Implications of Scottish Independence

[stokes234]

It's impossible to be certain of course, but I think that Scottish independence would change the political dynamics of the whole UK so much that an everlasting Tory reign is unlikely. Either way it's not really an argument designed to make Nationalists go "Oh, okay then, we'll not bother"

No, I accept that it isn't a particularly powerful argument. Solidarity went out of fashion a while back. But considering the title of the thread, it seemed appropriate to bring it up here as a possible implication of scottish independence.

 

[Darat]

...snip...

A straw poll of people around me suggests that quite a few voted SNP in the past election who either don't support independence or who are indifferent to the idea.
...snip...

I suppose that will be the hope of some who want independence, that because they want the change they will be more likely to go and vote compared to those that go "meh".

I know it has a nasty taste for some on the independence side of the argument because of what they perceive as a stitch-up in a past referendum but I still hold that there should have to be a minimum turnout for a referendum of this importance (and yes to other types of political voting, that's why I am for compulsory voting with a none-of-the-above option).

 

[Rolfe]

I thought Labour was making that call long before the election, back to at least 2008. In fact I recall you taking them to task for that on this very board back then... quick search throws this up http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=3683932#post3683932?

Oh yes, we've been through all this before. "Bring it on!" was Wendy's line. Oppose a referendum, but if you start to think you can't, then switch to demanding it RIGHT NOW before your imagined lead evaporates. Standard tactics.

And really it is a rather meaningless complaint Rolfe - as you are engaging in the same behaviour you are castigating them for! Both sides will want to to have the referendum when they think they have the best chance to get the result they want, so you think that means to have it in a little while and they want it sooner.

Indeed. And who won the election? A bit amusing, really, the attempts by the losers to dictate terms.

It's not quite the same though. Nobody is going to be able to stop a NO campaign saying what it likes. If they have good and valid arguments, good luck to them. What they are trying now is to prevent the YES campaign from getting started.

Rolfe.

 

[Rolfe]

I suppose that will be the hope of some who want independence, that because they want the change they will be more likely to go and vote compared to those that go "meh".

I don't think so. The hope is that when everyone is able to examine the issues in detail, that they will realise where their best interests lie.

I know it has a nasty taste for some on the independence side of the argument because of what they perceive as a stitch-up in a past referendum but I still hold that there should have to be a minimum turnout for a referendum of this importance (and yes to other types of political voting, that's why I am for compulsory voting with a none-of-the-above option).

After 1979, anyone trying that is doomed to failure, I hope. It was bittery, bitterly resented at the time, and has become more so as history unfolded. It has the air of the desperate frantically shifting the goalposts to allow their failing arguments to prevail.

The other trick used in conjuction of course was the Tories telling everyone that the 1979 Scotland Bill didn't go nearly far enough and didn't give Scotland enough power, and if voters rejected it then an incoming Conservative government would put forward much stronger propsals. I don't know how many NO votes were people who fell for that one, either.

There is always going to be a proportion of non-voters, unless you do indeed make voting compulsory. Now is hardly the time for that step. To seek to co-opt these people to one side of the argument is deeply, deeply undemocratic.

Rolfe.

 

[Last of the Fraggles]

Where does the south of England start?

Oi. You asked a question, moaned that nobody answered it and then when I did, you didn't respond.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

Oi. You asked a question, moaned that nobody answered it and then when I did, you didn't respond.

I was wondering if the south of England is (psychologically) relative to where a person is.

BTW, there are plenty of crappy areas in the "south" of the UK and in London.

Personally I think calls for independence are based more on addressing irrational feelings of inferiority coupled with a dollop of racism rather than rational economic sense.

 

[Lothian]

http://manifesto.votesnp.com/independence

This does seem a bit like reinventing the wheel, but carry on....

Rolfe.

Your link says no new jobs will be created. I don’t think that is true. You will need a Scottish Civil Service to deal with all the national issues currently handled by Westminster.

