Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 5
Discussion
Well, yes but no. Admirable honesty. However, I'll never understand the logic - 10 years of decline (let's say from 100 to 90%) before things begin to pick up, and god knows how long before we get anywhere near where we would be as part of the UK.
Seems to be a total acceptance that a yes vote f
ks the country. If that's the case, why vote for it?
Perhaps I'm approaching it totally the wrong way by looking for sense and logic again.
Seems to be a total acceptance that a yes vote f
ks the country. If that's the case, why vote for it?Perhaps I'm approaching it totally the wrong way by looking for sense and logic again.
Garvin said:
simoid said:
I'm rather uncertain about the process for what happens after a "yes" vote.
More specifically: what happens negotiations wise if a stalemate occurs?
The Scottish negotiating team Shirley wouldn't accept the UK offer of 8.3% oil, 8.3% debt, no currency union... would they?
I fail to see why the UK team would accept anything other than that.
I don't think Scotland can play the "we can make this difficult and take ages..." card as it will almost certainly harm us more than anyone. Mind you, we've already voted to cut our nose off by this point, might as well decapitate ourselves.
(There was a serious question in there for anyone that could help. Does stalemate = court, or simply no independence?)
A yes vote merely gives Scotland the mandate to negotiate the terms of independence but, having said that, it would be churlish of the rUK to deliberately derail that so there will have to be compromises on both sides which will inevitably mean rUK tax payers picking up some of the bill for iScotland excesses. However, I believe the rUK government will get short shrift from the rUK electorate if it goes easy on Scotland in those negotiations.More specifically: what happens negotiations wise if a stalemate occurs?
The Scottish negotiating team Shirley wouldn't accept the UK offer of 8.3% oil, 8.3% debt, no currency union... would they?
I fail to see why the UK team would accept anything other than that.
I don't think Scotland can play the "we can make this difficult and take ages..." card as it will almost certainly harm us more than anyone. Mind you, we've already voted to cut our nose off by this point, might as well decapitate ourselves.
(There was a serious question in there for anyone that could help. Does stalemate = court, or simply no independence?)
Garvin said:
A yes vote merely gives Scotland the mandate to negotiate the terms of independence but, having said that, it would be churlish of the rUK to deliberately derail........
Who makes that judgement though.IMO - the fair option would be to split all assets and liabilities (excluding the setup cost for iScotland) on a strictly per capita basis. iScotland should take 100% of the setup costs on their own chin since it was only they who had a say in this process. We then go our separate ways with no tie ins or get out of jail free cards handed out (i.e. currency union).
Of course - the SNP are not going to accept such a proposal - since their utopian vision depends on them getting geographic share of the oil, a currency union etc, despite seemingly having little basis in international law, or having been already told it is out of the question.
The problem is, any attempt to deviate from the SNPs white paper 'demands' will be accompanied by accusations of deliberate derailment and unfairness on the part of Westminster......despite the fact that Westminster may be being totally reasonable and not "churlish" in the least.
Big Rod said:
I would assume some sort of internationally recognised arbitrator would be engaged otherwise I could see any negotiations would soon nosedive into a national squabbling match.
All they need to do is follow the rules of international law.Dividing oil. Dividing debt. There are quite a few precedents in place.
This is problematic for many hopes of the SNP. I don't think they will like the outcome, if things are divided under the same precedents that already exist. An iScotland will not be like Narnia. The rUk gets to keep a lot of stuff.
Garvin said:
A yes vote merely gives Scotland the mandate to negotiate the terms of independence but, having said that, it would be churlish of the rUK to deliberately derail that so there will have to be compromises on both sides which will inevitably mean rUK tax payers picking up some of the bill for iScotland excesses. However, I believe the rUK government will get short shrift from the rUK electorate if it goes easy on Scotland in those negotiations.
How very lose:lose.I wonder if the governments have played out a game theory style negotiations and how they turned out. I think the Scottish predictions would be enlightening.
Big Rod said:
I would assume some sort of internationally recognised arbitrator would be engaged otherwise I could see any negotiations would soon nosedive into a national squabbling match.
I would imagine so - this is afterall a matter of great importance for the international community too.New precedents set or existing precedents followed (or not followed) could have global repercussions. This isn't just a local matter.
Moonhawk said:
The problem is, any attempt to deviate from the SNPs white paper 'demands' will be accompanied by accusations of deliberate derailment and unfairness on the part of Westminster......despite the fact that Westminster may be being totally reasonable and not "churlish" in the least.
And that would matter why? No one in rUK is going to be worried about a few Scots calling them names by this point. They've said no to numerous demands now - before the referendum - so can hardly be blamed is they are consistent. When the negotiations do not bear any relation to those stated by the Yes campaign people in Scotland should take it up with A Salmond Esq not anyone in rUK.Scotland and their negotiatiors are just going to look like idiots to the world at large and get no backup. They may find a similar situation on their first visit to Brussels!
jamiebae said:
Actually, if all Yes voters were that enlightened and this was their reason for their vote then I'd have a lot more respect for them. This is someone making a choice based on their beliefs and values, as opposed to the promise of a money tree and a Buckfast fountain for anyone joining the SNP cause.
