Scottish nationalists set for record majority, boosting independence push

[JonnyF]

10 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Not true. We have no control over immigration and the Westminster government has left that as a free for all. 

 

Remember the outrage when it was mooted that we should have checkpoints on the border between England and Scotland to prevent unnecessary travel? We were called a fascist state then. 

 

But working with one arm tied behind her back, Sturgeon has performed better than Johnson. 

 

A massive over-simplification, ignoring things such as population density per square km in the case of a virus which requires social distancing to overcome it.

 

Still, it fits your facile agenda of Johnson bad, Sturgeon good.

 

[RuamRudy]

5 hours ago, UKresonant said:

I think the UK is far too integrated, to suddenly just split to support political career ambitions, it would take years of transition. 

Nichola S. is probably quite a good politician, but I could only vote for her if she dropped what appears to be an anti-English Obsession!

I don't doubt that Scotland could stand by it's self, with about 30 years UK collaborative preparation.  One of the Banks at the time of the last referendum, forecast that there would need to be a fund of helicopter money equal to about half a year of Scotland's GDP available to stop the economy falling off a cliff due to uncertainty. There appears to be a lot of academic thinking, and many passionate, passionate, about becoming independent, but very little "What then" discussed. Nothing about credible economic analysis or modelling mentioned. (Demonstrated at an actual special interest debate,  I was lucky to be able to attend, just before the last referendum) 

The arguments for indi' are quite often the 180 degree exact opposite of the arguments the same people were using against leaving the EU. 

I think the nationalist have successfully whipped up the illusion "The Scottish people want..."

well, not really from my and a lot of others peoples point of view. I was talking to someone on a BKK to LHR EVA flight at the time of the referendum, and that was the impression he had from the media, I had to say "nope". Every time I hear the statements of "The Scottish people want.." from that group, it really gets my back up. I think they must spend a lot of time in their own bubbles or silos. They may say the same about us, but we may be happy-ish, whilst they only appear bitter.

I think England devolving somewhat, may cure many of the sighted, central gov issues, used to  kindle resentment, and the separatist .agenda. Though the London centric squad just cannot prevent shooting themselves in the foot on many issues...concerning the union

.... to be continued 

 

 

To the vast majority of people of all nations, even the basics of supranational economics are a mystery. To expect the Scottish electorate to have grasped a concept that washes over most other people is a bit rich.

 

But because you didn't hear the average man on the street discussing it doesn't mean that it was overlooked. You might question the ambition of the proposals, but they existed. 

 

As for your 'the Scottish people want' concern, how do politicians determine and enact a mandate? We hear plenty guff about the British people wanting Brexit. If the SNP gets more than 50% on the Holyrood election, is the phrase permissable in your book? 

 

Please elaborate on the anti English obsession of Sturgeon. If it is as obvious as you say, I am sure you will have many examples to share with us. 

[RuamRudy]

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

 

A massive over-simplification, ignoring things such as population density per square km in the case of a virus which requires social distancing to overcome it.

 

Still, it fits your facile agenda of Johnson bad, Sturgeon good.

 

 

Porous borders had nothing to do with it? It's all down to population density? Seriously? Is England have one of the most densely populated countries in the world? And you accuse me of oversimplifying? Good grief. 

 

Johnson can always rely upon his fanboys to shore him up with whatever corruption or incompetence he lands on us. 

[JonnyF]

16 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Porous borders had nothing to do with it? It's all down to population density? Seriously? Is England have one of the most densely populated countries in the world? And you accuse me of oversimplifying? Good grief. 

 

Johnson can always rely upon his fanboys to shore him up with whatever corruption or incompetence he lands on us. 

Where did I say it was "all down to" population density?

 

Misrepresenting an argument again in order to attack it. Same old tricks.

[sandyf]

14 hours ago, herfiehandbag said:

Now, with regard to selling water, electricity, oil and gas to England and Wales, geography means that unless you (Scotland) are prepared to invest in a colossal infrastructure to bypass England to sell elsewhere (with the possible exception of oil, which could of course be moved by ship, although the distance involved would make it expensive) we would be your only customer. We of course would be free to shop around for cheaper suppliers. As your only customer perhaps we would have a significant influence upon the currency used, and indeed the price charged. If the sale of water, electricity, oil and gas to England and Wales is critical to an independent Scotland's economy ( I have no idea if it is) then that puts you on rather shaky ground!

