The Dirty Independence Question

[ThomThomDrum]

I dont think I would like to be a Scot trying to make a decision on this. It seems like a very emotional referendum and there is emotional and economic blackmail being thrown about all over the place and it would be very hard for most to see through all that crap on both sides.

The way it is in reality is that no one truly, 100% knows what an iScotland will look like and what will happen and so voters need to assess their propensity to risk taking. Thats kinda crap. Its a bit of a shit dilemma for a lot of them. You would like some guarantees one way or the other, but they are not forthcoming, so I suppose its easy to say "better the devil you know".

But what they truly need to ask themselves, individually is very simple IMO. First and foremost, do they want an independent Scotland? Is it something they desire personally? If so, I reckon go for it. There may be a few tough times ahead, who knows, but if you have a passion about self governance; your own country; freedom, or how ever in manifests in your mind, then go for it I say.

If you dont desire it at all, as an idea, then its simple to say No. So it seems they issue is with folk who in some way do desire independence, but are trying to understand at what cost it will come. No one truly knows at what cost. There are loads of theories on both sides, but no one can be 100%. Negotiations and a timetable for handover will not occur until after the vote, if required.

I do feel for those who are in that dilemma. I would hate to be in a situation whereby on principle I believe in something, but I feel like there is an economic gun being held to my head forcing me to reconsider my principles.

Either way, I wish the good folk of Scotland all the best no matter the out come. I do personally have a fondness for the Scots and for Scotland. Great folk from a great place. I hope they get what they desire.

[russycarps]

Peston on prices:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-29161335

Unfortunately, he's missed a further extra cost for Scotland, and that's the fact of the geographic spread also increasing the cost of any business servicing Scotland (currently these extra costs are mostly absorbed across the whole of the UK).

And more (something I've mentioned in the past in this thread)....

While the "patriotic shopping" effect will happen each side of the border and is in theory both a benefit as well as a loss on each side in equal proportions, there's much less of a benefit to come in the future for Scotland from this because "patriotic shopping" already happens within Scotland to a much greater extent than it does in rUK - so Scotland will get the loss without a benefit of the same size.

This "patriotic shopping" effect has massive potential to hugely damage the iScottish economy, because 70% of Scottish exports come to rUK, whilst only 10% of rUK exports go to Scotland.

There's very few countries in the world that even exceed 30% of their exports to one market - and so that suggests that around 40% of Scottish exports (and the related jobs) will either dry up completely or head south (tho of course this won't happen in an instant, it'll probably take a decade or so till it settles down).

bluff and bluster!!!!!

but seriously, anyone who doesnt believe this will happen is either a cretin or has their head buried in the sand.

But then again what does it matter, once iscotland goes independent the oil will ensure everyone is at least $60k per annum better off right? That is the pay increase everyone will get when scotland becomes the richest country in the world by GDP per capita.

If you choose to believe the Yes'ers of course.

Edited September 12, 2014 by russycarps

[eFestivals]

Spending on the NHS in Scotland in real terms will have fallen by 1% between 2009/10 - 2015/16 compared to a 4% increase in England.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-29162234

Vote indy to protect the NHS from English cuts?

[philipsteak]

http://www.tatler.com/news/articles/september-2014/the-future-of-scotland

Tatler magazine doing their bit for Independence

[eFestivals]

I dont think I would like to be a Scot trying to make a decision on this. It seems like a very emotional referendum and there is emotional and economic blackmail being thrown about all over the place and it would be very hard for most to see through all that crap on both sides.

The way it is in reality is that no one truly, 100% knows what an iScotland will look like and what will happen and so voters need to assess their propensity to risk taking. Thats kinda crap. Its a bit of a shit dilemma for a lot of them.

A pretty good assessment.

You would like some guarantees one way or the other, but they are not forthcoming, so I suppose its easy to say "better the devil you know".

One of the reasons why there are no guarantees is because Salmond refuses to debates of substance.

Salmpond is in the perfect position to give the guarantees - you know, like what is Plan B (for more than just currency) - but he refuses to do so.

It doesn't take a genius to know why, so anyone who is able to step away from the empty rhetoric is able to work out what is guaranteed for themselves.

For instance: that the banks would head south. Only the economically dumb or deliberate liars have been saying they wouldn't.

But what they truly need to ask themselves, individually is very simple IMO. First and foremost, do they want an independent Scotland? Is it something they desire personally? If so, I reckon go for it. There may be a few tough times ahead, who knows, but if you have a passion about self governance; your own country; freedom, or how ever in manifests in your mind, then go for it I say.

I'm very happy for Scotland to make that choice is they wish, and i'd wish them the best of luck with it (meant in full seriousness, just in case anyone thinks i'm taking the piss).

