A more balanced poll on Independence for Scotland

[-Pete-]

How about this poll?

[perdu]

I'm bored of these threads


WITH






and yes I am

[-Pete-]

Strage? Foxed. I mean Fixed...

[don4l]

Funny thing is that most people want them to be indepentant...

...and still they are angry?



Don
--

[perdu]

Guam said:

perdu said:

I'm bored of these threads


WITH






and yes I am

Strage that Bill same answer I gave

Oi Tom watch it

It's supposed to be me that misses vital bits

[perdu]

Guam said:

We need an old fogeys subforum of PH I reckon Bill

Hmm maybe...

But more than a tad of risk that we'd be in there on our own, do you think the youngsters would pop in at times with a wee drinkie for us?

[mybrainhurts]

I don't understand the question...

[CanadianScot]

don4l said:

Funny thing is that most people want them to be indepentant...

...and still they are angry?



Don
--

Most people where? Certainly not in Scotland.

[Craigyp79]

I'm Scottish, I live in England (Most of the time) and don't like Alex Salmond.

[mybrainhurts]

Alex Salmond likes Alex Salmond...

[Pesty]

So bye bye Union


Good luck up there with ypur new found freedoms

Could Brown save Scotland for the UK?: Miliband urges Gordon to stop his old enemy Salmond breaking the Union

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1384730/Ed...

[eharding]

Pesty said:

So bye bye Union


Good luck up there with ypur new found freedoms

Could Brown save Scotland for the UK?: Miliband urges Gordon to stop his old enemy Salmond breaking the Union

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1384730/Ed...

Well, that's sorted then.

With Winky being trusted to save the Union, when he's finished there will be 600 miles of sea between Berwick and Edinburgh, and the Scotland will officially be part of Iceland.

As a result of the Winky-induced tectonic shift, you'll note that the North Sea will no longer lie within Scotland's Exclusive Economic Zone, so he'll have lost them what's left of the oil as well.

He really is that much of a walking disaster zone.

[Nero601]

Yes let them have independance , as long as they fund it themselves

[deadslow]

Nero601 said:

Yes let them have independance , as long as they fund it themselves

Another daftie.

[Nero601]

deadslow said:

Nero601 said:

Yes let them have independance , as long as they fund it themselves

Another daftie.

Go on I will bite , why is it daft ?

[jimbo65]

Nero601 said:

Go on I will bite , why is it daft ?

Go on I will bite too!, and the answer is?

[eharding]

Nero601 said:

deadslow said:

Nero601 said:

Yes let them have independance , as long as they fund it themselves

Another daftie.

Go on I will bite , why is it daft ?

The economics of partition are good for both sides of the border, at least in the short to medium term.

North of the border, they can benefit from the oil revenue.

South of the border, we benefit from vastly reducing the prospect of Labour being in power again - and the huge, huge damage to the economy that Labour government entails, outweighing by an order of magnitude the lost tax revenue from oil.

In the longer term, the oil revenue goes away, but a) that ceases to be our problem and b) I'm sure the Scots will think of something to make up for it.

[jimbo65]

[quote=eharding]

The economics of partition are good for both sides of the border, at least in the short to medium term.

North of the border, they can benefit from the oil revenue.

South of the border, we benefit from vastly reducing the prospect of Labour being in power again - and the huge, huge damage to the economy that Labour government entails, outweighing by an order of magnitude the lost tax revenue from oil.

In the longer term, the oil revenue goes away, but a) that ceases to be our problem and b) I'm sure the Scots will think of something to make up for it.

But surely while we are the UK oil revenue is for the UK, same as tax revenue paid to Westminster is paid to help Scotland

[eharding]

jimbo65 said:

eharding said:

The economics of partition are good for both sides of the border, at least in the short to medium term.

North of the border, they can benefit from the oil revenue.

South of the border, we benefit from vastly reducing the prospect of Labour being in power again - and the huge, huge damage to the economy that Labour government entails, outweighing by an order of magnitude the lost tax revenue from oil.

In the longer term, the oil revenue goes away, but a) that ceases to be our problem and b) I'm sure the Scots will think of something to make up for it.

But surely while we are the UK oil revenue is for the UK, same as tax revenue paid to Westminster is paid to help Scotland

In principle, yes. In practice, yes. In a certain mindset north of the border, no.

However, the pay-off is always political.

There is a very vocal, but persuasive, minority north of the border for whom the economics of partition were always secondary to the primary reason, a deeply ingrained and generations-old hatred of all things English. You might have seen some evidence of that here recently. From their perspective, it would be worth bankrupting Scotland to be free of the English yoke...but that would be a challenge after the nirvana of independence is achieved.

South of the border, I don't think the same depth of animosity exists, and certainly not something we have nurtured across generations. The resentment is more recent, and born out of what two Scottish Prime-Ministers at Westminster, propped up by Scottish socialism, have done to the country as a whole. The Union was once what made us strong, but since 1997 is what has brought us to the brink of disaster. Hence, for me at least, the reason we should bring it to an end, in the hope we can stop that horror from returning.

Edited by eharding on Monday 9th May 01:16

[mko9]

Other - I'm an American, why would you care what my opinion is?