 

Returning to the idea of an independent Scotland continuing to use Sterling, how will you get it in reliable predictable quantities? Yes you can raise it through domestic taxation, perhaps even through the sale of water, electricity, oil and gas, and through trade with your southern neighbour; but as a modern sophisticated country, especially with the sort of spending plans and intentions which Ms Sturgeon and her government seems to have in mind, Scotland will need significant reserves. I am genuinely curious as to how that will be achieved. Finally, we come to the subject of International borrowing, an indispensable tool of a modern government. Again, no expert, but I suspect borrowing will be much more difficult (and expensive) if you do not control your own currency. So much depends upon England's preparedness to indulge an independent Scotland in using Sterling as the mainstay of it's economy. I suspect that the price for that would be "Bank of England oversight" of the economy - a strange independence! All very pertinent points - yes? If we look past the name calling which this thread is rather degenerating into.

Did all those that voted for brexit give the "pertinent points" such careful consideration?

Of course they didn't, they trusted the government to act in their best interests. Only a hypocrite would condemn others for doing the same.

Everything is speculation until we see the Holyrood - Westminster Withdrawal Agreement.

[NanLaew]

13 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

29 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Porous borders had nothing to do with it? It's all down to population density? Seriously? Is England have one of the most densely populated countries in the world? And you accuse me of oversimplifying? Good grief. 

 

Johnson can always rely upon his fanboys to shore him up with whatever corruption or incompetence he lands on us. 

Where did I say it was "all down to" population density?

 

Misrepresenting an argument again in order to attack it. Same old tricks.

 

@RuamRudy the once and forever strawman of ThaiVisa's Scottish independence debate.

Edited January 27, 2021 by NanLaew

[NanLaew]

46 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

Not true. We have no control over immigration and the Westminster government has left that as a free for all. 

 

Remember the outrage when it was mooted that we should have checkpoints on the border between England and Scotland to prevent unnecessary travel? We were called a fascist state then. 

 

But working with one arm tied behind her back, Sturgeon has performed better than Johnson. 

 

Good points well made.

 

I recall when the UK's football home internationals were an annual event. The finish table was eerily similar, no?

[RuamRudy]

20 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Where did I say it was "all down to" population density?

 

Misrepresenting an argument again in order to attack it. Same old tricks.

 

When you accuse me of oversimplification then offer me such a gross oversimplification as a counter to my point, did you really expect me to respond with anything other than incredulity? 

[Phulublub]

7 hours ago, NiceGuyEddy said:

No, I do not think there is anything to crow about but I don't agree with placing all of the blame on Boris Johnson. We are all adults and everyone needs to take some responsibility for their own actions. If everyone had stuck to the government restrictions and guidelines to the letter I believe the death toll would be a lot lower.

If BJ's senior advisor had done just that it is probable that far more of the UK population would have been willing to comply.  If BJ had accepted that Cummins had made a toal ar$e of things and sacked him on the spot, then a similar result could have followed.  But BJ defended DC's slimy refutation of the wongdoing of his actions.  So while not all the balame can be laid at BJ's door he should set an example, and make sure his teram do likewise.

 

Lead by example, or do not lead at all...

 

PH

[sandyf]

11 hours ago, NiceGuyEddy said:

, don't you think it would be better for us four nations of the UK to be pulling in the same direction?

Don't you think it would have been much better if that sentiment had been pursued over brexit?

Make no mistake, if the people of Scotland want to hold Westminster to account over the brexit betrayal, they will. After all it's a democratic country, isn't it, and they will have their say on May 6th.

[RuamRudy]

7 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

I recall when the UK's football home internationals were an annual event. The finish table was eerily similar, no?

 

The relevance escapes me. If I was to draw any message from it at all, all I can think is 'know your place', but that seems a bit of a stretch. 

[JonnyF]

3 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

When you accuse me of oversimplification then offer me such a gross oversimplification as a counter to my point, did you really expect me to respond with anything other than incredulity? 

Incorrect.

 

You oversimplified and I countered by stating (and I quote) "things such as" population density need to be taken into account. Anyone who speaks a reasonable level of English would not conclude I was saying it was "all about" population density therefore I have to assume this was a deliberate strawman on your part.

 

Anyway, I'm not going to get drawn into a back and forth with you, having to correct you every time you misrepresent my points. It's a tiresome tactic and not indicative of intelligent debate. 

[Phulublub]

50 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

A massive over-simplification, ignoring things such as population density per square km in the case of a virus which requires social distancing to overcome it.

 

Still, it fits your facile agenda of Johnson bad, Sturgeon good.

 

That hides a lot.  More than it shows in fact....while the population of Scotland, as shown by your graph is about 70 per km2, figures from 2005 show avery different picture for many areas - with density WAY above that England figure for many inner city areas:

 

5.1 Information on land areas and population densities is shown in Table 9. Population density is 65 persons per square kilometre for Scotland and ranges from 8 persons per square kilometre in Highland Council area to 3,298 persons per square kilometre in Glasgow City Council area.

