|
|
Post by happyjack on Jan 9, 2023 3:04:59 GMT
It is an indicator that the Scottish people are going through a turbulent time due to the political machinations that have been subjected to over a decade or more. Come again? Are you insinuating the majority of scotland have all of a sudden become more scottish than british in terms of national identity due to tory machinations and snp brainwashing?
I have books on this subjects , including works by tam devine or michael lynch , that show over the course of the union since 1707 , quite clearly the majority held national identity of scots has been scottish not british , with the anomaly of the baby boomer generation being slightly more british , before levels began dropping down back to scots national identity .
Scottish independence , scottish national identity , and political and military turbulence is the norm in this union. Its not something that merely arrived in 2011.
From 1707 , we had armed uprisings and rebellion to 1820 , and the history of the snp and home rule movements can be found throughout most decades of the twentieth century.
No, I am not insinuating that - although “SNP brainwashing” is a snappy and apposite term. Well done you for coming up with that one.
|
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Jan 9, 2023 4:17:51 GMT
I am able to communicate on here perfectly adequately without doing as you suggest, but thank you for your kind suggestion. Glad to hear it.
i have done so and perhaps your communication isnt as good as you think , but i cant see where i am factually wrong.
I even pointed out my acknowledgement i am british by geography , as i am also european for example. I recognise i am a uk citizen (fill in terminology as you will ) and i am a scottish national as defined on my birth and marriage certificates.
I don’t know if my communication skills are as good as I think but I do know that they are markedly better than yours. Communication is just as much (arguably more) about being open to receiving and understanding a message as it is about the quality of the message that gets issued in the first instance. As you repeatedly demonstrate, you are not open (doubtless unwittingly) to either receiving or understanding any message that jars with the twisted and erroneous narrative that you buy into and promote, so any message that does that gets seriously corrupted in your brain. You did point out that you are British by geography, but you embarrassingly resist conceding the equally undeniable fact that you are British by birth too. And no, you are not a Scottish national and neither your birth certificate nor your marriage certificate describe you as such. Your birth certificate will only state the town or city where you were born, and while your marriage certificate might make reference to Scotland under your name, this is only to denote your birthplace, not your nationality. |
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Jan 9, 2023 4:38:46 GMT
The current uk passport i have calls me a uk and EU citizen.
No it doesn’t. It includes the term “European Union” on the front cover but it only describes you as a “British Citizen” because that is what you are. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 9, 2023 8:13:24 GMT
Glad to hear it.
i have done so and perhaps your communication isnt as good as you think , but i cant see where i am factually wrong.
I even pointed out my acknowledgement i am british by geography , as i am also european for example. I recognise i am a uk citizen (fill in terminology as you will ) and i am a scottish national as defined on my birth and marriage certificates.
You did point out that you are British by geography, but you embarrassingly resist conceding the equally undeniable fact that you are British by birth too. And no, you are not a Scottish national and neither your birth certificate nor your marriage certificate describe you as such. Your birth certificate will only state the town or city where you were born, and while your marriage certificate might make reference to Scotland under your name, this is only to denote your birthplace, not your nationality. I suggest you re read this confusing claptrap.
You tell me im british by birth , waffle on im not scottish , but then conced my marriage certificate denotes me as scottish by birth?
What was that about communication skills? I suggest adding reading into that as well. You talk so much shite you dont appear to know what you are saying.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Jan 9, 2023 9:15:59 GMT
You were born a citizen of the UK and when death takes you (hopefully old age at the end of a long and comfortable life rather than something unpleasant), you will die a citizen of the UK.
More Scots are unionists than separatists.
You will never achieve the vote you want.
Even if you were to get another bite of the cake you've already eaten, Scexit would have all the downsides of Brexit, but without any of the upsides.
|
|
|
|
Post by research0it on Jan 9, 2023 12:00:47 GMT
You were born a citizen of the UK and when death takes you (hopefully old age at the end of a long and comfortable life rather than something unpleasant), you will die a citizen of the UK. More Scots are unionists than separatists. You will never achieve the vote you want. Even if you were to get another bite of the cake you've already eaten, Scexit would have all the downsides of Brexit, but without any of the upsides. Hi vinny Perhaps instead of making all these meaningless statements that you cannot know are true, you could Answer the question I posed . And Look at the OP, where I pointed out some pros and cons that could be true and tell me what's wrong with it. This thread has wandered somewhat. Staying in the ukmeans tying scotland to a slowly declining economy, where scotland will be forever denied proper investment. |
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Jan 9, 2023 15:11:19 GMT
You did point out that you are British by geography, but you embarrassingly resist conceding the equally undeniable fact that you are British by birth too. And no, you are not a Scottish national and neither your birth certificate nor your marriage certificate describe you as such. Your birth certificate will only state the town or city where you were born, and while your marriage certificate might make reference to Scotland under your name, this is only to denote your birthplace, not your nationality. I suggest you re read this confusing claptrap.
