc, as relevant to life in the 2020s as Beefeater cod pieces!

5 hours ago, Kwasaki said:

Jokes apart I just think it would be better if Scotland,  Northern Ireland & Wales went along with backing England and be a UK. 

The problems with this approach, however, are insurmountable, I fear. Firstly, England, with 80% of the population of the UK, has dominance on all non devolved matters. This results in all sorts of unsatisfactory situations for the other countries in the union, which they are forced to accept despite clearly expressed wishes to the contrary.

 

Secondly, you don't send your salary to your neighbour and allow him to decide how much to return to you. That is the absurdity of the union - we are required to send all our taxes to the country next door and it is up to them to decide how much they will give us back. And to make matters worse - they also go on a spending spree and decide, themselves, how much to allocate to our account whether we want it or not, and whether we benefit from it or not. 

 

3 hours ago, Nigel Garvie said:

There were times, the Victorian era in particular, when Scotland supplied well beyond their share of cannon fodder for the Empire. For example in India every 3rd Brit was a Scot, so I have read. It is the nature of things that times change, and what worked well in the past (For some anyway) is not always the best option for the future. Of all the former colonies which one has run back begging to be re-admitted to the Empire? 

I read an article (I wish I could find it again) that up till around 1914, the Scots were the tallest people in Western Europe. 

59 minutes ago, Nigel Garvie said:

I know of course what the population of England and many other countries is. This is just a matter of fact which I neither like nor dislike. Many smaller countries -Portugal, Denmark, etc live happily next to larger neighbours. I do get the impression though that some posters here are resentful that Germany has a population of c. 84M, significantly more than England, which seems a bit silly to me.

 

Ahh the Commonwealth, HRH, etc, as relevant to life in the 2020s as Beefeater cod pieces!

 

portugal/denmark? yes OK, but don't forget Luxembourg and Ireland and the Baltic states

 

re Germany and silly

I well remember when the wall was dismantled and West Germany and East Germany were merged,

that <deleted> / urinated UK PM and cabinet and HoC off big time,

unbelievable really what they actually expressed in interviews at the time

(imperial thinking and hurt superiority complex at display big time)

 

5 hours ago, evadgib said:

Agreed. It's worked well enough for 300+ years.

 

yes,

it has worked and is working so well that now a rather significant number of jocks want it discontinued

 

2 hours ago, evadgib said:

???????????????????????????? at 55M dwarfs the others whether @Nigel Garvie likes it or not (yet lacks it's own Parliament!) but I can understand anyone getting the hump re your wording.

 

As for anyone 'running back and begging to be re-admitted';

 

a) There is no longer a Empire to be re-admitted into, 

 

b  ) The Commonwealth currently stands at 54 countries, with several re-admissions inc the Maldives among them. 

 

c) HM heads the Commonwealth and is head of state in 16 member states.

 

This to me blows his statement out of the water.

 

HTH

What are the obligations to the Commonwealth for member countries? Do they, like Scotland, Wales and NI, have to send all their income to London and receive a proportion back as a 'grant' in return? Are they bound to the commonwealth with no intrinsic right to reconsider their membership? Are their countries' political direction decided by England irrespective of how they themselves vote?

10 minutes ago, melvinmelvin said:

 

yes,

it has worked and is working so well that now a rather significant number of jocks want it discontinued

 

And a rather significant number of Scots want to remain, there may be troubles ahead, lets face the music and dance, lets call the whole thing off.

20 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Secondly, you don't send your salary to your neighbour and allow him to decide how much to return to you. That is the absurdity of the union - we are required to send all our taxes to the country next door and it is up to them to decide how much they will give us back

Bit like the EU then?????

1 hour ago, Nigel Garvie said:

I know of course what the population of England and many other countries is. This is just a matter of fact which I neither like nor dislike. Many smaller countries -Portugal, Denmark, etc live happily next to larger neighbours. I do get the impression though that some posters here are resentful that Germany has a population of c. 84M, significantly more than England, which seems a bit silly to me.

 

Ahh the Commonwealth, HRH, etc, as relevant to life in the 2020s as Beefeater cod pieces!

-Having lived in ???????? I have nothing but praise for the country or people.

-You perhaps need reminding who brought up the Empire.....again! ????

1 hour ago, RuamRudy said:

What are the obligations to the Commonwealth for member countries? Do they, like Scotland, Wales and NI, have to send all their income to London and receive a proportion back as a 'grant' in return? Are they bound to the commonwealth with no intrinsic right to reconsider their membership? Are their countries' political direction decided by England irrespective of how they themselves vote?

Was it ????????????????????????????'s failed forays into Panama that backrupted the country & forced them to seek union with the most powerful country on earth cira 1707 or were the ???????????????????????????? to blame for that too?

21 minutes ago, evadgib said:

Was it ????????????????????????????'s failed forays into Panama that backrupted the country & forced them to seek union with the most powerful country on earth cira 1707 or were the ???????????????????????????? to blame for that too?

No, your grasp of history is wrong on this occasion. 