 

https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/statistics-and-data/statistics/statistics-by-theme/population/population-estimates/mid-year-population-estimates/archive/mid-2005-population-estimates-scotland/population-density#:~:text=Population density is 65 persons,in Glasgow City Council area.

 

PH

[sandyf]

7 hours ago, NiceGuyEddy said:

No, I do not think there is anything to crow about but I don't agree with placing all of the blame on Boris Johnson. We are all adults and everyone needs to take some responsibility for their own actions. If everyone had stuck to the government restrictions and guidelines to the letter I believe the death toll would be a lot lower.

Absolute garbage, who took the decision not to close the borders back in March? 

Since then it has been mainly Bojo decisions that have stirred up anti restriction feelings.

Take it you have forgotten about that advisor already.

If Bojo had done things right and the numbers were low, but high in Scotland, then you would have something to crow about. Remind us, who opposed travel restriction from England into Scotland.

[JonnyF]

4 minutes ago, Phulublub said:

That hides a lot.  More than it shows in fact....while the population of Scotland, as shown by your graph is about 70 per km2, figures from 2005 show avery different picture for many areas - with density WAY above that England figure for many inner city areas:

 

5.1 Information on land areas and population densities is shown in Table 9. Population density is 65 persons per square kilometre for Scotland and ranges from 8 persons per square kilometre in Highland Council area to 3,298 persons per square kilometre in Glasgow City Council area.

 

https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/statistics-and-data/statistics/statistics-by-theme/population/population-estimates/mid-year-population-estimates/archive/mid-2005-population-estimates-scotland/population-density#:~:text=Population density is 65 persons,in Glasgow City Council area.

 

PH

3298? Impressive.

 

London has a population of 9 million, almost twice that of the whole of Scotland. It's population density is 5701.

 

[RuamRudy]

5 minutes ago, Phulublub said:

That hides a lot.  More than it shows in fact....while the population of Scotland, as shown by your graph is about 70 per km2, figures from 2005 show avery different picture for many areas - with density WAY above that England figure for many inner city areas:

 

5.1 Information on land areas and population densities is shown in Table 9. Population density is 65 persons per square kilometre for Scotland and ranges from 8 persons per square kilometre in Highland Council area to 3,298 persons per square kilometre in Glasgow City Council area.

 

https://www.nrscotland.gov.uk/statistics-and-data/statistics/statistics-by-theme/population/population-estimates/mid-year-population-estimates/archive/mid-2005-population-estimates-scotland/population-density#:~:text=Population density is 65 persons,in Glasgow City Council area.

 

PH

 

Even this logic that population density is a major factor is such a red herring. If it was a major factor, the many countries which have higher population densities should have higher death tolls - unless their governments were taking different, more effective approaches. 

[NanLaew]

10 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

19 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

 

When you accuse me of oversimplification then offer me such a gross oversimplification as a counter to my point, did you really expect me to respond with anything other than incredulity? 

Incorrect.

 

You oversimplified and I countered by stating (and I quote) "things such as" population density need to be taken into account. Anyone who speaks a reasonable level of English would not conclude I was saying it was "all about" population density therefore I have to assume this was a deliberate strawman on your part.

 

Anyway, I'm not going to get drawn into a back and forth with you, having to correct you every time you misrepresent my points. It's a tiresome tactic and not indicative of intelligent debate. 

 

30 - 40

[sandyf]

12 hours ago, Phulublub said:

I do, just as I hink being part of the largest and most advanced trading block would be a good idea.

 

PH

Exactly. Malta became independent from UK in 1964, population is about a tenth of Scotland and GDP per capita about 2 thirds that of Scotland.

I used to go every year for about 15 years in the 70s/80s, and then again a couple of years ago, doing very well as a member of the EU.

[transam]

14 hours ago, Phulublub said:

So many falsehoods that I know not where to begin...but this stands out immediately:

 

So much depends upon England's preparedness to indulge an independent Scotland in using Sterling

 

There is nothing that rUK (not England BTW - but you are another to display your Little Englander credentials) can do to stop an independent Scotland from using Sterling. 

 

PH

 

 

What's with the "Little Englander" thing....?

[NanLaew]

13 minutes ago, sandyf said:

Exactly. Malta became independent from UK in 1964, population is about a tenth of Scotland and GDP per capita about 2 thirds that of Scotland.

I used to go every year for about 15 years in the 70s/80s, and then again a couple of years ago, doing very well as a member of the EU.