You tell me im british by birth , waffle on im not scottish , but then conced my marriage certificate denotes me as scottish by birth?
What was that about communication skills? I suggest adding reading into that as well. You talk so much shite you dont appear to know what you are saying.
I know what I am saying. Scotland is a sub-national territory of the UK, so as you were born in Scotland, that makes you legally British for as long as Scotland remains part of the UK (or part of Great Britain after the re-unification of Ireland takes place). And of course, if someone was born in Scotland, or has Scottish heritage or some other personal connection or feelings that makes them feel that they are Scottish, then that person is Scottish too. But legally there is no such thing as a Scottish national in the way that there is such a thing as a British national, a status that is referred to a couple of times in your British passport and something which you and I both are. So you are a Scot, and you are Scottish, and if it somehow makes you feel better to describe yourself as a Scottish national because of that then that’s fine I guess, as long as you don’t mistakenly believe that this has any status in law or that it over-rides the fact that legally the only “national” that you are is a British national. BTW - I don’t need to add reading into what I said above about communication skills. As it is one of the ways through which we can receive communications (and, indeed, the only way in which we receive communications on this place) it is already covered by what I posted previously. |
|
|
|
Post by jaydee on Jan 10, 2023 18:43:29 GMT
I suggest you re read this confusing claptrap.
You tell me im british by birth , waffle on im not scottish , but then conced my marriage certificate denotes me as scottish by birth?
What was that about communication skills? I suggest adding reading into that as well. You talk so much shite you dont appear to know what you are saying.
I know what I am saying. Scotland is a sub-national territory of the UK, so as you were born in Scotland, that makes you legally British for as long as Scotland remains part of the UK (or part of Great Britain after the re-unification of Ireland takes place). And of course, if someone was born in Scotland, or has Scottish heritage or some other personal connection or feelings that makes them feel that they are Scottish, then that person is Scottish too. But legally there is no such thing as a Scottish national in the way that there is such a thing as a British national, a status that is referred to a couple of times in your British passport and something which you and I both are. So you are a Scot, and you are Scottish, and if it somehow makes you feel better to describe yourself as a Scottish national because of that then that’s fine I guess, as long as you don’t mistakenly believe that this has any status in law or that it over-rides the fact that legally the only “national” that you are is a British national. BTW - I don’t need to add reading into what I said above about communication skills. As it is one of the ways through which we can receive communications (and, indeed, the only way in which we receive communications on this place) it is already covered by what I posted previously. Yes I know what you are saying. I am saying The UK is not a country it is a sovereign state consisting of four countries . And what you are not saying. Is what UK court has jurisdiction in this magic fairy country of yours. Or how if I commit some magic crime in Scotland what law allows England to drag me over the border or vice versa for trial in this UK court. . What you are not saying who is a UK Judge. Who is a UK police officer. Where is there a UK prison. What you are not saying is who you were on the old forum. Was it soapy soutar. What you have not said or answered. . What do you mean by risk assessment. And what you have not said. In this risk assessment how did you arrive at the conclusion, indy would be disastrous for Scotland and make your family worse off. Yet al the indicators point otherwise. You say you are not a Tory. So as a Unionist that leaves you screwball Labour. Or Tartan Tory. Or look at the blue and beyond Lib. The coalition with the Tory's is why the Uk is in the state it is in. Which. |
|
|
|
Post by om15 on Jan 10, 2023 18:59:41 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by research0it on Jan 10, 2023 21:35:09 GMT
Hi Om15 It's beginning to irritate me that people so quickly move away from the OP, without exploring it properly. There is nothing in the OP that contradicts that link as it is all connected to how under developed scotland is. So inevitably, the early years of independence could be a struggle. While scotland develops it's potential. So there's no need to post links that merely prove what I know already - that scotland doesn't have enough of a tax base to cover the costs of current public services. For all the reasons that I said. So the question is what is the uk going to do about it, should scotland stay in the union? Would it be too much to hope that the uk will develop scotland? The potential is there for someone to do it. |
|
|
|
Post by research0it on Jan 11, 2023 1:44:58 GMT
Hi Om15 again
Just to clarify. Reports such as this assume independent Scotland will continue to do everything in exactly the same way as it was done in the UK. Forever.
