Scotland

[Macca]

[chenGOD]

Krugman sums up pretty well why gaining political independence without monetary independence is a bad idea.

http://www.salon.com/2014/09/08/paul_krugman_on_scottish_independence_the_risks_are_huge/

(for some reason I can't connect to the NYT, so this will have to do.)

 

and here's a letter from Canada to Scotland on a similar referendum that Canada had to go through:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/editorials/an-open-letter-to-scotland/article20579017/

[jhonny]

Krugman sums up pretty well why gaining political independence without monetary independence is a bad idea.

http://www.salon.com/2014/09/08/paul_krugman_on_scottish_independence_the_risks_are_huge/

(for some reason I can't connect to the NYT, so this will have to do.)

 

and here's a letter from Canada to Scotland on a similar referendum that Canada had to go through:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/editorials/an-open-letter-to-scotland/article20579017/

Stiglitz has a counter for Krugman.

http://www.cityam.com/1410708099/joseph-stiglitz-scottish-independence-no-basis-fear-mongering-and-currency-non-issue

[chenGOD]

Stiglitz cites Singapore and Hong Kong as two smaller economies that have prospered. Singapore has huge income inequality issues, they make the shit that's happening in the states look tame.

Hong Kong was first under English colonial rule and then under the Chinese sphere.

Both of them suffer from serious corruption issues.

And finally, both of them are city-states, who have put all their eggs in one or two baskets. Not really a viable option for Scotland.

 

Being in the EU is no guarantee, which Krugman demonstrates very well with the case of Spain. Greece and Italy have also suffered whilst being in the EU, whereas the ability to control their own monetary policy could have been a potential lifesaver for their respective economies.

 

Obviously I'm not a nobel-prize winning economist, but Stiglitz needs to provide some evidence for his claims.

[anigbrowl]

And whoever wrote that bit about post-colonial civil war - you're talking about nations that were left without functioning institutions, poor infrastructure and a lack of properly trained people to run a country. Comparing Scotland (or Australia) to those nations is like saying North and South Korea are the same things.

 

We had a civil war in Ireland (my home country) not long after gaining independence. None of the issues you suggest were factors. The wars in Palestine and the partition in India were also rooted in deep sociopolitical divisions rather than an absence of functional governance.While I don't expect war to break out if Scotland votes yes, I do expect a protracted period of bitter factionalism. If the experience of the Scottish Parliament building is anything to go by, it will also involve a failure to acknowledge glaringly obvious problems.

[Soloman Tump]

A yes vote will only increase tensions between nations.

 

I for one am especially looking forward to the next Eng. vs. Scotland 6nations rugby match!

 

Also, there is a "friendly" Scotland vs. England football match scheduled for November... either way, its going to be interesting!

 

*edit* nsfw, and probably offensive (or funny) if you are Scottish

 

 

 

[MadameChaos]

It'll be fine

[pcock]

''81% of England shown to be opposed to independence. Vast majority apparently want us to be punished either by heavy spending cuts if we vote no or obstructing our transition as much as possible if we vote yes. Although this is based on one poll taken in August, it's a popular enough opinion that the English media are claiming we will pay a 'heavy price' for our referendum, which we will. Given that England are the largest electorate and we'll have just waved our chance to defend ourselves we will be severely punished and you can bet it wont be with new powers.

"This "punish them whatever they decide to do" stance actually makes a very strong argument in favour of Scottish independence. Not only do a majority of my fellow Englishmen want Scotland to vote no to independence because they feel a sense of entitlement to the revenues from Scottish natural resources, they also want Westminster to attempt to severely punish the people of Scotland for their audacity, should they dare vote yes to independence."

 

 

http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.com.es/2014/08/scotland-heavy-price-referendum.html

[poblequadrat]

 

''81% of England shown to be opposed to independence. Vast majority apparently want us to be punished either by heavy spending cuts if we vote no or obstructing our transition as much as possible if we vote yes. Although this is based on one poll taken in August, it's a popular enough opinion that the English media are claiming we will pay a 'heavy price' for our referendum, which we will. Given that England are the largest electorate and we'll have just waved our chance to defend ourselves we will be severely punished and you can bet it wont be with new powers.

"This "punish them whatever they decide to do" stance actually makes a very strong argument in favour of Scottish independence. Not only do a majority of my fellow Englishmen want Scotland to vote no to independence because they feel a sense of entitlement to the revenues from Scottish natural resources, they also want Westminster to attempt to severely punish the people of Scotland for their audacity, should they dare vote yes to independence."

 

 

http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.com.es/2014/08/scotland-heavy-price-referendum.html

 

 

 

"If Artur Mas brings the ballot boxes out this 11/9, which method of bringing him to his senses looks the most effective to you?"

I'd laugh, but this was posted on the official Twitter of a local branch of the Conservatives... in a Catalan town no less!

[poblequadrat]

oh, and this is the same party:

 

 

such great arguments for unionism here in the south.

[Bob Dylan]

50% +1 for YES vote : You can do it Scotland!

[eugene]

and if this turns out to be a fuckup then the rest 50%-1 will have to suffer forever? lolmocracy. though i actually doubt it's as irreversible as cameron says but it'll surely be bureaucratic nightmare.

[Guest wundertones]

If Scotland go it alone we're all fucked - this is going backwards. But then were all fucked anyway so...

[doublename]

Don't do it, Scotland! I couldn't bear putting up with the outpouring of "Scottish-American" solidarity from people who've never left Pennsylvania.