It is not the case that you can simply peel off the 8% of the civil servants living in Scotland (assumed to match the overall population) as they are mainly operational.

The fact is that the majority of senior civil servants and policy makers are not in Scotland but in Westminster. There would be a severe shortage of staff skilled in the policy and law making that would be necessary.

You would lose the current economy of scale and have to, pretty much, replicate the full Westminster complement. Getting appropriately trained staff to fill these posts would be a challenge.

There would be a large cost to this. Any attempt to raise this (as suggested in the article) through corporation tax and excise duty would result in a shift of businesses’ base from Scotland to England. I would expect the large finance institutions to jump ship straight away unless huge incentives are provided, to the detriment of the general taxpayer.

 

[Rolfe]

Personally I think calls for independence are based more on addressing irrational feelings of inferiority coupled with a dollop of racism rather than rational economic sense.

I agree in part with that last, though not with the detail of it. I think that desire for independence is based much more on feeling and being part of a separate nation group, than on pure economic self-interest. I have no respect for someone who simply wants to cut a part of their own country adrift because they will be better off without them.

"Inferiority"? It's one way of putting it. When you have been governed by another country for 300 years, repeatedly assured that you are in fact inferior and incapable and made mock of, it does tend to rub off. Take away Scotland's resources and insist they were never hers to begin with, give back pocket money and demand gratitude in return, and attract the brightest and best "down south", and it has an effect.

Rolfe.

 

[Last of the Fraggles]

I was wondering if the south of England is (psychologically) relative to where a person is.

BTW, there are plenty of crappy areas in the "south" of the UK and in London.

Personally I think calls for independence are based more on addressing irrational feelings of inferiority coupled with a dollop of racism rather than rational economic sense.

Well I made some economic-ish arguments and you didn't respond to them.

I don't think it's fair to categorise calls for independence as being based on inferiority and racism.

There is a sense that Scotland has a distinct cultural, political and national identity from England. This is recognised in the fact we have our own parliament. That some people would like the powers of that Parliament taken further seems only natural.

I think the call of racism is a strange one given that it is likely than an independent Scotland would be more open and inclusive than the UK currently is. There are few, if any, calls for Scottish Nationalism based on who we can keep out, or get rid of. It's distinctly different to British or English Nationalism in that respect. (Yes there are some Anti-English nutbags but they are not a strong voice in Scottish nationalism)

I think its very difficult for non-Scots to have an informed view on Scottish Nationalism or Scottish Independence because, outside of Scotland, the arguments and arguers really don't get the attention nor the analysis that they do inside of Scotland.

 

[Last of the Fraggles]

Your link says no new jobs will be created. I don’t think that is true. You will need a Scottish Civil Service to deal with all the national issues currently handled by Westminster.

It is not the case that you can simply peel off the 8% of the civil servants living in Scotland (assumed to match the overall population) as they are mainly operational.

The fact is that the majority of senior civil servants and policy makers are not in Scotland but in Westminster. There would be a severe shortage of staff skilled in the policy and law making that would be necessary.

You would lose the current economy of scale and have to, pretty much, replicate the full Westminster complement. Getting appropriately trained staff to fill these posts would be a challenge.

There would be a large cost to this. Any attempt to raise this (as suggested in the article) through corporation tax and excise duty would result in a shift of businesses’ base from Scotland to England. I would expect the large finance institutions to jump ship straight away unless huge incentives are provided, to the detriment of the general taxpayer.

We would need to find a way to manage the country that works for us and that we can afford. Just like other countries do. I don't think we should start from the assumption that we would need to replicate all of the Westminister functions and structures to begin with.

I would agree that an increase in corporation tax would be a mistake....a reduction however.......

 

[Undesired Walrus]

"Inferiority"? It's one way of putting it. When you have been governed by another country for 300 years, repeatedly assured that you are in fact inferior and incapable and made mock of, it does tend to rub off.