Where it might be honest. I dont think honesty will comfort the tens of thousands of people who will lose their employment over this debacle.Im also not really interested in paying for their pipe dream via higher taxes, taking a hit on my savings, mortgage increase, losing a chunk of my pension and increased costs on pretty much everything.
There seems to be a pointless rush for this aswell as if its all or nothing, now or never. Are the SNP the right people for the job? Have they been honest? No. Do they have a clear plan? No. Can they answer questions? No.
Wrong time, wrong people...Definite No.
MintyChris said:
There seems to be a pointless rush for this aswell as if its all or nothing, now or never.
Well for one person at least - it's probably true. Salmond wants to write himself into Scotland's history books along side William Wallace and Robert the Bruce.......and this is his one chance to do it.
He doesn't care what he says or what unattainable promises are made in order to achieve this. History will only remember that he delivered Scotland from the clutches of the evil tory sassenachs.........the decades of struggle and financial strife that will likely result will be forgotten in the annals of time.
Moonhawk said:
Well for one person at least - it's probably true.
Salmond wants to write himself into Scotland's history books along side William Wallace and Robert the Bruce.......and this is his one chance to do it.
He doesn't care what he says or what unattainable promises are made in order to achieve this. History will only remember that he delivered Scotland from the clutches of the evil tory sassenachs.........the decades of struggle and financial strife that will likely result will beforgotten in the annals of time blamed squarely on someone else.
EFA Salmond wants to write himself into Scotland's history books along side William Wallace and Robert the Bruce.......and this is his one chance to do it.
He doesn't care what he says or what unattainable promises are made in order to achieve this. History will only remember that he delivered Scotland from the clutches of the evil tory sassenachs.........the decades of struggle and financial strife that will likely result will be
MintyChris said:
jamiebae said:
Actually, if all Yes voters were that enlightened and this was their reason for their vote then I'd have a lot more respect for them. This is someone making a choice based on their beliefs and values, as opposed to the promise of a money tree and a Buckfast fountain for anyone joining the SNP cause.
Where it might be honest. I dont think honesty will comfort the tens of thousands of people who will lose their employment over this debacle.Im also not really interested in paying for their pipe dream via higher taxes, taking a hit on my savings, mortgage increase, losing a chunk of my pension and increased costs on pretty much everything.
There seems to be a pointless rush for this aswell as if its all or nothing, now or never. Are the SNP the right people for the job? Have they been honest? No. Do they have a clear plan? No. Can they answer questions? No.
Wrong time, wrong people...Definite No.
Gutted, my annual bonus is due to be paid one week after the vote, by which time the markets will have recovered if it's a 'no'. On the plus side though, if it's a 'yes' I reckon the pound will collapse to the point I can buy myself a nice house with it once I've converted it and transferred it back to the UK 
simoid said:
Garvin said:
A yes vote merely gives Scotland the mandate to negotiate the terms of independence but, having said that, it would be churlish of the rUK to deliberately derail that so there will have to be compromises on both sides which will inevitably mean rUK tax payers picking up some of the bill for iScotland excesses. However, I believe the rUK government will get short shrift from the rUK electorate if it goes easy on Scotland in those negotiations.
How very lose:lose.I wonder if the governments have played out a game theory style negotiations and how they turned out. I think the Scottish predictions would be enlightening.
Now what the real value of independence is when you have no control over your currency does baffle me somewhat? What value independence when you jump out of one alliance with the UK to immediately seek another alliance with the EU baffles me further? To do this and suffer years of hardship for the 'pleasure' just smacks of downright masochism*.
*Interchangeable with 'stupidity'
Garvin said:
Financially, I think it will, unfortunately, be lose : lose. However, if you are driven by emotion then having independence and 'freedom' may seem like a win to some yes supporters who see the financial pain as being 'value for money'.
Now what the real value of independence is when you have no control over your currency does baffle me somewhat? What value independence when you jump out of one alliance with the UK to immediately seek another alliance with the EU baffles me further? To do this and suffer years of hardship for the 'pleasure' just smacks of downright masochism*.
*Interchangeable with 'stupidity'
I wonder if the best way to deal with this politically would've been to negotiate first, vote later.Now what the real value of independence is when you have no control over your currency does baffle me somewhat? What value independence when you jump out of one alliance with the UK to immediately seek another alliance with the EU baffles me further? To do this and suffer years of hardship for the 'pleasure' just smacks of downright masochism*.
*Interchangeable with 'stupidity'
As we have it just now, yes voters are able to remove themselves from the actual reality of the situation because there is nothing concrete (or the stuff that is concrete they can fairly easily ignore/discredit as baseless, and other yes voters will agree without question). However, I feel many of the Yessers would be much less malleable and enthusiastic if knowledge was less imperfect.
This wouldn't affect the hardcore who can cope with a decade of being broke, mind you. I wish I had their money.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff