1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Poll: Scottish independence vote

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by Biohazard, Sep 23, 2013.

?

Scottish independence, yes or no?

  1. I'm Scottish and in favour of independence

    137 vote(s)
    10.9%
  2. I'm Scottish and against independence

    167 vote(s)
    13.3%
  3. I'm from another part of UK and in favour of Scottish independence

    273 vote(s)
    21.7%
  4. I'm from another part of UK and against Scottish independence

    682 vote(s)
    54.2%
  1. Superficial

    Mobster

    Joined: Oct 29, 2002

    Posts: 4,010

    Location: London

    The Scottish health service is not, in any way, controlled by Westminster. they also have an additional 10% funding per person.
     
  2. grumpysculler

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Nov 23, 2009

    Posts: 1,195

    The English NHS has not been obliterated. It still seems to be rather alive.

    The Scottish NHS is entirely devolved and nothing anybody south of the border does can change that (unless we are so far down tinfoil hat lane that we think devolution might be rescinded).

    However, apparently independence is required to improve NHS Scotland. Somehow. Nobody tells us how. Maybe nobody knows, but we still need independence to do it (if we knew how, which we don't).
     
  3. yonderblue

    Gangster

    Joined: Dec 18, 2002

    Posts: 220

    Location: Ecosse

    Quite simple really, Since Labour started privatising the NHS in England and Tories/Libdems increased the privatisations which means the budget is cut for NHS in England which means there is a cut it barnett formula for Scotlands budget. If you guys down south want to pay to see a GP your welcome but I for one don't.
     
  4. q974739

    Hitman

    Joined: Feb 4, 2009

    Posts: 638

    Could I refer you to the example of Hinchingbrooke Hospital? Some links...

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-27468171
    http://www.hinchingbrooke.nhs.uk/hinchingbrooke-news/?p=299

    That is, a failing hospital was privatized and has gone, in 2 years, from a significantly indebted hospital to an *award winning* hospital which is at least breaking even.

    This is saving the NHS/Government/Tax-payers money. To the tune of about 9 million a year, currently, while winning awards. If saving money can be done like this, why in the world is it a problem? Why burn money?

    (Note, effects of privatization can vary, your millage may vary, stocks may go up as well as down, this topic should have a separate thread, arguably.)
    Edit: Declaration of interest, have used this hospital in the last 2 years. Further details might be revealed, but only if they add to the debate.
     
  5. Weaver

    Hitman

    Joined: Jul 9, 2008

    Posts: 722

    Location: It's Grimm up Norf


    If I were of the notion to debate with you about this I'd ask you firstly what do you mean by nationalist?

    I'd then await your reply and see where you took it. However I think we already know where you are driving with the comment and that you had hoped to engage with someone not as aware as this observer so lets dispense with the formalities shall we?

    Your statement is so full of fallacy’s that I don’t know where to begin so we'll start with the two glaring ones first and follow on from there. First of all we have the Non-Sequitur with the Straw Man standing very close by with his Spotlight and last but not least we witnessed you Poisoning the Well just to make sure that anyone who drinks from that particular source of agua is well and truly tainted.

    Do you even understand what that term civic nationalism entails or how it relates to the debate on Scottish independence? It relates to the debate in two ways the first of which is entirely in keeping with my political leanings of rationalism and liberalism where membership of the civic nation is considered voluntary. It may be an alien concept to you but it was an idea promoted by the likes of Hutcheson, Hume, Smith, Stewart, Reid, Burns and even further afield by Rousseau with his theories on the social contract etc etc, other observers will confirm that my liberal position here has been consistent through these debates. Secondly its the term used by the YES movement in combination with the Scottish National Party i.e. the national party of Scotland in order to highlight and discuss their position on popular sovereignty (You'll note its NOT the Scottish 'Nationalists' Party as some people mainly against an iScotland like to label/libel them [since we're playing with words]).

    YES Scotland is made up of a number of very different civic/social/political groups of which the SNP is merely a tiny part. Quite clearly 'National' and 'nationalist' have very different connotations. Therefore you're supplanting of 'nationalist' as a catch all term for ALL iScotland supporters, in spite of the vast difference in ideologies is something which I regard as not only a clumsy employment of reductio ad absurdum or a funnelling to absurdity but is also so far off the mark that I find it particularly nauseous. If your going to try that stuff on you are going to have to work a lot harder.

