Free Scotland

[Rodcx500z]

Christ! What time did you start today?

Well we had a good lamb dinner with a bottle of rioja which was very nice and then i got on the user upper, got some other stuff for later when i might think about running for pm

 

[Rodcx500z]

Going on yt and sailing here should be peaceful 2500 miles from land no tinternet and 28,000 feet of ocean when you sail out, minerva reef

 

[An Ankoù]

Rod's on the moonshine

I'm jealous.
Going to catch up though.

 

[Rodcx500z]

I'm jealous.
Going to catch up though.

Hi An it's this user upper really hitting the spot, one of those days when you can drink all day and feel like you had none

 

[foxy]

If you can point me to the handshake agreement and the given word, that would allow me to have a think about what that's worth.

Clearly you have a full understanding of the trade balances and Scotlands potential exports. I cant claim to have that. I do know that Scotland can export an enormous amount of of renewable energy to England for which it does not currently gain anything due to the national nature of the grid. And also a large volume of fresh water, for which England struggle. That's leaving aside other large industries such as oil and gas, food and drink etc.

I'm not talking about whether WA can make it. I'm talking about Australia as a whole. Why can it function as a country where Scotland can't?

Also, the 12 years into the EU is guesswork and speculation, and is utterly irrelevant to what I have asked you previously and the topic at hand.

Under what circumstances should a referendum be granted? If you want to say never, just be honest and say never. That's cool.

https://www.theguardian.com/politic...referendum-yes-no-agree-once-in-lifetime-vote

And as far as I'm aware there would be no impediment to joining the single market immediately.

Pigs, there is a waiting list now if you care to check. 10 years is average wait time. Scotland joins the EU then the 60% of Scotlands gross export market is lost. Oil and gas has 10 years tops. Maybe even half of that considering the moves to leave fossil fuels in the ground.
Even when the UK were in the EU Scotland's balance of trade was always in deficit. To the tune of around 10 billion GBPS average.
If the populace wants independence and out of the UK then joining the EU isn't going to make things any better than they were when Scotland was in the EU, they will be worse after losing their biggest trading partner.

 

[Bosch]

Pigs???

 

[foxy]

Pigs???

Pig's ****. (Bull tish)

 

[foxy]

The "premise" I was trying to raise is that unfortunately the current Scottish Govt isn't really doing that well. There are numerous problems which require to be addressed prior to IndyRef 2; sadly some folk just feel that wishing for independence will solve them
If the Nationalists in power took more time to fix the problems AND try to persuade the doubters (me included) that there is at least an economic argument, maybe, and only maybe, we could have a balanced discussion as to the future.

Well in 181 posts no-one has addressed any advantages, economic or otherwise for leaving.
Probably because there isn't any.

 

[Brewnaldo]

Well in 181 posts no-one has addressed any advantages, economic or otherwise for leaving.
Probably because there isn't any.

The onus isn't on anyone to produce the case for independence when discussing the circumstances under which a referendum should be granted, which is something you still haven't answered.

 

[foxy]

The onus isn't on anyone to produce the case for independence when discussing the circumstances under which a referendum should be granted, which is something you still haven't answered.

Answered what?
Not only have I answered, I have put pointers up for not leaving, there has to be a reason for either leaving or staying! If you can't come up with a reason for leaving, apart from you want to follow the pack then why post. Scotland's economy is, and was ****, even when part of the EU. Surely you must have just one little snippet on why Scotland should leave the Union, anything will do. Or are you just part of the flock?

 

[An Ankoù]

Well in 181 posts no-one has addressed any advantages, economic or otherwise for leaving.
Probably because there isn't any.

It's gratifying to see that, by and large, the thread has stayed on track in spite of your efforts to derail it. The question is about the status of Scotland: country, region, or province, and whether it should have the right to self determination.
A discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of independence belongs elsewhere. Start a new thread by all means. It could be fun.

 

[foxy]

It's gratifying to see that, by and large, the thread has stayed on track in spite of your efforts to derail it. The question is about the status of Scotland: country, region, or province, and whether it should have the right to self determination.
A discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of independence belongs elsewhere. Start a new thread by all means. It could be fun.

But surely that has been established already. A vote has been taken and there is nothing to stop another vote being taken. The question is when, saying I have tried to derail the thread is nonsense. It has already been put forward, not by me, that because the UK voted to leave the EU another vote should be taken! So was the thread derailed early on?
I an countering those suggestions put forward, about why Scotland should not have another vote as have others.

 

[Brewnaldo]

Answered what?
Not only have I answered, I have put pointers up for not leaving, there has to be a reason for either leaving or staying! If you can't come up with a reason for leaving, apart from you want to follow the pack then why post. Scotland's economy is, and was ****, even when part of the EU. Surely you must have just one little snippet on why Scotland should leave the Union, anything will do. Or are you just part of the flock?