|
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Jan 11, 2023 4:23:14 GMT
Hi Om15 again Just to clarify. Reports such as this assume independent Scotland will continue to do everything in exactly the same way as it was done in the UK. Forever. I don’t think that it does assume that. It makes clear that it does not consider anything other than the trade effects of independence so it does not even consider, never mind make assumptions about, anything else that an independent Scotland might do ie. “ In this briefing, we restrict our analysis to trade effects and do not consider other potentially important economic effects of Scottish independence, such as changes in investment flows into and out of Scotland, whether Scotland continues to use sterling as its currency and the fiscal implications of independence”. If they had considered these issues then their conclusions would surely have been even worse than the figures highlighted by om15... bearing in mind, for example, the £20 billion per annum hit to the public finances (per GERS reports) and the additional costs of borrowing due to a lower credit rating and an increase in rates of interest generally (borrowing costs in general are currently on a clear upward trend after sitting at record lows for years) that an Indy Scotland would face.
The other big takeaway item from this report is that rejoining the EU, the reason that most of the Yes side gives to justify another indyref, would result in even further damage to an Indy Scotland’s economy and therefore bring even more hardship to bear on the Scottish people ie.
“The analysis highlights a paradox in the economic argument that Scotland should become independent in order to rejoin the EU. For an independent Scotland to be better off inside the EU, independence must destroy a sufficiently large share of Scotland’s trade with the rest of the UK that the EU becomes Scotland’s most important trade partner. However, the more independence reduces trade, the greater its economic costs. In other words, for rejoining the EU to be economically desirable, independence itself must bring substantial economic costs.
Our estimates should be interpreted as the long-run effects of Brexit and independence after the economy has adjusted to changes in trade costs. Brexit studies typically argue that it will take 10-15 years for the full effects to materialise (Sampson 2017; HMG 2018). Adjustment to Scottish independence is likely to be even slower and may take a generation or more, as border costs gradually increase due to divergence between economic policy and regulations in the two countries and the erosion of existing cultural, social and business ties.
This slow adjustment means that in the initial decades after independence the rest of the UK will continue to be Scotland’s most important trade partner. Consequently, even if in the long- run there is an economic case for an independent Scotland to rejoin the EU, we conclude that Scotland’s medium-run priority following independence should be keeping border costs with the rest of the UK as low as possible” |
|
|
|
Post by research0it on Jan 11, 2023 5:39:55 GMT
Hi Om15 again Just to clarify. Reports such as this assume independent Scotland will continue to do everything in exactly the same way as it was done in the UK. Forever. I don’t think that it does assume that. It makes clear that it does not consider anything other than the trade effects of independence so it does not even consider, never mind make assumptions about, anything else that an independent Scotland might do ie. “ In this briefing, we restrict our analysis to trade effects and do not consider other potentially important economic effects of Scottish independence, such as changes in investment flows into and out of Scotland, whether Scotland continues to use sterling as its currency and the fiscal implications of independence”. If they had considered these issues then their conclusions would surely have been even worse than the figures highlighted by om15... bearing in mind, for example, the £20 billion per annum hit to the public finances (per GERS reports) and the additional costs of borrowing due to a lower credit rating and an increase in rates of interest generally (borrowing costs in general are currently on a clear upward trend after sitting at record lows for years) that an Indy Scotland would face.
The other big takeaway item from this report is that rejoining the EU, the reason that most of the Yes side gives to justify another indyref, would result in even further damage to an Indy Scotland’s economy and therefore bring even more hardship to bear on the Scottish people ie.
“The analysis highlights a paradox in the economic argument that Scotland should become independent in order to rejoin the EU. For an independent Scotland to be better off inside the EU, independence must destroy a sufficiently large share of Scotland’s trade with the rest of the UK that the EU becomes Scotland’s most important trade partner. However, the more independence reduces trade, the greater its economic costs. In other words, for rejoining the EU to be economically desirable, independence itself must bring substantial economic costs.