But Salmond says there will be no hard times (tho I've noticed that's now crept in to Sturgeon's words, i wonder how many yes-ers have noticed?). Salmond says that iScotland will only be gloriously successful, and will have no down sides.

So Salmond is bullshitting Scotland, and trying to steal the people's sovereignty with lies.

If nothing else, Salmond taking that line only ensures that support for indie will not be sustained if yes wins, and makes the job of stabilising a new country all the harder.

Would I vote to be lead into the most difficult of situations for my country by a blatant bullshitter? Not if I wanted things to go well.

If you dont desire it at all, as an idea, then its simple to say No. So it seems they issue is with folk who in some way do desire independence, but are trying to understand at what cost it will come.

Why do they desire that indie? Cos it's "our oil", and we can all be oil sheiks and driving Ferraris.

Simple fact is, without the greed cooked up by Alex around the oil there would be no indyref.

Voting for personal greed in the left leaning Scotland is a bit of a contradiction, but one that many Scots have failed to notice - probably because they're already dreaming of how to spend their new unearned wealth (just like any banker). It's fruitcake land.

No one truly knows at what cost. There are loads of theories on both sides, but no one can be 100%.

There have always been some 100%-ers - like the banks moving south.

The exact cost of things like that can't be calculated, but to deny it's a loss to Scotland (cue Salmond) is fruitcake land again.

I do feel for those who are in that dilemma. I would hate to be in a situation whereby on principle I believe in something, but I feel like there is an economic gun being held to my head forcing me to reconsider my principles.

Being able to feed your children is also just as much of a principle as the constitutional make-up of your country.

They are not mutually exclusive things, tho Alex tries to suggest that they are with his "Team Scotland" and "Team Westminster" bollocks.

He might as well come straight out with it and say "no true scot will vote no". Civic nationalism my arse.

Either way, I wish the good folk of Scotland all the best no matter the out come. I do personally have a fondness for the Scots and for Scotland. Great folk from a great place. I hope they get what they desire.

They'll get what they desire for the constitutional make-up of their country whether they vote yes or no.

It's self-determination either way. Many yes-ers would refuse to admit that (thus showing their disdain for democracy ).

Everything else comes off the back of that constitutional make-up, and is not guaranteed - tho everyone has real life experience of how it works for one of the possible results.

For the other possibility, no one has experience - which allows voting yes to be sold on every invented fantasy basis anyone can think of, and it has been. Almost no yes-er actually bothers to think of anything beyond their wildest dreams.

[eFestivals]

when scotland becomes the richest country in the world by GDP per capita.

GDP is meaningless bollocks when such a big part comes from one exported product (oil). It skews the figures without giving back a benefit to real people of the same value.

Any sensible economist will suggest alternative national numbers for giving a better true measure.

If Scotland was really as rich as the GDP suggests, then Scotland would be visibly more prosperous than rUK even now - and that's certainly not the claim that those who quote the GDP and say "4th richest" make.

[ThomThomDrum]

Why do they desire that indie? Cos it's "our oil", and we can all be oil sheiks and driving Ferraris.

Simple fact is, without the greed cooked up by Alex around the oil there would be no indyref.

Thats a bit unfair and simplistic, no? Surely there are plenty of folk in Scotland that desire independence simply for independence sake ,no? and are not viewing it simply as an economic gamble?

Sure if you forgot the money/economy aspect of it all and sat everyone down in Scotland next Wed for a viewing of Braveheart I'm sure the Yes vote would romp home!

[eFestivals]

http://www.tatler.com/news/articles/september-2014/the-future-of-scotland

Tatler magazine doing their bit for Independence

That's fantastic - how indie will effect the landed gentry.

Still, they needn't worry. The SNP have so far been very supportive of 5 families continuing to own one third of the country.

[eFestivals]

Thats a bit unfair and simplistic, no? Surely there are plenty of folk in Scotland that desire independence simply for independence sake ,no? and are not viewing it simply as an economic gamble?

It's true that there's plenty of people now supporting indie and not on the basis of personal greed - tho it's also clear they're a small minority within Scotland.

Perhaps that small minority were always there, tho the SNP's election results before the oil suggest they weren't.

And what the election results also tell us is that around half of their support comes from who-would-otherwise-be tory voters - who tend to be led in their choices by personal benefit and nothing else.

What I was saying is that Scotland would probably never have got to the point of having this indyref if the SNP hadn't spent the last 40 years repeating the mantra "it's our oil".

Sure if you forgot the money/economy aspect of it all and sat everyone down in Scotland next Wed for a viewing of Braveheart I'm sure the Yes vote would romp home!

just there you've nailed the SNP campaign.

They won't debate the money/economy aspects - everything that disagrees with them is "bullying" and "bluster".

Instead they talk about how glorious an independent Scotland will be.

