Yes or no. Scottish residents only please
- Thread starter Den
- Start date
- Status
Yes
We would not want foreigners interfering in our currency and leaving our children liable for the foreigners debts when it goes tits up. These are the same foreigners who held our children in contempt, educating Scottish and Europeans kids for free while making other British kids pay.
Independence will mean Independence not what a few bitter angry Scots say it means. HTH
You're sticking your fingers in your ears and singing la la la. Doesn't matter, you will be foreigners and you will not dictate to the British how their currency is operated.
HTH
An interesting article. So in essence:
Scotland has a right to a share of the Bank of England and therefore is entitled to continue using and having influence over the Pound (OK, I tend to agree with that)
The Scottish Banks are not really Scotland's problem as most of their trading is in London (Erm, but the Bank of England is in London so by this arguement the article infers Scotland don't have a right to a share in the Bank of England).
rUK will lose 90% of its energy resources (Scotland would appear to want it's fair share of the UK's other resources based on a per capita basis, yet when it comes to the UK's oil and gas resources they want it based on geographical boundries. What happened to the arguement in the article that states "the adult thing is for both sides to share assets and liabilities").
OK, I'm being somewhat simplistic in applying the counter arguements (in brackets) above, but just trying to show there are different ways of looking at things when you try to apply the logic used in one arguement across the board.
Scotland has a right to a share of the Bank of England and therefore is entitled to continue using and having influence over the Pound (OK, I tend to agree with that)
The Scottish Banks are not really Scotland's problem as most of their trading is in London (Erm, but the Bank of England is in London so by this arguement the article infers Scotland don't have a right to a share in the Bank of England).
rUK will lose 90% of its energy resources (Scotland would appear to want it's fair share of the UK's other resources based on a per capita basis, yet when it comes to the UK's oil and gas resources they want it based on geographical boundries. What happened to the arguement in the article that states "the adult thing is for both sides to share assets and liabilities").
OK, I'm being somewhat simplistic in applying the counter arguements (in brackets) above, but just trying to show there are different ways of looking at things when you try to apply the logic used in one arguement across the board.
This is the attitude problem, right here.
They want out of the union while still retaining the protection financially through a currency union, where the union protects them from any failure. The remainder of the union has no say in the currency union, only the ex union country Scotland has the say in a currency union.
Dream on !
Insane
They want out of the union while still retaining the protection financially through a currency union, where the union protects them from any failure. The remainder of the union has no say in the currency union, only the ex union country Scotland has the say in a currency union.
Dream on !
Insane
The whole 'independent' Scotland thing is a sham. What we have had is a protracted effort from a few Scots to break up Britain. Salmon was supposed to be some super clever politico who would lead the faithful to some daft idea of utopia, even when that isn't what he was offering, it turns out he is a completely clueless twat: quelle surprise
I can picture you now. Strutting about with your finger under your nose. You vill not dictate how ve vill yoos our currency you infidel Scottish pigs.
In fact .... where is that hitler video? I'll make a new version. Devon, you can be hitler. Cpn Black can be the guy who tells you we are going to use the pound. Salmond can be one of the guys being lectured to.
I'll get Ronnie to do it
Tee..hee..hee
Things which Scotland have contributed to - are quite logically owned in part by Scotland.
Your idea that natural resources belonging to a separate country - might be owned jointly - is absolutely crackers! Unless - you believe like some other people - that the fields were deveiloped using British taxpayers' money?
They weren't.
Al
Are you sure that's correct?
http://www.ukcisa.org.uk/Internatio...e-or-Overseas-fees/Scotland-Higher-Education/
It's small print, and there are a lot of sections - but it looks to me like Continental European, English, Irish and Welsh students fall into the same "Non-Scottish EU Nationals" group.
Anything other - would appear to be rather "racist". If I'm incorrect, I'll appreciate being corrected.
Otherwise - where are you getting the notiion?
Al
I'll tell you what you lot have created the bog of eternal stench with this referendum shit, and your demands over running your independent federalist state through the bank of England, all headed up by a complete wanker Salmond .
Be careful what you wish for.
but please go it alone now.I'll tell you what you lot have created the bog of eternal stench with this referendum shit, and your demands over running your independent federalist state through the bank of England, all headed up by a complete wanker Salmond .
Be careful what you wish for.
So sorry that our democratic right - is causing your nose to curl up....................
(I wish I could edit the clip of Father Jack apologising to Bishop Brennan)And just which Westminster leaders are you saying is less of a wanker than Salmond?
I know if I offer Blair and Brown as being worthy of machine-gunning - someone will say "But they're Scottish!"
(again)Al
So sorry that our democratic right - is causing your nose to curl up....................
And just which Westminster leaders are you saying is less of a wanker than Salmond?
I know if I offer Blair and Brown as being worthy of machine-gunning - someone will say "But they're Scottish!"
Al
Bit like our democratic right to tell you we don't want a money union with countries outside the UK then !
I hope you do go independent , doubt you'll have the balls though somehow .
Either way good luck with whatever your new currency ends up as.
Bit like our democratic right to tell you we don't want a money union with countries outside the UK then !
I hope you do go independent , doubt you'll have the balls though somehow .
Either way good luck with whatever your new currency ends up as.
PS no doubt you'll blame the English if your own countrymen vote no ! Lol
I rarely look into this thread now. It's been ruined by people , most of whom will have no vote in September ( and don't they resent it) who have no serious political or economic views other than to parrot the rubbish they read in the red tops or over the bar of their local. It seems to me that they offer no alternatives to independence for Scotland but are willing to accept more of the same dreary old Westminster based status quo or like Devon seek to blame foreigners for the problems faced by the UK.
The key thing about breaking away from the Union is that it provides an opportunity for people in Scotland to decide their own future and to take responsibility for that future. If that means a separate currency, a new passport, border posts on the A68 etc etc then so be it.
The key thing about breaking away from the Union is that it provides an opportunity for people in Scotland to decide their own future and to take responsibility for that future. If that means a separate currency, a new passport, border posts on the A68 etc etc then so be it.
You have obviously totally misunderstood what I was trying to say in my last post, and have attributed to me ideas that are not mine. I was just trying to point out how politicians, and supporters, on either side consistently phrase their arguements, and choose the boundries/conditions of those arguements, to suit their cause. For example:
The natural resources off the coast of Scotland currently belong to the U.K., not Scotland, therefore it is an asset of the U.K., the article referred to stated "the adult thing is for both sides to share assets and liabilities". Yet further down the article then stated that with independence Scotland would own 90% the energy assets (oh, so the author is not prepared to share this asset then
). In my previous post I stated no ideas or opinions of my own with regard to Scottish Independence (other than agreeing that the Scots are entitled to use the Pound, etc.). Afterall, according to most of the 'yes' camp, as an Englishman, I have no right to an opinion, this despite whatever happens will have an impact on me and the rest of the UK.
- Status