[mike777]

From what little I read and hear the Scots will vote to secede from UK with little thought about money and even less about defense.

I have Scottish heritage here but this seems to be thoughtless.

I note that Scottish posters claim little to zero interest in defense of scotland....but money?

[paulg]

 mike777, on 2014-February-24, 01:51, said:

From what little I read and hear the Scots will vote to secede from UK with little thought about money and even less about defense.

From what little I read and hear, the Scots who want to secede from the UK plan to have none of the UK debt and lots of money from North Sea oil and gas.

I do not have any Scottish heritage but I do live here and get a vote.

I guess I should read more.

[32519]

Last time I heard the North Sea oil and gas supply had started dwindling?

[mike777]

 paulg, on 2014-February-24, 02:29, said:

From what little I read and hear, the Scots who want to secede from the UK plan to have none of the UK debt and lots of money from North Sea oil and gas.

I do not have any Scottish heritage but I do live here and get a vote.

I guess I should read more.

the scots have zero uk debt ok....did not know that ...but sounds weird.

I assume but don't know that they have lots of money from north sea.

again if you live there assume you know this but you don't seem to tell us.

you seem to confirm my worst fears....the scots you live in scots simply don't know.


for example what is your money...no pound.
example2=what is your defense...none?

[Cyberyeti]

 mike777, on 2014-February-24, 03:11, said:

the scots have zero uk debt ok....did not know that ...but sounds weird.

I assume but don't know that they have lots of money from north sea.

again if you live there assume you know this but you don't seem to tell us.

you seem to confirm my worst fears....the scots you live in scots simply don't know.


for example what is your money...no pound.
example2=what is your defense...none?

I suspect your sarcasm detectors fail you on Paul's post.

Alec Salmond is insisting that:

a) Scotland will be able to join the EU after splitting off from the UK, despite it being clear in the articles of the EU that they can't without joining the Euro, and have to go through the application process. The EU have also told them they can't.

b) Scotland can keep the pound and some control over it despite all the UK politicians telling him they can't.

c) Scotland won't take any of the UK's national debt and can keep the oil, well the UK parliament won't allow them to secede without a share of the debt.

The oil is dwindling in terms of how much is produced, but there's still quite a lot there, some is currently uneconomic, but changes to the tax regime could change that.

The odds at the moment is that they will vote to stay in the UK. Cameron is in the strange position of having to campaign to keep the UK together (a Conservative core value) when it would be of massive benefit to him if all Scotland's Labour MPs disappeared from Westminster.

[kenberg]

So many issues, so little time. As i perhaps understand it, the Scots have their own Parliament for Scottish affairs, and they have seats in the UK Parliament for UK affairs. I gather that I should not think of this as analogous to Maryland having its own State Legislature and also seats in Congress. Exactly how I should think of this is not clear to me. I also gather that, unlike in Maryland, Scotland can detach itself from the UK with this vote if it so chooses. But I can't imagine it would be that simple. Who owns/controls/is responsible for what? Debts? Access to North Sea oil and other assets? Divorces are messy things. As is often the case, the best a Yank can do is to wish good luck to everyone involved. Don't expect me to understand it.

I can imagine that the average Scot is uncertain about the consequences. Of course all of us Americans are completely clear about our own best course of action. Sure, it's just that what I am completely sure is right my neighbor is completely sure is wrong.

So good luck to them. Generally speaking, I hope for preserving cooperative unions rather than for splintering into individual spheres of interest. But that's me.

[paulg]

QI is a TV show in the UK, hosted by Stephen Fry, that asks 'quite interesting' questions for the comedy panel to address. Each of the panelists has a 'Nobody Knows' card because there will be a question where this is the answer ("why are moths attracted to light?").

The 'Nobody Knows' card is needed to answer what will happen if Scotland votes Yes to independence in September. The pro-independence lobby suggest a positive vision for the future and the unionists (if I may call them that) tend to suggest a lurch back to the Dark Ages, but the real answer is that it is would be just a hideously complex thing to do and it would probably be better to do most of the work after a Yes vote than waste valuable time and money on it beforehand.

For reference, Scotland has its own regiments in the forces and maintains all the English nuclear submarines, so judicious choice of Independence Day could remove all defensive worries. Scottish banks have been producing bank notes since the 1800s that have rarely been accepted in England, so hard to see any significant change there.

And it is so low on the European radar that they are more concerned about the qualifying groups for the 2016 football championships, so any response from them really starts with 'we have no opinion and do not care until it happens, but we've coped with far more difficult issues over the past 20 years'.

Scottish bridge achieved independence in 2000. Work on the financial separation is still on-going

[helene_t]

 paulg, on 2014-February-24, 08:22, said:

the real answer is that it is would be just a hideously complex thing to do and it would probably be better to do most of the work after a Yes vote than waste valuable time and money on it beforehand.

