What difference would this proposal make anyway, the english have been DICTATEING POLICY for years. This bullhit is in, as always, in the english favour. SCOTLAND NEEDS TO TELL THE english TO GO AND FOULK THEMSELVES, for we are going to be an INDEPENDENT NATION IN 2009. OH dear I nearly forgot for the english government, when we the SCOTS leave the telephone number fot the INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND IS 999. For england you are going to need it!!!!!!This delightful perspective is consistent with a previous, equally thoughtful, comment:
Next Year when SCOTLAND is INDEPENDENT, the bank of disastards, will come running to us, the SCOTS. for a loan. To think that that shower of incompetent idiots can run a country is laughable, Bank of england, give up and move to FRANKFURT!!!!Two quick observations:
Firstly, he is framing the entire issue in terms of what he appears to see as English dominance and abuse of Scotland. I am reminded of a statement by Andrew Sharp, SNP Westminster candidate for East Lothian, which for obvious reasons I recently noticed. He referred to Scotland as a nation which, in his mind, is “subordinate to another one” – obviously meaning England. With this kind of thinking prevalent not only on the fringes but within supposedly mainstream Nationalism, is it any wonder that anti-Englishness is a concern?
And secondly, he appears to relish the bizarre notion that England (not the UK less Scotland; see previous point) would experience sustained negative consequences if ever Scotland were to become independent. I am put in mind of this wishful thinking by the celebrated (by at least one SNP MSP) Niall Aslen: “Scotland leaving the Union could well trigger an English stock market crash. A crash in house prices and a devaluation of the pound.” Reasons to dissolve the Union? Some with a visceral hatred of England might say so.
WHO WOULD YOU PREFER TO HAVE AS SCOTLANDS CLOSEST NEIGHBOURS, GEOGRAPHICLY SPEAKING?
http://www.cybernatcentral.blogspot.com/
I wonder what answer ptdoug is hoping for ?
To be quite frank the fact that the English economy (and Scotlands outside of the North-East) is mostly smoke and mirrors is an error owing to years of Westminister mismanagement.
If you move the 'pool of resources' around Scotland then this will have a negative effect on England in the short term until people get off their behinds and start working again (across the UK).
I know this is a problem but since I support Scottish Independence as it is simply 'the right thing to do' then it doesn't affect my choice.
Brian
If you get a minute, please could you provide a link to any academic paper which validates your unorthodox view that "English economy (and Scotlands outside of the North-East) is mostly smoke and mirrors".
I was also interested in your description of Scottish independence as "the right thing to do". Right, in what sense? Do you see the constitutional issue in moral terms?
Leaving aside the specific economics here, I thought you might like the following:
http://www.twodoctors.org/2008/08/blood-on-the-streets.html
As Bill Clinton would say 'It's the Service Economy Stupid!'
But no seriously, we need to get people out 'making things' again. The debt of the U.K and Scotland is atrocious. I point to the credit crunch as endemic of this. The need a car, holiday, suite, packet of crisps? Loan culture only works if we generate wealth.
Hence why Aberdeen is the 'City that the Credit-crunch forgot', A city based on producing a real commodity, oil.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/welcome-to-boomtown-britains-new-capital-of-bling-891291.html
Now I think that independence would tackle the frankly defeatist attitudes of the dole dodgers. Often people don't work because they don't take pride or feel that they get the benefit (the why should I work if the government takes it all culture).
They feel it is okay to be lazy if their fag/booze/fight money comes from other people far away. If it came from someone they relate too, they would in effort be shamed into working and producing. Devolving the social security bill to a more local level is 'better' for everyone in my view.
With regards to the right thing to do, Scotland is a nation with a strong national identity. As a Scotsman I feel Scottish and I would rather have 'Scotland' rather than the pseudonym 'U.K' as a placeholder.
I don't think anyone in the U.K feels British. You'll feel English-British or Scottish-British or Welsh-British.
A federal system would be fine, but as the current political system doesn't want to change then independence is the next best option.
Brian
I agree about debt, but look at this graph". It's a myth that we aren't manufacturing.
As for "dole dodgers", Scotland has the lowest unemployment of any country of the UK. In fact, we have lower unemployment than any G8 country.
85%+ of people in the UK feel British. Obviously that's in addition to being Scottish, English, Welsh and/or N.Irish. Why would you expect it to be otherwise?
I feel British, but I definately feel Scottish first.
I think there is no-one who simply feels British and no other nationality! Therein belies the problem.
I agree with the overwhelming number of dole dodgers in our country, hence why I think independence is a good idea. It will be a difficult adjustment but as they will feel it is worse to take from the people they know it should motivate them to work.
Brian
Firstly, I don't see the relevance of your point about not feeling exclusively British. Perhaps you could expand on that?
And actually, I was pointing out that Scotland has very low unemployment. The stats are here. In my opinion, the forthcoming welfare reforms (JSA, ESA etc) are, if perhaps not quite sufficient, certainly a very significant step in the right direction.
Blaming unemployment on Scotland being part of Britain, when in fact our unemployment is less than most other EU countries, strikes me as rather fanciful.