Have any thoughts on the other part of my post? For clarity the whole thing reads as follows, second part now in bold:
Will you vote for independence?
- Thread starter ska invita
- Start date
Have any thoughts on the other part of my post? For clarity the whole thing reads as follows, second part now in bold:
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
The bold bit has all been addressed before, save for a possible nationalist backlash in England. And I actually have no real way of gauging that. Do you think there might be one? And why. This isn't an anti English demand for independence. It's not even a little bit about that.
8ball
Decolonise colons!
Is a nationalist backlash expected in Scotland in the event of a 'No'?
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
8ball
Decolonise colons!
Maybe not the right word, but possibly not far off if a lot of people are expecting a 'yes' and it is denied.
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
I think that lots of people have lost trust in the BBC and media and with the Labour Party during this campaign. I don't think it'll be regained. I think that's a good thing.
It's possible that some nationalists voting Yes for nationalist reasons will feel bitter towards No voters. But I don't think inordinately so. I think people know it's been close all along.
Unfortunately, a lot of people down here (I'm in London) don't get this. I'm quite regularly asked how I'm voting and explain I can't vote etc. A few times when pressed, I've said that if I was in Scotland, I'd vote yes and the response has been 'why are you down here if you hate us so much?' Obviously people I don't know well but I now stop at the 'can't vote' thing in general as CBA. Obviously happy to discuss with friends and people who've some clue though.
I got back to London last night after being in Scotland for a week so it's going to be interesting to see if the general mood has changed.
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
Another perfectly good post stolen by tapatalk.
What I said was: why do you think that is, Sue? Ignorance, or media portrayal?
What I said was: why do you think that is, Sue? Ignorance, or media portrayal?
Both. People in general know little about Scotland (apart from having been up for the Festival/to a stag do) and until very recently haven't been very interested either. For example, I've been asked quite a few times if we've thought about maybe trying some form of devolution first...
There's a perception (which I assume must be being fuelled by the media) that most people in Scotland are on benefits and Scotland contributes little by way of tax and free prescriptions are a sign of overall scrounginess. (Free prescriptions seem to really piss people off for some reason.)
It's interesting, if depressing, that the old stereotype (hardworking, canny) seems to have been replaced for quite a lot of people by the 'scrounger' one.
How it would go would be something like this:
- Scotland votes "yes".
- There is general financial instability, particularly acute in Scotland, from the resulting uncertainty over currency.
- This instability lasts at least until there is certainty on the currency, which at a minimum would seem to be 2016, long past the next general election.
- The Bank of England, which has effectively guaranteed Scottish banks, has to prop them up by being the lender of last resort, lending billions of pounds to them.
- This is effectively a loan from rUK to Scotland.
- There is no guarantee that the resulting Scottish currency will be good for the loan, so the loan will, in effect, appear to be a bailout of an independent Scotland by the rUK taxpayer in the run up to a general election, with the very real prospect that Scotland will have to default on the loan at some future point in time.
My broad understanding is that the "yes" camp would rebut that by saying it is just the kind of nightmare scenario that guarantees that a currency union would happen - i.e. rUK are bound to let us in because if they don't we'll go bust and they'll lose a very large amount of money...they'll see reason etc, etc...
It's a strange argument, I can see the logic of it but it's quite high stakes stuff.
The real problem is that the basic structure there - of rUK insuring a Scottish economy which it has very little control over through sharing a lender of last resort (the Bank of England) - is a key feature of currency union. Demonstrating just how wrong something can go, while negotiating for exactly the same thing is a really odd way to go about doing things...
And then you can add in nationalist sentiment down here. It would be less anti-Scots per se because I don't think I've ever met anyone in rUK who is anti-Scots (unlike in Scotland where I not infrequently got a fair load of crap for being English), but more along the lines of - "what a bloody cock-up, how on earth can we trust that lot in a currency union?"
It would be a really interesting one for the Tories, would probably tear them apart given that they are both the Conservative and Unionist party...
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
Then your broad understanding is inadequate.
Care to expand?
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
I have written repeatedly and in detail about this on this thread.
So that'll be a no then...?
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
I have been so fucking expansive on a policy I don't support that you wouldn't believe it. Were I to print it off, it'd be a book. Fill your boots.
Read the thread. We've been discussing this for the last two years and not sure why we should go over stuff that's been discussed at length just because you've belatedly realised there's a referendum on.
The point is very clear and is discussed at length up there ▲.
weltweit
Well-Known Member
Nothing wrong with debating it again.
Scotland will only be truly independent if it has its own currency. If it wants to keep the pound or even adopt the Euro it will be less than whole independence though France and Germany seem content with the Euro, and Ireland, so perhaps Scotland could be.
In much the same way that there was no chance that I, down in London, was going to spend 2 years watching a regional political debate from the area of the UK farthest away from London, there is no chance that I am going to try and parse together your own argument for you from 183 pages of a thread.
If there is a good case for currency union, it can generally be made in two or three sentences so I don't see why it is so hard for the "yes" supporters here to not do so. More time has probably now been spent by peeps saying "I can't be arsed to tell you why it is a good thing..."
weltweit
Well-Known Member
Which in a funny way is a lot of the substance of the argument from the yes camp.
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
Really, both of you, read the thread. Seriously.
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Seriously, the arrogance of just turning up a week before the vote and saying, right, now i'm here the debate can start properly - off you go.
I managed to follow it from London because I was interested. It is a bit much though, arriving two years late and expecting people to go through the whole thing again because you're now interested. Anyway weltweit seems keen to chat so I'll leave you two to it.
Similar threads
