Independence - how would you vote?

[Ad Lib]

That is an awfully long and roundabout way of saying "none". I'm increasingly coming round to the way of thinking that if the Lib Dems want to be the anti-Scottish government and play hardball, then we should call their bluff. If they don't want a currency Union on day one, and don't want to "let" us use the pound then fine. We don't want their debt. After all, its not like we would be a successor state, is it?

No it's not. The share of the national debt that Ireland "took" was an equivalent proportion, in lieu of which they agreed to pay £150k up front and a further £250k every year for 60 years to the UK Treasury. Land annuities, a related aspect, were disputed, and triggered a trade war.

What they PAID was different, because that agreement collapsed amidst a trade war, involving tariffs. Incidentally, that couldn't happen any more if both rUK and Scotland remained in the Common market, because it would be in breach of EU law for any state to do that.

And for the UMPTEENTH TIME, debt is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT to the question of successor statehood. The latter is about membership of treaties and international organisations. The former is financial liability incurred to individuals and corporations on the market by selling bonds to fund domestic spending.

[DeeGas]

That is an awfully long and roundabout way of saying "none". I'm increasingly coming round to the way of thinking that if the Lib Dems want to be the anti-Scottish government and play hardball, then we should call their bluff. If they don't want a currency Union on day one, and don't want to "let" us use the pound then fine. We don't want their debt. After all, its not like we would be a successor state, is it?

That kind of naughtiness will not be forgotten by the English.

Scottish business will suffer if you go independent,but if you dodge your debt too,then that border in peoples heads I've mentioned will become more solid.

This kind of talk will not win the SNP any votes and it is destructive.The majority of Scots are not anti English like you.

So bitter and twisted.

The Union works fine,it is a credit to us all.

A scot can feel absolutely welcome in England,it is his country,Britian.

We are a special peoples and country.

The envy of much of the world.

Better together.

[xbl]

No it's not. The share of the national debt that Ireland "took" was an equivalent proportion, in lieu of which they agreed to pay £150k up front and a further £250k every year for 60 years to the UK Treasury.

What they PAID was different, because that agreement collapsed amidst a trade war, involving tariffs. Incidentally, that couldn't happen any more if both rUK and Scotland remained in the Common market, because it would be in breach of EU law for any state to do that.

And for the UMPTEENTH TIME, debt is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT to the question of successor statehood. The latter is about membership of treaties and international organisations. The former is financial liability incurred to individuals and corporations on the market by selling bonds to fund domestic spending.

Well I can't help it if your political party confuses me. After all, we've been told we won't be in Europe, we will be forced to use the Euro, and despite not being in Europe, our pensions will all collapse due to European regulations, again, despite not being allowed in Europe. Oh, and we will be forced to take on the liabilities, but won't get any of the assets. Although we will get to keep most of our sea! And if the question isn't one of successor states, then why are we going to let England use OUR currency?

Edited to add, and again, when it comes to Ireland, you could just say "nothing". It would save you a lot of words.

[~~~]

Think this deserves a repost

http://youtu.be/JDrqamBHqLg

[Guest The Phoenix]

It is his country,Britian.

Better together.

FFS, you almost make me believe in Better Apart.

[xbl]

We are a special peoples and country.

The envy of much of the world.

Better together.

And so we come back to the unpleasant reality of ethnic superiority complexes. Yuck. You'll excuse me if I don't believe in your racially tinged arrogance. Is that going to be your new slogan? Better Together - apart from the darkies?

[DeeGas]

FFS, you almost make me believe in Better Apart.

What don't you like about that comment?

I mean at the moment a Scot can go to England and feel completely at home.

Independence will mean England is a foreign country.

Come on matey,what?

[Guest The Phoenix]

What don't you like about that comment?

Mostly the spelling.

[DeeGas]

And so we come back to the unpleasant reality of ethnic superiority complexes. Yuck. You'll excuse me if I don't believe in your racially tinged arrogance. Is that going to be your new slogan? Better Together - apart from the darkies?

In my European travels (years of) Europeans are fascinated and envious of Britain.

It is a truth.

It's the Union they are impressed with,not some racial nonsense you're suggesting.

[~~~]

Independence will mean England is a foreign country.

[Ad Lib]

Well I can't help it if your political party confuses me.

It's not my or anyone else's fault if you can't tell the difference between domestic law and international law.

1. After all, we've been told we won't be in Europe

2. we will be forced to use the Euro

3. and despite not being in Europe, our pensions will all collapse due to European regulations, again, despite not being allowed in Europe.