Evidence?

 

[Lothian]

I would agree that an increase in corporation tax would be a mistake....a reduction however.......

....is unaffordable.

 

[Last of the Fraggles]

....is unaffordable.

Quite a few people seem to disagree. What do you base your analysis on?

 

[Rolfe]

I see Wendy's husband is arguing from the position that economically, Scotland is more than able to function as a prosperous independent country. It's inevitable, because that's the simple truth. There is no black hole, and no subsidy junkies. The case for the union will have to switch to something else.

What has happened in the past is that a large proportion of revenue which is identifiably Scottish has been labelled as generically "British", while revenues specific to England (principally the City of London) have been asserted to be English. This manipulation of the figures has allowed a false impression to be given of the balance of the relationship.

Unfortunately it has led to a very negative attitude on the part of some English people, principally Daily Fail readers, that the Scots are scroungers and that it is the English taxpayer who is paying for the benefits that Scots enjoy (no, we're paying for these out of our pocket money actually).

The unionists have been running a very delicate balance, trying to maintain the illusion of Scotland too poverty-stricken to go it alone, while actually fighing desperately to retain what is a very healthy revenue stream which is set to get healthier. Once the argument starts to go into detail, the first part of that will really have to be abandoned, which is what Ashcroft seems to be accepting.

I remember seeing a very strange BBC Money Programme in about 1992, about Scottish independence. It was subliminally biassed, including a mock-up newspaper about English residents fleeing for the border on independence day, but it did include some knowledgeable participants. One economic expert gave a clear and compelling explanation of exactly how Scotland was in the black and would remain so. The presenters just ignored it, and went on discussing the "negative financial implications of independence" as an article of faith not to be relinquished by exposure to mere facts. This attitude is going to have to change.

Rolfe.

 

[Rolfe]

Evidence?

Oh, come on.

Rolfe.

 

[stokes234]

Quite a few people seem to disagree. What do you base your analysis on?

Well, that didn't work out so well in ireland. Nor is it particularly ethical, as it spurs a race to the bottom for countries to out-compete eachother on the lowest viable taxes.

 

[Undesired Walrus]

Oh, come on.

Rolfe.

I'm serious. I just wonder where all this 'repeated.. (accusations) of inferior(ity) and (mockery)' has been.

I can assure you the only time I've ever heard any animosity towards the Scottish has been when it comes to football, something that isn't any different from the attitude of a Spurs fan towards an Arsenal fan.

 

[Rolfe]

Well, that didn't work out so well in ireland. Nor is it particularly ethical, as it spurs a race to the bottom for countries to out-compete eachother on the lowest viable taxes.

I don't want to sound obsequious, but at the moment there is a very high degree of trust in Alex Salmond as a tactician. Even people who have opposed his strategy for years are coming out and declaring their conversion. One of them said that as things are now, if Alex declared that the best way to achieve independence was for us all to go around in our pyjamas for a year, he'd be off to M&S to stock up.

Alex is an economist by profession. I am not. Right at the moment, if he says it's a good idea, I'm not going to argue quite frankly.

Rolfe.

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

Well, that didn't work out so well in ireland. Nor is it particularly ethical, as it spurs a race to the bottom for countries to out-compete eachother on the lowest viable taxes.

Really? It was a cornerstone of the Celtic Tiger. Corporation tax is also more complex than it appears as there is very little uniformity across Europe on what it is paid on.

 

[Ivor the Engineer]

[anecdote]

I used to work for a set top box manufacturer based in West Yorkshire. We had our prototype circuit boards made in Scotland. The guys there used to comment on how careful they had to be going into pubs and clubs in Glasgow having had problems on previous trips, which, given the stereotypical Yorkshireman's opinion of those native to the southeast of England, demonstrates how silly racism towards "Southerners" (or any other large and diverse group of people who share superficial characteristics) is.

[/anecdote]