Braveheart! And most are too wrapped up in cheerleading to notice.

Edited September 12, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

http://www.tatler.com/news/articles/september-2014/the-future-of-scotland

Tatler magazine doing their bit for Independence

With a 'nice' festie link in there too - Belladrum.

Who'd have thought that indie-LJS would be supporting the Scottish aristocracy with his festie choices?

(for anyone that doesn't know, the festie is run directly by the resident family - something I didn't know till I just read the name).

Edited September 12, 2014 by eFestivals

[Lizzim]

a letter to staff! is that legally binding? Kraft wrote to cadbury's staff to reassure them when they acquired them. These things are meaningless

you're crackers if you believe there wont be job losses. But I think you already know there will be

Yes indeed and it wasn't a letter in the strict sense. And plenty of wiggle room. I am sure the intention is there but business environment changes all the time. And whilst there is no practical implications for now it does change the way people think about things.

[wee_insomniac]

Try it this way:

How many UK companies have large-scale facilities in that foreign state called Ireland (which shares Scotland's language advantages) to serve the UK market?

And how many UK companies have large-scale facilities in places such as India to serve the UK market?

Now ask yourself why would UK companies continue to want large-scale foreign facilities to serve the UK market that are not the cheapest foreign facilities?

Don't banks registered headquarters have to be in the country of the majority of their customers?

[eFestivals]

Don't banks registered headquarters have to be in the country of the majority of their customers?

yep, under EU law.

I was talking about large offices of any sort for a bank, such as those that for the moment will remain in Scotland. Some of the functions in those offices could be anywhere in the world.

It's hugely likely that those banks will over time migrate those facilities away from Scotland, at least to some extent if not fully.

Cos if you're going to have offices in one country to serve business done in another country, then it doesn't much matter which foreign country they're in and the logical choice is to go for the cheapest - such as India.

This is why there's been few examples of companies that are serving the UK setting up large offices in Ireland to serve their UK business. Ireland has the same language advantage as Scotland has, and similar economic advantages as iScotland might be able to offer a UK business (cheaper than having staff in London) - whilst (say) India can offer the language advantage but MUCH cheaper costs. So companies choose India.

Ultimately, the reason any business would want foreign facilities to serve UK business is one of cost - so iScotland would not be the first choice for most. This means that the bank facilities that are currently in Scotland are unlikely to stay there. They'll either move to the primary market (rUK) or they'll move to where is cheapest (such as India).

(and from my own point of view, i find Indian accents easier to understand than I do Scottish ones, and I doubt i'm the only one - so there's not too much of a 'native language' advantage with Scotland compared to the likes of India either).

Edited September 12, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

PS: there was a bit of a celebratory news piece on the local news to Bristol last night - because Bristol has some very large bank offices (all of RBS, Lloyds, and HBOS, plus perhaps others), and the general theme was "this is great, jobs *WILL* be coming to Bristol".

[LJS]

Yeah

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/scottish-men-are-better-lovers-and-more-romantic-than-their-english-counterparts-new-survey-reveals-9727551.html#|gigyaMobileDialog

[russycarps]

Yeah

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/scottish-men-are-better-lovers-and-more-romantic-than-their-english-counterparts-new-survey-reveals-9727551.html#|gigyaMobileDialog

Pfft we're too busy oppressing Scots to worry about all that nonsense

[lost]

Nationalist warns businesses that support no will face "day of reckoning" if Scotland votes yes

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11091801/Big-business-warned-of-day-of-reckoning-if-Scots-vote-Yes.html

[Lizzim]

Yeah

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/scottish-men-are-better-lovers-and-more-romantic-than-their-english-counterparts-new-survey-reveals-9727551.html#|gigyaMobileDialog

Hilarious. Well they didn't ask me and having been married to both a Scot and an English man, I can say that my English husband wins hands down. And he has a sexy Liverpool accent.

[russycarps]

Nationalist warns businesses that support no will face "day of reckoning" if Scotland votes yes

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11091801/Big-business-warned-of-day-of-reckoning-if-Scots-vote-Yes.html

Wonderful stuff

So SNP has the power to nationalise multinational corporations with £90bn market caps do they? I guess they will change the name to SP too.

Fantastic.

[LJS]

Just noticed the 2010 general election results in the guardian for Scotland:

SNP's 491,000 Votes

Conservatives 412,000 Votes

Is that right because judging by the commentary I've been reading the press I was thinking Tory support in Scotland would be about a 10th of that.

I have do idea what point you are trying to make here

The SNP do not poll as highly in Westminster elections partly I would suggest because we recognise they will alwaus be a tiny party in Westminster. But you will not the Tory vote you quote is 16.7%. UK wide the Tories got 36.1 %

Edited September 12, 2014 by LJS

[LJS]

PMSL - there is no factual comment that can be made against a yes-ers fact. There is only belittling.