It is a bit of a chicken/egg problem. Hard to vote when nobody knows what the "yes" option really is. And in the event of a yes vote, it will be hard to negotiate if you don't know what mandate the voters gave you.

[Aberlour10]

It seems there are more candidates which want to leave, Barcelona? Sevastopol?

[Cyberyeti]

 Aberlour10, on 2014-February-24, 09:58, said:

It seems there are more candidates which want to leave, Barcelona? Sevastopol?

And the Portuguese (but very close to Madrid) EU head who said Scotland couldn't join the EU was instantly decried by the SNP for saying that this was basically as a message to the Catalans.

[cherdano]

 mike777, on 2014-February-24, 01:51, said:

I have Scottish heritage here but this seems to be thoughtless.

Those whom I know who will vote yes will do so because they despise the Cameron government.
The more I read and learn about UK politics, the more I understand...

(If you think the US immigration debate is crazy: the actual law and practice in the UK is worse than anything the worst Republicans in the US have ever suggested. (Thinking.) Ok, the UK has no multi-billion border fence. But given the rest of visa policies, you would expect them to rebuild Hadrian's wall in case Scotland joins Schengen.)

[blackshoe]

maybe Scotland will petition to become the 51st state - although for the life of me I can't think why they'd want to.

[Cyberyeti]

I don't know if this has changed, but last time I was in the Orkneys (a few years ago), the people there were terrified of being ruled from Edinburgh/Glasgow. They'd rather be ruled from London (or possibly Copenhagen or Oslo). What happens if they and the Shetlanders decide an independent Scotland is not something they want to be part of and take much of the oil with them ?

[helene_t]

 cherdano, on 2014-February-24, 12:05, said:

(If you think the US immigration debate is crazy: the actual law and practice in the UK is worse than anything the worst Republicans in the US have ever suggested.

I am curious - is this personal experience? OK as an EU citizen (like you, right?) I am privileged but colleagues that came from China, Pakistan, OZ, Albania etc never seemed to have much troubles getting the formalities sorted.

[cherdano]

 helene_t, on 2014-February-25, 03:10, said:

I am curious - is this personal experience? OK as an EU citizen (like you, right?) I am privileged but colleagues that came from China, Pakistan, OZ, Albania etc never seemed to have much troubles getting the formalities sorted.

As a EU citizen I have no problem at all personally.
I am not in the mood to list the full list, let me just point out:

• https://www.google.c...+home+campaign
  
• We track attendance of students at tutorials - for the sole purpose of reporting student VISA holders who don't attend to the UK border agency.

Edit: Some more examples:

• Say a non-EU graduate student proves a fantastic theorem, and we would like to invite her for a research visit. University rules (who are written in fear of UKBA) officially prevent us from sending her an invitation letter that she would need to apply for a VISA.
  
• It is fairly common for academics to take an (unpaid) leave of absence to take part, say, in a special programme at a research institute. This is extremely tricky for my colleagues who are on a VISA, i.e. depending on their situation they would not be able to do that without losing their position.
  
• Any hiring process we do needs about twice as much paperwork because the administration/HR is afraid of having enough justification in case we want to make a job offer to someone who needs a VISA.

I really don't understand why there is no bigger outcry about these things.

[Zelandakh]

I do hope that if the result of the vote to end the Union is indeed a Yes that Parliament chooses to distribute the debt using the same formula that is used to distribute the wealth (and that massively advantages Scots in comparison with other parts of the UK).

It should also be noted that most of the rights to the oil hve already been sold and the main income is from tax and the refining in the Aberdeen area. There is no reason that the oil companies could not move that operation down to England if they wanted to should the economics point that way. For this reason and many others, practically every budget that has put out by the SNP in the last 30+ years has been dismissed by independent financial organisations.

I would suggest that the breaking of the Union will turn out to be bad for both regions but more so for Scotland due to the loss of the benefits from the money-making machine that is the City of London. It may even turn out to be good for the average English or Welshman due to the fact that they will get a larger proportion of the wealth pro capita.

[paulg]

 Zelandakh, on 2014-February-25, 07:19, said:

For this reason and many others, practically every budget that has put out by the SNP in the last 30+ years has been dismissed by independent financial organisations.

To be fair, for the time prior to the last ten years the chance of the Scottish Nationalist Party gaining any significant power was negligible and saying anything was better than saying nothing in terms of publicity. I'm sure that the fact that anyone looked at it, let alone thought it was worthy of comment, was a real coup for them!

The financial separation is just too complex for me to understand and I'm sure it is for most. It is really going to come down to who you trust. Alex Salmond is in power because more people in Scotland believes he cares about the country and seems to do well in negotiations with England with his limited powers. It is unclear whether people would trust him, and his party, to run the entire country.