 

Scotland had no central bank back then, so there was no way it could have been bankrupt  - there was no institution which could be in such circumstances. What there was, however, was a group of wealthy, private individuals who faced ruin through their own folly. Unfortunately, as was the way of things in those days, they had power in the court. 

 

At the same time, having had a hand in screwing up the Darien misadventure, the Palace of Westminster played their next card which was to issue the Alien Act which forbade any non-English person who owned land in England from passing that land on to their offspring upon their death. This meant that the same wealthy Scots would end up in deep trouble if their English assets were sequestrated. Therefore, they were compelled to accede to the demands of the English court and agree to Scotland being subsumed by the union. 

 

This caused outrage in Scotland, with the Act of Union being burned in the street and rioting in both Glasgow and Edinburgh. Daniel Defoe, the author, was also a spy for England and reported on the outrage of the population.

 

So, as is clear, Scotland was not bankrupt and dd not seek any assistance from England. There - aren't you happy you learned a little bit about the history of the island you come from today?

13 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

No, your grasp of history is wrong on this occasion. 

 

Scotland had no central bank back then, so there was no way it could have been bankrupt  - there was no institution which could be in such circumstances. What there was, however, was a group of wealthy, private individuals who faced ruin through their own folly. Unfortunately, as was the way of things in those days, they had power in the court. 

 

At the same time, having had a hand in screwing up the Darien misadventure, the Palace of Westminster played their next card which was to issue the Alien Act which forbade any non-English person who owned land in England from passing that land on to their offspring upon their death. This meant that the same wealthy Scots would end up in deep trouble if their English assets were sequestrated. Therefore, they were compelled to accede to the demands of the English court and agree to Scotland being subsumed by the union. 

 

This caused outrage in Scotland, with the Act of Union being burned in the street and rioting in both Glasgow and Edinburgh. Daniel Defoe, the author, was also a spy for England and reported on the outrage of the population.

 

So, as is clear, Scotland was not bankrupt and dd not seek any assistance from England. There - aren't you happy you learned a little bit about the history of the island you come from today?

Glad to see you're returning to form, RR ????

54 minutes ago, evadgib said:

Glad to see you're returning to form, RR ????

Always happy to help out a friend ????

5 hours ago, vogie said:

Bit like the EU then?????

BIT being the operative word. We send a VERY SMALL proportion of UK taxes to the EU and receive back large amounts in Grants, and the huge financial benefit of being part of a massive trading block. Unlike Scotland sending ALL their taxes (Except local council tax of course) to Westminster. 

 

I admit that exactly the same idea occurred to me initially, till I thought about it more.

4 hours ago, Nigel Garvie said:

BIT being the operative word. We send a VERY SMALL proportion of UK taxes to the EU and receive back large amounts in Grants, and the huge financial benefit of being part of a massive trading block. Unlike Scotland sending ALL their taxes (Except local council tax of course) to Westminster. 

 

I admit that exactly the same idea occurred to me initially, till I thought about it more.

13 billion a year may be a small proportion to you, but to most people who are not trying to wriggle out of hypocracy, it's a fair old wad of cash. But we do get told how to spend the 4 billion we get back, you call that a result, yeah right.

Nice try but no cigar.????

Interesting reading :

 

Office for National Statistics :

 

"The UK contribution to the EU budget" 

 

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/articles/theukcontributiontotheeubudget/2017-10-31

1 hour ago, vogie said:

13 billion a year may be a small proportion to you, but to most people who are not trying to wriggle out of hypocracy, it's a fair old wad of cash. 

13 billion is indeed a lot of money and many will consider that as such. 

The same people will certainly consider 2% as a small proportion. 

However 13 billion is less than 2% of the yearly UK government spending. 

Everything is relative 

 

47 minutes ago, luckyluke said:

13 billion is indeed a lot of money and many will consider that as such. 

The same people will certainly consider 2% as a small proportion. 

However 13 billion is less than 2% of the yearly UK government spending. 

Everything is relative 

 

All very nice Luke, but it would seem the EU still havn't made a decision on how there going to replace the loss of the UKs missing billions.

Playing with figures is all well and good, but 13 billion in our pocket is better than putting it someone elses. Maybe when and if you have to have tax rises in europe you may start to think that 2% is not such a "small proportion" after all.

36 minutes ago, vogie said:

All very nice Luke, but it would seem the EU still havn't made a decision on how there going to replace the loss of the UKs missing billions.

Playing with figures is all well and good, but 13 billion in our pocket is better than putting it someone elses. Maybe when and if you have to have tax rises in europe you may start to think that 2% is not such a "small proportion" after all.

Correct, 

For the new E.U. budget,

the "Frugal Four" ( Austria, Denmark, Holland, Sweden) don't want to spend more than 1% of their GNI.

The other countries are agree with 1,074%.

 

For me personally I will have to wait,, as mention earlier the E.U. has  no influence on my daily life.

Will have to see what will happen with the E.U. without the U.K.. 