This may well be my favourite ever quote from you, Neil.

Looked in the mirror lately, Neil?

[LJS]

ha this is sensational stuff.

in before "but it's not about the snp!"

despite the fact it is certain this snp will be the party who creates the blueprint for iscotland.

God you are singing Neil's song now!!!!

[LJS]

Do you bother to listen to Russy's words above? You cannot change the banks situation without near-bankrupting yourselves, and changing your country's situation changes the banks.

Even Clydesdale bank has buggered off, and that does almost no business in England. That really is "a Scottish bank".

If you're happy to live in a cave ( ) I'm happy for you, but the rest of Scotland prefers economic prosperity.

I dont think I would like to be a Scot trying to make a decision on this. It seems like a very emotional referendum and there is emotional and economic blackmail being thrown about all over the place and it would be very hard for most to see through all that crap on both sides.

The way it is in reality is that no one truly, 100% knows what an iScotland will look like and what will happen and so voters need to assess their propensity to risk taking. Thats kinda crap. Its a bit of a shit dilemma for a lot of them. You would like some guarantees one way or the other, but they are not forthcoming, so I suppose its easy to say "better the devil you know".

But what they truly need to ask themselves, individually is very simple IMO. First and foremost, do they want an independent Scotland? Is it something they desire personally? If so, I reckon go for it. There may be a few tough times ahead, who knows, but if you have a passion about self governance; your own country; freedom, or how ever in manifests in your mind, then go for it I say.

If you dont desire it at all, as an idea, then its simple to say No. So it seems they issue is with folk who in some way do desire independence, but are trying to understand at what cost it will come. No one truly knows at what cost. There are loads of theories on both sides, but no one can be 100%. Negotiations and a timetable for handover will not occur until after the vote, if required.

I do feel for those who are in that dilemma. I would hate to be in a situation whereby on principle I believe in something, but I feel like there is an economic gun being held to my head forcing me to reconsider my principles.

Either way, I wish the good folk of Scotland all the best no matter the out come. I do personally have a fondness for the Scots and for Scotland. Great folk from a great place. I hope they get what they desire.

Thanks Thom, I understand your view but I don't fit your description.

I have never been in favour of independence until the last year or so. If you ask me my nationality, I would always have said Scottish & Independence will make no difference to that one way or the other. I have always taken the view that solidarity with workers across the UK is much more important than solidarity with millionaire Scottish landowners. I have always voted in the way I thought would best improve social justice, fairness & equality within the UK. I felt quite uncomfortable with the "It's Scotland's Oil" campaign of the 1980's. It seemed selfish to me. And the priority at that time was to get rid of Thatcher.

So what has changed? Well, I think the catalyst for me to change my mind was the decision (taken by the Westminster parties) to insist on a straight yes/no in the referendum. Had they allowed a "devo max" option & it was reasonable & workable, I think that would have got my vote. But they didn't & that forced me to choose between two options - neither of which I instinctively liked much. And the more I thought about it (& read views form both sides) the more it became clear to me that there was little or no prospect that Westminster could deliver any meaningful social change because neither of the 2 parties who actually matter have any interest ion doing so. I have written at some length of how I feel massively let down by New Labour.

Will things be different in an independent Scotland. I have always made it clear there is absolutely no guarantee of that. But, crucially, there is an opportunity, an opportunity that I believe does not exist in the UK. My hopes do not rest with the SNP, although I would still suggest they are better than Labour. Part of my faith is based on the astonishing grass roots yes campaign which has had nothing like the coverage the official campaigns have had in the main stream media. I have genuinely seen nothing like it in my life.

I am not voting yes in the expectation of being better off - either personally or as a nation and I accept in the short term we may be worse off. I do believe in the long term the very fact that we are electing a government whose first priority is getting the best outcome for Scotland and who will be held to account by the people of Scotland is likely to lead toa better outcome for Scotland in the long term.

Sadly, I probably need to add as a footnote that I do not believe Scots are better than anyone else & I have no issue at all with the people of England. I should also point out that I totally accept that it is perfectly reasonable to believe No is the best answer. Indeed I have many friends who believe that & we discuss it, disagree & remain friends.

[LJS]

Try it this way:

How many UK companies have large-scale facilities in that foreign state called Ireland (which shares Scotland's language advantages) to serve the UK market?

And how many UK companies have large-scale facilities in places such as India to serve the UK market?

Now ask yourself why would UK companies continue to want large-scale foreign facilities to serve the UK market that are not the cheapest foreign facilities?

RBS could have employed people anywhere before Indy

They can employ people anywhere after Indy

so what exactly is your point?

[LJS]

Better together

http://gu.com/p/4xg4f