No one is asking if you think we should or shouldn't leave in the event of the referendum. As a Scot, il take that decision on my own at the ballot box without being overly concerned what outside observers think.

This thread is about the mechanisms for having a referendum in the first place.

I have directly asked you a few times now, under what circumstances should Scotland be granted an independence referendum?

 

[An Ankoù]

Answered what?
Not only have I answered, I have put pointers up for not leaving, there has to be a reason for either leaving or staying! If you can't come up with a reason for leaving, apart from you want to follow the pack then why post. Scotland's economy is, and was ****, even when part of the EU. Surely you must have just one little snippet on why Scotland should leave the Union, anything will do. Or are you just part of the flock?

No you haven't.
The question is in post #1.
There are three options, yes, no, don't know.

Typical answers might be, "yes, because the Union has always been consideted to be a union of consent and the Scottish people and those living in Scotland are best placed to know what's best for them."
Or
"No. While we refer to Scotland and Wales as countries or nations, they don't really have that status as understood in an international context. They are more properly referred to as devolved regions and this is more to protect local history and culture."
Or
"Don't know. I live many thousands of miles away and I haven't yet had the opportunity to sample a deep-fried, battered Mars bar. Until I do, I can't say whether I consider the Scots to be mature enough to know what's best for them.

There. It's a question of status and dignity. Not economics.

 

[Bosch]

there is nothing to stop another vote being taken.

The UK Supreme Court.

Anyway, I reckon the Scots should be given a second referendum considering the changes in the situation since 2016

 

[Bosch]

There. It's a question of status and dignity. Not economics.

A referendum to leave a union no matter the disastrous economic warnings?
Like Brexit

Only kidding, I reckon Scotland could succeed and thrive as an independent nation.

 

[foxy]

No you haven't.
The question is in post #1.
There are three options, yes, no, don't know.

Typical answers might be, "yes, because the Union has always been consideted to be a union of consent and the Scottish people and those living in Scotland are best placed to know what's best for them."
Or
"No. While we refer to Scotland and Wales as countries or nations, they don't really have that status as understood in an international context. They are more properly referred to as devolved regions and this is more to protect local history and culture."
Or
"Don't know. I live many thousands of miles away and I haven't yet had the opportunity to sample a deep-fried, battered Mars bar. Until I do, I can't say whether I consider the Scots to be mature enough to know what's best for them.

There. It's a question of status and dignity. Not economics.

Then why was Brexit put into the mix?

The UK Supreme Court.

Anyway, I reckon the Scots should be given a second referendum considering the changes in the situation since 2016

There is nothing to stop another vote being taken under the agreement reached. One generation agreed by all.

No one is asking if you think we should or shouldn't leave in the event of the referendum. As a Scot, il take that decision on my own at the ballot box without being overly concerned what outside observers think.

This thread is about the mechanisms for having a referendum in the first place.

I have directly asked you a few times now, under what circumstances should Scotland be granted an independence referendum?

Of course it is your vote and your right to vote how you want. No one is questioning that, all I am saying that the Brexit vote has diddly squat to a reason why another referendum should be forthcoming.

 

[Bosch]

Seeing you live so far from Scotland you may not be unaware of this.
Scotlands ability to join the EU was one of the main arguments debated in the original referendum.

You have made it very clear that you think that Scotland is not a viable independent country @foxy , you have also made it clear you think there should only be one referendum every generation.

Myself and some other members disagree with you on both those points.

 

[foxy]

Seeing you live so far from Scotland you may not be unaware of this.
Scotlands ability to join the EU was one of the main arguments debated in the original referendum.

You have made it very clear that you think that Scotland is not a viable independent country @foxy , you have also made it clear you think there should only be one referendum every generation.

Myself and some other members disagree with you on both those points.

Well Brian it wouldn't be a debate if we all agreed with each other. I am not saying Scotland is not viable as a country, just pointing out they import far more than they export. If it was a business the receivers would have been brought in long ago. I have just made it clear that before the last referendum the agreement was 'a generation' Now if Salmond and Sturgeon said we want a referendum every 8 years I would be saying go for it. The point is which is being missed they didn't. Even if they did I doubt Westminster would have been agreeable.

 

[Brewnaldo]

Well Brian it wouldn't be a debate if we all agreed with each other. I am not saying Scotland is not viable as a country, just pointing out they import far more than they export. If it was a business the receivers would have been brought in long ago. I have just made it clear that before the last referendum the agreement was 'a generation' Now if Salmond and Sturgeon said we want a referendum every 8 years I would be saying go for it. The point is which is being missed they didn't. Even if they did I doubt Westminster would have been agreeable.

The import export thing is unfathomably complex incidentally, and in no way can ever be boiled down in the way you are attempting to do. One reason for this is Scottish goods leaving the UK at English ports are not accounted for as "Scottish Exports".

Also, I note your use of the word "agreement" there.

Your previous words on that subject were "no one has said it was part of an agreement".

Glad to have finally cleared that one up.

FYI, there was no agreement.