    Since I'm not a supporter of the SNP nor do I agree with your transparent attempt and vulgar word play. I refuse to allow you to denigrate my position on popular sovereignty by burdening me with the toxic label of nationalist!

    I am NOT nor have I ever been a nationalist of any persuasion.


    Now, take the day off, and give yourself a break.


    ------
     
  6. Bear

    Capodecina

    Joined: Oct 24, 2002

    Posts: 12,450

    Location: Bucks and Edinburgh

    There are plenty of Scots I work with that see in the press that the English complain about the Scots getting more spending per head than we do and say that we subsidise them. It is not just clueless people on the internet, it's the press that has been feeding them this nonsense and they bite hook line and sinker.

    It is a just one piece amongst others that make some of them want independance.
     
  7. Cooper

    Mobster

    Joined: Jun 16, 2004

    Posts: 2,605


    ..this is how a typical, guilt ridden, self loathing, educated middle class leftie sleeps at night, disturbed by the fact that his socialist politics and desire to leave the UK, have led him to get into bed with vulgar nationalism, responsible for so much of the misery we've seen around the world in the 20th, and now the 21st century.

    Pathetic.
     
  8. DireEmblem

    Hitman

    Joined: Aug 25, 2008

    Posts: 681

    I have always said that I would leave Scotland(Edinburgh) if the yes vote went through.

    I hate the arguements - especially Oil - that we will use the Oil money to build a pension fund like Norway. So where are you going to cut funding from then, and what if someone comes up with a new wonderfuel in the next 5 years? Dont lay all your eggs in one basket.

    Also, what happens for people on the border - my folks are from Berwick - if we go down the route of using a different currency that would be a pain in the @$$ for me.

    Likewise - how does the NHS/Police/Fire Brigade work cross borders, and what will happen to Glasgow building the UK fleet?

    I'm very much "live together, die alone". I like the way things are at present, I have never voted, but this will force me to vote NO.

    We are governed by Politicians that are micromanaged with different budgets into difference areas/sectors. Are you saying the people who will potentially govern the new Scotland dont currently get a say in how things are run at present? BS.

    (This is by no means a balanced account, only my opinion. I am not going to waste my time going through the full list of pros/cons for this. You only live once, I'm not going to waste my time reading through countless pages/articles on projected facts and figures.)
     
  9. Tefal

    Capo Crimine

    Joined: Jun 30, 2007

    Posts: 66,519

    Location: Wales



    You'd be giving the ruk a stick to beat you with if you went down that path

    The UK hold major nessecery assets in Scotland that I Scotland would need such as all the government offices thier computers thier databases thier computer systems infrastructure etc.

    If you were doing an asset split and the ruk was spiteful they could keep all of those offices and equipments forcing the new Scottish government to desperately try and build a government infrastructure over night while turning over to Scotland some as far as Scotland concerned ccompletely worthless assets. Wonder how much some offices in the south east would be worth and a load of ageing military equipment that we don't want.

    Also if your defaulting on your debt you won't be getting any assets that were paid for by those debts
     
  10. yonderblue

    Gangster

    Joined: Dec 18, 2002

    Posts: 220

    Location: Ecosse

    I would just stay in bed.
     
  11. Schlong&Stable

    Mobster

    Joined: Apr 27, 2013

    Posts: 4,083

    The asset issue is a funny one. Do the SNP think that they are going to get £108bn in cash? They'll get to keep £108bn worth of infrastructure: roads, railways, telecomms, energy etc.

    The SNP seem to have a very parasitic attitude towards rUK. Even if they get independence, they still want Scotland to leech of rUK and make outrageous demands.

    If there is a vote for secession, then my fellow Scots should pay their debts and go their own way. Begging for more defeats the point of independence.
     
  12. Tefal

    Capo Crimine

    Joined: Jun 30, 2007

    Posts: 66,519

    Location: Wales

    Haha would be interesting if we deducted 108 billion from the total cost of all roads and rails in Scotland then asked for the other trillion plus back in cash
     
  13. Turambar

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Jun 10, 2007

    Posts: 1,174

    Location: Glasgow

    What on earth are you talking about? What major assets do you think are currently based in Scotland that weren't paid for out of the Scottish budget?
     