[KovalainenFanBoy]

Well Scotland if you do succeed in your separatist cause please figure out a cheaper way to send stuff out the country cause Royal Mail is crazy expensive

[Guest]

Scotland. Whatever happens, Canada will always love you as long as you keep sending us Innis and Gunn.

[chenGOD]

 

And whoever wrote that bit about post-colonial civil war - you're talking about nations that were left without functioning institutions, poor infrastructure and a lack of properly trained people to run a country. Comparing Scotland (or Australia) to those nations is like saying North and South Korea are the same things.

We had a civil war in Ireland (my home country) not long after gaining independence. None of the issues you suggest were factors. The wars in Palestine and the partition in India were also rooted in deep sociopolitical divisions rather than an absence of functional governance.While I don't expect war to break out if Scotland votes yes, I do expect a protracted period of bitter factionalism. If the experience of the Scottish Parliament building is anything to go by, it will also involve a failure to acknowledge glaringly obvious problems.

India had no infrastructure that was purposed toward the governance of the nation, it was all run to the benefit of the colonizing power. It also technically wasn't a civil war. The war between India and Pakistan (two sovereign nations) was driven by communal violence and wasn't a war for control of the nations.

Palestine was much the same: the institutions they did have were not developed for the governance of the state beyond the benefit of the colonial powers.

 

Also, being as Scotland doesn't have a standing army, fighting a war might be asking a bit much.

[anigbrowl]

India had no infrastructure that was purposed toward the governance of the nation, it was all run to the benefit of the colonizing power. It also technically wasn't a civil war. The war between India and Pakistan (two sovereign nations) was driven by communal violence and wasn't a war for control of the nations.

Palestine was much the same: the institutions they did have were not developed for the governance of the state beyond the benefit of the colonial powers.

 

That's I why I spoke of the partition of India, rather than civil war. I guess my original comment wasn't clear enough and I should have used some more generic term such as 'civil unrest' which include such outcomes as well as the more narrow technical meaning of 'civil war.' However, I don't think you can handwave these problems away as a legacy of colonialism where everything was run to the benefit of the colonizing power. Certainly the basic colonial model was one of resource extraction and colonial institutions were established to support that end, but they didn't operate exclusively to that end; one way to verify this is to look at the extent to which those institutions have persisted, or not. It's striking that both India and Pakistan, for example, have retained the English common-law legal system with relatively little alteration despite the varieties of political upheaval since independence (especially in Pakistan, which has been beset by coups and suchlike).

 

It seems to me that while political stress following independence can be exacerbated by infrastructural or institutional factors, the root cause is that internal conflicts (religious, ethnic, tribal or whatever they may be) are often frozen or obviated by colonization or annexation, only to reassert themselves when the external pressure is removed.

 

Also, being as Scotland doesn't have a standing army, fighting a war might be asking a bit much.

 

 

Which was why I said 'I don't expect war to break out if Scotland votes yes.' but having said that, if the country does become independent you are almost certainly going to establish a standing army and some sort of navy. even if their projected use is limited to tasks like disaster relief and coast guard duties or perhaps a bit of UN peacekeeping. Otherwise you'd have to have a defense treaty with the rest of the UK which will mean keeping the Royal Navy at Faslane (which I understand is not too popular with the SNP), and if you have your defense contracted out to Britain then you'll have to pay for it in some way, which would be politically uncomfortable for a lot of people. Between that and regimental tradition, I'd expect that establishment of Scottish armed forces would be among the first official acts of a new country.

[BCM]

It's all a conspiracy - England want the Scots to vote for independance and become a seperate country. When it happens we will withdraw our nukes and the rest of the army, leaving Scotland completely un-defended. Then we will simply declare war on Scotland, invade, claim the whole place and call it England II.

[Soloman Tump]

It's all a conspiracy - England want the Scots to vote for independance and become a seperate country. When it happens we will withdraw our nukes and the rest of the army, leaving Scotland completely un-defended. Then we will simply declare war on Scotland, invade, claim the whole place and call it England II.

Don't forget the rebuilding of Hadrian's wall and re-establishment of York as the great bastion of the north. It will be just like game of thrones but with less dragons.

[BCM]

awesome

[Guest Atom Dowry Firth]

 

It's all a conspiracy - England want the Scots to vote for independance and become a seperate country. When it happens we will withdraw our nukes and the rest of the army, leaving Scotland completely un-defended. Then we will simply declare war on Scotland, invade, claim the whole place and call it England II.

Don't forget the rebuilding of Hadrian's wall and re-establishment of York as the great bastion of the north. It will be just like game of thrones but with less dragons.

 

 

Each crenellation along the parapet will be fashioned into a lifesize statue of Margaret Thatcher just for good measure

[pcock]

I did always find it pretty funny how much westeros looked like the uk, with kings landing roughly in the position of london.

[Soloman Tump]

I did always find it pretty funny how much westeros looked like the uk, with kings landing roughly in the position of london.

Yep. Its a good analogy.

 

 

It's just unfortunate in this analogy that the Scottish are either a bunch of wild savages or albino zombies.

 

.....

[Schlitze]

Scotland. Whatever happens, Canada will always love you as long as you keep sending us Innis and Gunn.

Just happened to have cracked open a 660ml bottle about 1 minute before I clicked into this thread.

It's a sign

The polls have been bullshit so far, not an accurate representation of the general population. I think it'll be close on thursday, but not as close as these misleading polls would make you believe. I think it's gonna sway the YES way by about 3% once all the people who haven't been picked up in these polls crawl out of the shadows. And why not, they fancy a wee change.