 

In the meantime good thing for us Belgian pensioners, we will receive 2%  increase starting this month.

22 hours ago, Kwasaki said:

English outdated laws that haven't been taken of the books just as the one I said Boris could do. 

And yes there some differences in Scots law so what. 

Duh!

3 hours ago, luckyluke said:

no influence on my daily life.

unbelievable!

22 hours ago, Kwasaki said:

backing England

That just about sums up the ignorance surrounding the Union.

10 hours ago, Nigel Garvie said:

BIT being the operative word. We send a VERY SMALL proportion of UK taxes to the EU and receive back large amounts in Grants, and the huge financial benefit of being part of a massive trading block. Unlike Scotland sending ALL their taxes (Except local council tax of course) to Westminster. 

 

I admit that exactly the same idea occurred to me initially, till I thought about it more.

England sends all its taxes to Westminister as well .

The issue is Westminsters location being in London 

 

An interesting update on the Shetland & Orkney independence front - not only is there an active cell of dissenters trying to wrestle the northern islands from Scottish and British control, they now have a real, live political prisoner - and he has gone on hunger strike for the cause!

 

Jailed Hill goes on hunger strike

"A Shetland man, jailed last week for illegally recording court proceedings at Kirkwall Sheriff Court, has gone on hunger strike, claiming he is “effectively a political prisoner.”

 

[Stuart] Hill said: “All the sheriff had to do was to show proof that Orkney and Shetland are part of Scotland. However, not being able to do so, he put me in prison. I am now effectively a political prisoner."

 

It is worth noting, however, that Mr Hill is not your typical Shetlander. In fact, he only moved there from his home in Suffolk a few years ago but is actively trying to secede the islands from Scotland. He stood for election in the 2017 GE as an independent, receiving a little over 1% of the vote. Here is his Wikipedia page for reference / amusement. 

3 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

An interesting update on the Shetland & Orkney independence front - not only is there an active cell of dissenters trying to wrestle the northern islands from Scottish and British control, they now have a real, live political prisoner - and he has gone on hunger strike for the cause!

 

Jailed Hill goes on hunger strike

"A Shetland man, jailed last week for illegally recording court proceedings at Kirkwall Sheriff Court, has gone on hunger strike, claiming he is “effectively a political prisoner.”

 

[Stuart] Hill said: “All the sheriff had to do was to show proof that Orkney and Shetland are part of Scotland. However, not being able to do so, he put me in prison. I am now effectively a political prisoner."

 

It is worth noting, however, that Mr Hill is not your typical Shetlander. In fact, he only moved there from his home in Suffolk a few years ago but is actively trying to secede the islands from Scotland. He stood for election in the 2017 GE as an independent, receiving a little over 1% of the vote. Here is his Wikipedia page for reference / amusement. 

Reminds me of an old friends' antics some years earlier...????

(He says he was under the water for 2.5 mins!)

 

In the fifth Panelbase poll of 2020 asking whether Scottish voters supported the notion of independence, the lead for the Yes camp has opened up to 8% over No.

 

The results of all 5 (excluding don't knows):

1/ 52% Yes

2/ 49% Yes

3/ 50% Yes

4/ 52% Yes

5/ 54% Yes

 

I wonder can Johnson pull anything out of the bag now to reverse the trend. And with growing support for independence comes growing clamour for a new referendum. How can he reject it without meeting considerable ire from the electorate?

 

Support for Scottish independence soars to 54 per cent

SUPPORT for Scottish independence has jumped to a record 54% – with an increasing number of Labour voters now willing to vote Yes, according to a new poll.

Why then, if you (the Scottish Nationalists) are so convinced that you have overwhelming support for independence, don't you do something about it? Hold your own referendum, and if the result confirms your claims, secede from the Union, at once. Lets see, if you held the referendum on the 21st of August you could be an independent nation by the 1st of September. Think about it, no more taxes to send to Westminster, no more money from Westminster, your own independent country, free to do whatever you like. I'm English of course, but like many ( I rather suspect most) English people it really wouldn't bother me one bit. Go for it, please.

 

It would be a bit of an upheaval for the UK, but so what, we would cope: the sun would still come up on the 2nd of September - except in Campbeltown of course - the sun never shines there!

22 minutes ago, herfiehandbag said:

Why then, if you (the Scottish Nationalists) are so convinced that you have overwhelming support for independence, don't you do something about it? Hold your own referendum, and if the result confirms your claims, secede from the Union, at once. Lets see, if you held the referendum on the 21st of August you could be an independent nation by the 1st of September. Think about it, no more taxes to send to Westminster, no more money from Westminster, your own independent country, free to do whatever you like. I'm English of course, but like many ( I rather suspect most) English people it really wouldn't bother me one bit. Go for it, please.

 

It would be a bit of an upheaval for the UK, but so what, we would cope: the sun would still come up on the 2nd of September - except in Campbeltown of course - the sun never shines there!

Clearly no understanding of the legal issues surrounding Scittish independence..... you are proposing UDI? I would check that out before making comments like those above.