4. Oh, and we will be forced to take on the liabilities, but won't get any of the assets.

5. Although we will get to keep most of our sea!

6. And if the question isn't one of successor states, then why are we going to let England use OUR currency?

1. Wrong.

2. Wrong.

3. Wrong.

4. Wrong.

5. Again, wrong.

6. Wrong again. And not just because "England" isn't doing anything.

Edited to add, and again, when it comes to Ireland, you could just say "nothing". It would save you a lot of words.

But that would be, you know, wrong. Ireland took on £15.15 million of liabilities (the land annuities dispute ignored for the time being) arising from the national debt.

[DeeGas]

Mostly the spelling.

At least i pronounced it correctly whilst typing.

[DeeGas]

A fantastic Scottish writer.

I read every Sherlock story.Loved it.

I think Sherlocks 'nationality' was British by the way.

Sir Arthur CD,top man!

[xbl]

It's not my or anyone else's fault if you can't tell the difference between domestic law and international law.1. Wrong.

2. Wrong.

3. Wrong.

4. Wrong.

5. Again, wrong.

6. Wrong again. And not just because "England" isn't doing anything.But that would be, you know, wrong. Ireland took on £15.15 million of liabilities (the land annuities dispute ignored for the time being) arising from the national debt.

And yet despite that, you're still a member of the Lib Dems. Where is the compatibility with being a Scottish independence supporter in an anti-Scottish party? All of the above are things we've been told by assorted Unionists. Incidentally, that headline poll thats out today has this little nugget which isn't appearing in most of the papers:

“Scepticism about independence was closely linked to party allegiance: 98% of Tories, 91% of LibDems and 82% of Labour voters are unconvinced by SNP arguments.”

91% of lib dems, second only to the Tories. No wonder they join in with glee when it comes to telling lies about Scotland. All I'm doing is repeating things your party has said. If they are wrong, then take it up with the people that said them.

Ah, so Ireland paid a big chunk of debt? A proportionate share was it? How many decades did that take to pay off?

[Guest The Phoenix]

At least pronounced it correctly whilst typing.

Unfortunately, I don't have my desktop speakers turned on.

[Ad Lib]

And yet despite that, you're still a member of the Lib Dems. Where is the compatibility with being a Scottish independence supporter in an anti-Scottish party? All of the above are things we've been told by assorted Unionists.

This is LITERALLY untrue. Not all of these things have been said by "assorted unionists". In pretty much every single case you have misrepresented a nuanced statement about the transition period.

Take, for example the first: it has not been said that "we won't be allowed into the EU". It has been said that membership won't be automatic. Which is completely different.

And what about number 2? Again, it has not been said that we will be "forced" to use the Euro. It has been said that, absent securing an opt-out in our membership negotiations, Scotland would, as a condition of membership, be legally obliged to enter the ERM when it meets the convergence criteria and stays in the ERM for the requisite period.

And what about number 3? No one has said "our pensions will collapse", let alone that they will do so because of EU rules. What was said was that a significant proportion of pensions relating to employment of people in Scotland are arranged under a UK-wide framework, and that unless these pension pots are split up, they will be treated as cross-border schemes within the meaning of EU law. Those schemes are afforded less flexibility in the "deficits" they're allowed to run-up at any given time, meaning that there would be a legal obligation to make up the short-fall more quickly than if they continued to be schemes wholly internal to the United Kingdom.

As for number 4? Yet again literally untrue claim on your part. Scotland gets a significant share of the land and sea assets, and in any negotiations something broadly resembling a pro-rata share of the value of the corporeal and incorporeal assets of the British state. And in exchange for doing so, it would be expected to assume a pro-rata share of the liabilities of the British state. All that is subject to internal negotiation, however.

Then number 5? There's no such thing as "our" sea when "our" relates to Scotland, because "Scotland" is not a sovereign state. What is "our" sea only becomes "our" sea once we become a sovereign state. Domestic division of sea for administrative purposes is literally meaningless except as a common-sense starting point for negotiations, to which you could only seek non-binding international arbitration if there remained a disagreement.

As for number 6? Again, "England" will not be using the GBP. RUK will. Because it's the successor state. All of the financial contingencies that underpin the VALUE of that currency may or may not change, depending on what rUK decides to do with its assets in the immediate aftermath of Scottish secession. But since the right to issue currency arises out of sovereign statehood, and rUK will be the successor sovereign state, it will retain the right to issue and to honour GBP currency. I cannot emphasise this enough. Being allowed to issue a currency is NOT an "asset". It is a sovereign right. No one is saying that Scotland could not unilaterally adopt the pound (though without their own lender of last resort, this is widely seen as a stupid idea). What has been said is that Scotland cannot force the United Kingdom to continue a currency union with it involving shared central banking institutions, and that in the view of those in charge of the UK just now, it would be contrary to their interests to acquiesce.