Our estimates should be interpreted as the long-run effects of Brexit and independence after the economy has adjusted to changes in trade costs. Brexit studies typically argue that it will take 10-15 years for the full effects to materialise (Sampson 2017; HMG 2018). Adjustment to Scottish independence is likely to be even slower and may take a generation or more, as border costs gradually increase due to divergence between economic policy and regulations in the two countries and the erosion of existing cultural, social and business ties.
This slow adjustment means that in the initial decades after independence the rest of the UK will continue to be Scotland’s most important trade partner. Consequently, even if in the long- run there is an economic case for an independent Scotland to rejoin the EU, we conclude that Scotland’s medium-run priority following independence should be keeping border costs with the rest of the UK as low as possible”Hi happyjack OK, fair enough. Maybe adjustment would take longer. Although I didn't really have any notion of how long it would take. If you recall, I did suggest that it would be easier if the uk chose to fix things itself and started to divert investment away from London to the less developed areas of the uk. So are they going to do it? In some ways the argument against independence from the UK, is that "we've so trashed your economy that independence would be difficult". Hardly a positive endorsement of the union. |
|
|
|
Post by research0it on Jan 11, 2023 6:26:28 GMT
Hi happyjack again
Thinking about it, the report does carefully set out the limits of it's scope and what it does and doesn't cover.
The assumption that if you move outside the scope of the report, then ANYTHING independent Scotland could consider doing different than it does inside the uk, would make a difficult situation worse, is YOUR assumption? Right?
So are you saying that there are NO changes to the way scotland does things within the UK that could improve things? Not a single thing?
Bearing in mind I've pointed out ways the uk could improve things.
|
|
|
|
Post by buccaneer on Jan 11, 2023 9:25:04 GMT
It's a hugely difficult task for the uk government to dig the uk out of the economic hole it's dug for 40 odd years. The uk is on a long slow economic decline. Do you wonder why the markets reacted so badly at the mini budget? After all cutting taxes for the rich and corporations is what conservatives do. They didn't do anything different than normal. Yet this time it was different. So I investigated. Since the 1980s the uk economy has changed from making and selling things to doing things It sells financial services. Success depends on the markets having confidence that these services add value and it's all underpinned by money flowing through London, and rapidly rising London property prices. This has resulted in one of the most unequal economies on earth, ,with London almost twice as rich as the 2nd richest economic region (Scotland). The outcome is that London is over developed and the rest of the country under developed. Scotland is the region with the most potential. Here we have huge natural resources. Water wind coastline and topography combine to produce a region that could be a renewables king of the world and a global warming oasis. Yet we run a deficit. There are not enough high tax payers to cover the costs of our public services, despite the potential. Why? Because we're under developed. Why? Because we don't get investment. We don't get public sector investment because the uk government can't tear itself away from the tax paying teat of London, so doesn't want to divert significant investment from London. We don't get private sector investment because investors are, say, choosing between investing in a tidal energy scheme off the western Isles, paying a steady 3%, or simply buying a mansion in London, paying 10 to 15%. What are they going to do? The mini budget, opened a curtain and exposed the giant Ponsi scheme that the uk economy has become. They've managed to close the curtain a bit again, but long term, events will happen that will open it again and it will get more and more difficult to put back. Long slow decline is inevitable. UK wise, does any party have the courage and means to tackle this? Tony Blair found it too difficult. He just raised more taxes from London and redistributed. Not a long term answer. Which is to develop the wealth producing regions of the uk and lessen investment in London. A painful road. Should scotland therefore leave and do it itself? It is also a painful risky road. Will we be smart enough? Will we use the huge natural resources for the people rather than multi nationals? We will still be attached to the rUK, so London may still draw away investment. It's a question of whether to take the chance rather than be tied to an economy that will always prioritise London and be in a long slow decline. The only thing I would counsel to Scots is to decide on what you want the future to look like and the most likely route to get there, not on current competencies and make up of administrations in Edinburgh or London. Scottish Secretary currently says otherwise: www.gov.uk/government/news/levelling-up-reaches-new-heights-in-scotland#:~:text=The%20UK%20Government's%20funding%20for,of%20further%20investment%20in%202023. Scotland has already had over 2 billion pumped into it. And perhaps your own SNP government could raise these concerns instead of ignoring and failing in policy areas rather than bang the same old tired 'moaning mindset' they have been doing re. independene. |
|