  14. touch

    Capodecina

    Joined: Oct 28, 2006

    Posts: 11,360

    Location: Sufferlandria

    When he says "major assets in Scotland" he doesnt just mean things based in Scotland.

    Passport infrastructure
    vehicle licensing + VED infrastructure
    HMRC infrastructure

    These are just a few examples of major assets in Scotland which we dont own and would have to replace.
     
  15. eddiemcgarrigle

    Mobster

    Joined: Nov 13, 2006

    Posts: 3,737

    Location: Inverkip

    Don't we have a passport office in Glasgow?
     
  16. touch

    Capodecina

    Joined: Oct 28, 2006

    Posts: 11,360

    Location: Sufferlandria

    When i say 'infrastructure', I mean computer systems, computer hardware, buildings, trained employees, business processes, etc.
    Yes, there is a passport office in Glasgow, but without the 'back-end' it would be pretty much useless.
     
  17. grumpysculler

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Nov 23, 2009

    Posts: 1,195

    The issue is who paid for it.

    Passports are not a devolved issue, therefore funding a passport office was paid for from the UK budget.

    But again, the treasury have assumed (for which I read proposed) that fixed assets be divided on a geographical basis. Yes poo-pooed the whole document without actually countering anything contained in it.

    The IT infrastructure and software licensing necessary to manage a secure passport system is obviously a different (and rather more difficult) issue to a building.

    Ditto for a large number of reserved functions of government.
     
  18. Raumarik

    Capodecina

    Joined: Jul 14, 2003

    Posts: 13,732

    The focus on finance is getting a bit dull again guys, it doesn't help either camp either since neither knows what will happen, or what would or wouldn't be divided out. There would be negotiation regardless, as there is when any two sensible neighbours sit down to talk.
     
  19. grumpysculler

    Wise Guy

    Joined: Nov 23, 2009

    Posts: 1,195

    The negotiation will almost certainly result in a balanced outcome as neither side could afford to give anything away in the eyes of their electorate. The treasury paper sets the overall numbers out in numbers from uncontested sources.

    I agree that the focus on financial negotiation is rather pointless. The finances of the startup costs and the running costs of an independent Scotland are not pointless, though. Money is (almost) everything.

    You cannot build a better country if you lack the money to pay for it. That isn't to say that Scotland can't be financially independent (almost everyone with a vote knows that it can, despite attempts by Yes to confuse this point). Just because we can, doesn't mean that it is in our best interests to do so.

    Having decisions made by a different group of politicians might appeal to some (and has an emotional argument attached) but is unlikely to change much.

    Moving a small number of nuclear missiles a short distance isn't really going to have any effect other than an emotional one (despite assertions to the contrary, nuclear relocation is not nuclear disarmament and Yes's path for Scotland contradicts the disarmament agenda).

    Just about everything else costs money. So financial discussions are very much worthwhile.
     
  20. xs2man

    Mobster

    Joined: Jul 21, 2008

    Posts: 4,686

    To be fair, I'm a LOT less worried about how the assets are to be split, and FAR more worried about the day to day costs of running iScotland.

    How much MORE tax will I have to pay (coz it damned sure wont be less). Not just income tax, but on goods and services too. I mean, the Yes campaign seem to suggest that we could do well, just like some of these Nordic countries, but they are among the most expensive countries in the world.

    I travel to Norway, for example, a LOT with my work, and hooped if I want to pay £10 for a pint, or £3 for a bottle (500ml) of coke, or £3 for a mars bar (or whatever sweetie you want). (£50+ per head, for an average 2 course meal with a beer). Then my house would cost twice as much, as would my car. As does pretty much everything (although petrol / diesel is around the same price), like road taxes (done on weight, and would be at least a grand per year for my current car). And other countries, Denmark, Sweden etc... aren't much better. Granted, they are better paid, but not twice as much (to be in line with the extra taxes), and they pay more income tax off it. Ok, they do get a lot in return for the pleasure of all their taxes, but it would take a LONG time of high taxation before we would see similar benefits.