Incidentally, that headline poll thats out today has this little nugget which isn't appearing in most of the papers:91% of lib dems, second only to the Tories. No wonder they join in with glee when it comes to telling lies about Scotland. All I'm doing is repeating things your party has said. If they are wrong, then take it up with the people that said them.

Which "lies" have "Lib Dems" told "about Scotland"? Be HYPER specific.

Ah, so Ireland paid a big chunk of debt? A proportionate share was it? How many decades did that take to pay off?

Again, what it PAID was different from what it TOOK. This isn't fucking complicated. Have you never heard of "wars" and "debt relief"?

It "TOOK" a proportionate share agreed by the relevant representatives under the Anglo-Irish Treaty and affirmed in the London Agreement 1925. I don't know what actual share it represents. I also don't know what share of state assets were allocated to them in mitigation, though I suspect they got far below their pro-rata share of assets (defence will have been the big ticket item back then) and as such probably got allocated a lower share of the national debt than they otherwise would have.

[Ad Lib]

And just to add: the Liberal Democrats are not an "anti-Scottish" party. They just don't agree that Scottish independence is in Scotland's best interests. They are wrong, but it doesn't make them anti-Scottish.

[Guest The Phoenix]

And just to add: the Liberal Democrats are not an "anti-Scottish" party. They just don't agree that Scottish independence is in Scotland's best interests. They are wrong, but it doesn't make them anti-Scottish.

Just to add, no they aren't, but that doesn't make them anti-Scottish.

[xbl]

Short version of the above. A ridiculous and wrong headed defence of the Better Together Campaign. When even their allies are admitting that the campaign is negative and horrendous, one "critical thinking" individual has sprung to their defence. I can't believe you're defending the indefensible like this. Take the "not allowed in the EU" claim. I ALREADY posted evidence of Lib Dem ministers saying just that. You hand waved it away. Willie Rennie, MONTHS after Spain said it would not stand in the way, was still talking about a Spanish veto in October last year.

http://www.scotlibdems.org.uk/news/2012/10/scotland-cannot-wait-spanish-veto-over-eu-membership

Now lets take that "forced to join the Euro" claim

http://www.europeandyou.com/news/1289/7/

"An independent Scotland would not be given opt-outs from the Euro and other international deals, a Lib Dem MEP has warned"

We then move on to Tory George Osborne, and his toadying Liberal Democrat sidekick, Danny Alexander. Apparently it would be the end of Scottish notes. Scaremongering and lies at their finest. I didn't hear any Lib Dems chirping up in disagreement?

Your defence of your precious Unionist bloc is intellectually and morally bankrupt.

Now, on to your bizarre defence of George Osborne

...and that in the view of those in charge of the UK just now, it would be contrary to their interests to acquiesce.

Listen here Captain Barbosa. Paolo Sergio caught you bang to rights on this one. If it was so "contrary to their interests to acquiesce", why did they not rule it out when they had the many, many opportunities to do so? As has been pointed out in many places, they explicitly didn't. All they did was sow the seeds of doubt with a highly, highly biased report and a nice big mouthful of yellow tory lies. Why is it that plenty of economists seem to think that a Sterling Union is workable? Once again, your defence of the indefensible would make George Galloway blush.

And now on to Ireland. Would it be fair to say that your actual answer to "how much debt did Ireland pay?" is "I don't know"?

[xbl]

And just to add: the Liberal Democrats are not an "anti-Scottish" party. They just don't agree that Scottish independence is in Scotland's best interests. They are wrong, but it doesn't make them anti-Scottish.

It goes beyond independence alone though, doesn't it? The Liberal Democrats are actively working against the best interests of Scotland on all levels.

"We are federalists - and we think Scotland needs this"

...and then, when they have the opportunity to help Scotland:

"Errr, no, Scotland doesn't need this..."

..as they refuse to support the original thing that they suggested. THEN, when they are sure that they will never have any opportunity to do anything good for Scotland ever again, suddenly, they are federalists once again, and are once again proposing the very things they turned down!

A disgusting anti-Scottish party. Although to be fair, they seem to be nicely in tune with their membership.