 

Malta has it all going on doesn't it? Since independence about 57 years ago, it is classified as an advanced economy by the International Monetary Fund and is considered a high-income country by the World Bank and an innovation-driven economy by the World Economic Forum. It is a member of the European Union and of the eurozone, having formally adopted the euro on 1 January 2008.

 

But Scotland isn't strategically placed at the crossroads between Europe, North Africa and the Middle East now, is it?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Malta

 

Scotland's at the cold, top-left corner of one of the more remote regions. Not quite a village, but sort of on the outskirts of medium-sized town where the dual-carriageway ends and the street lighting is sparse. Imagine a view of shopping mall out front but some sheep out the back. Looking at her near neighbors (not the English speaking ones), Norway has the deep financial reserves of a well managed, petrodollar based economy while Iceland has forsaken fishing for tourism (what was the cod war all about eh?). So where could Scotland fit in as it sits out there on the edge of European civilization?

 

In about 60 years time I mean.

 

[NanLaew]

3 minutes ago, transam said:

14 hours ago, Phulublub said:

So many falsehoods that I know not where to begin...but this stands out immediately:

 

So much depends upon England's preparedness to indulge an independent Scotland in using Sterling

 

There is nothing that rUK (not England BTW - but you are another to display your Little Englander credentials) can do to stop an independent Scotland from using Sterling. 

 

PH

 

 

Expand  

What's with the "Little Englander" thing....?

 

Good question. How tall are you anyway?

[transam]

10 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

 

The UK has the highest covid death toll in the world. There is absolutely nothing that the UK has done that I would want an independent Scotland to replicate. 

I thought Portugal had...????

[Scott]

Troll post reported and removed.  Stop with the insulting comments.  

 

[RuamRudy]

16 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

 

Malta has it all going on doesn't it? Since independence about 57 years ago, it is classified as an advanced economy by the International Monetary Fund and is considered a high-income country by the World Bank and an innovation-driven economy by the World Economic Forum. It is a member of the European Union and of the eurozone, having formally adopted the euro on 1 January 2008.

 

But Scotland isn't strategically placed at the crossroads between Europe, North Africa and the Middle East now, is it?

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Malta

 

Scotland's at the cold, top-left corner of one of the more remote regions. Not quite a village, but sort of on the outskirts of medium-sized town where the dual-carriageway ends and the street lighting is sparse. Imagine a view of shopping mall out front but some sheep out the back. Looking at her near neighbors (not the English speaking ones), Norway has the deep financial reserves of a well managed, petrodollar based economy while Iceland has forsaken fishing for tourism (what was the cod war all about eh?). So where could Scotland fit in as it sits out there on the edge of European civilization?

 

In about 60 years time I mean.

 

 

We are not proposing a Khmer Rouge style resetting of our economy to year zero. We already have a thriving, developed and multi faceted economy which outperforms most other parts of the UK. Why would this not factor into your post independence scenario? 

[sandyf]

5 hours ago, NanLaew said:

But Scotland isn't strategically placed at the crossroads between Europe, North Africa and the Middle East now, is it?

Obviously GDP per capita means little to you.

[Sujo]

Seems many dont like scotland and it being a drain on the uk but insist it doesnt leave.

 

Apparently self determination isnt a thing.

[sandyf]

6 hours ago, JonnyF said:

London has a population of 9 million, almost twice that of the whole of Scotland.

Yes, with around 56 million in England and about 5.4 million in Scotland there will always be an overwhelming perception in the UK that Scotland is subservient to England.

Human nature being what it is, there is only one way for that perception to be eradicated.

Brexiters pursued their objective at the expense of all other UK nations, so they must learn to live with whatever fall out may come about. We have already seen NI remain under the EU customs regime and Gibraltar join Schengen, brexit is far from over.

[transam]

12 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Seems many dont like scotland and it being a drain on the uk but insist it doesnt leave.

 

Apparently self determination isnt a thing.

It's Scotland.........

 I don't think Scotland is a drain on the UK, it is part of the great union. I would hate to see Scotland fall, at the hands of shield beaters...

[Sujo]

1 hour ago, transam said:

It's Scotland.........

 I don't think Scotland is a drain on the UK, it is part of the great union. I would hate to see Scotland fall, at the hands of shield beaters...

Which should be a choice made by scotland.

[NiceGuyEddy]

2 hours ago, Sujo said:

Which should be a choice made by scotland.

They made their choice in the independance referendum a few years ago and by a huge margin the Scots chose to stay part of the mighty UK.

You can't keep having referendums until you get the result what you want. Who do you think you are?.....the EU?

Edited January 27, 2021 by NiceGuyEddy