Scottish Independence

[North Rhins]

I’ve just watched Alex Salmond’s New Year message to Scotland. I know he’s a politician and as such apt to fib a bit, but do you think that he’s on the right line, could Scotland become an independent nation and split from the rest of the UK?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cD1g11yYZc

[j4bberw0ck]

I dare say it could, it if wanted to lose the banking and financial services industry from Edinburgh.......

The first question is, in the modern, globalised world, could Scotland survive becoming independent for very long? The euro has done a power of no good, ultimately, to every nation that signed up for it; a majority of Germans, French and Italians want their Deutschemarks, Francs and Lire back, and the eurozone is standing on the edge of economic - well, if not depression, certainly recession.

The second question is, aside from inflaming the passions of the Braveheart mob, what good would independence do Scotland in the longer term? And please don't talk about "the oil" - it's gone, or almost gone, and it was British oil anyway.

[North Rhins]

Wasn’t there talk a couple or more years ago of a substantial oil field to the west of Orkney? I seem to remember that it was in very deep water and it was going to be hard to bring to shore?

[Jeemag_USA]

Its a subject that could go on forever. When I was younger I used to think it would be great, and was very proud of my country, I still am but I used to be what would be called over-patriotic. When I think about it these days, Scotland has always been in a state of independence to me, with our own unique dialects, communities, behaviours and music, arts and so on, I used to think being a part of the UK was causing us to lose our identity, many years ago it did to some extent, but the people never change and therefore our identity is never lost.

If I thought that being independent would be beneficial for all the people of Scotland then I would be all for it. I spent a lot of time in the Republic of Ireland and never really saw them having any problem being an independent nation, and sometimes thought, this might be what Scotland would be like had we never joined a Union, but how is it possible to know for sure? I think wishing to claim independence for any patriotic reason in this day and age is not sensible, but if it is to safeguard the well being of a nations people then that might be a good reason. But is it really necessary, I am not sure.

I do always term Scotland a country when I talk about it to others, even though some would prefer it be called a provence. Sometimes I still struggle with stuff in my head, like the names United Kingdom and Great Britain, those names have never sat right in my head and still smack of the days of empire building and imperialism, and when asked about my background in the USA I never introduce myself as being british, or being from the UK or Great Britain, I am always Scottish and from Scotland. I can't stop doing that because I believe its the most important way to stay connected with my roots.

The first time I ever voted was for the SNP, but in hindsight being only 18 I probably voted only for Scottish Independence and not because of their party politics which is naieve really. I am not saying I wouldn't vote for them again if I thought their policy was better than others or if my local SNP candidate seemed like the best one for the area.

In short, its a question I used to answer pretty quickly when I was younger, now its seems something I would need to mull over a lot more. The nations within the UK are vastly different in many ways, I am not 100% sure that they have ever been United in anything except maybe battle or the Olympics. Another question is if Scotland did gain its independence, what would that leave, a United Kingdom of Wales, NI and England, does it stop there because the Welsh wil probably want theirs too and of course we know what aminefield Northern Ireland is, does it become independent or dissolve back into Eire?

If I think in terms of the future, I think it is important that all different cultures retain their identity because its what makes the world interesting. But should the boundaries, borders and flags make any difference? I am not sure?

If as a nation the people of Scotland already have an independant state of mind, does it need to be written down and sealed on paper?

My answer to the question "could Scotland survive as an independant nation", is yes I have no doubt of that. The resolve of its people has got them through much worse times in History, and I am sure it would again if things got tough. But that doesn't answer the question on wether it is necessary?

[young]

The second question is, aside from inflaming the passions of the Braveheart mob, what good would independence do Scotland in the longer term? And please don't talk about "the oil" - it's gone, or almost gone, and it was British oil anyway.

Where has the oil gone? The oil is still in the "North" sea major oil companies operate from Aberdeen were the heart of the oil industrys and oil rigs are from. So the majority of the oil is indeed still in scotland. How much money each year does the government make from "Scottish oil"?

[Conscience]

Here is a recent (2004) report on North Sea oil production. http://www.energybulletin.net/105.html

[percy toboggan]

If you decide to 'go' we'll all be the poorer for it.
Despite ancient enmities most English people have a place in their heart for Scotland, even if some of you seem a little belligerent towards England and the English, particularly when the world cup thing surfaces.

So why do we marry across the border, travel so freely across the border and settle so often across border?

Precisely because borders are political. They used to be Monarchic, but that gubbins is sinking without trace by the hour.(he said optimistically)

The real reason is that we have rubbed along side by side on this relatively small lump of rock for so long that most educated people can't see much a difference in people who are separated by a mere geographical hairsbreadth.

I love Scotland, and I like England although I've gone off it a bit of late.

Do whatever makes you happiest. I think, and I fervently hope when it comes down to a referendum the malcontents and free spirits will settle for the devil they perceive, rather than one they don't know. If your politicians are as good as the ones in Westminster just imagine what a bwlls up it could prove to be.
(can I say 'balls)?

[rich]

We sold the country once in 1707 and it worked out not too badly. So why not sell it again to Europe?
What we need now is some really good second hand car salesman, because frankly the Scottish independence wagon has seen better days.
It's like one of those clapped out out old Ford Prefects that Caithness farmers used as hen houses back when I was growing up there.
There's a few nasty blood stains on the upholstery and the body seems to have survived an attempt to blow it up. There are a few sheep in the back seat and a couple of crofters cursing in Gaelic. There's a pile of half read treatises on Calvinist religion, and a very nasty looking skian dhu.
Putting the wheels on this contraption might just cause the whole shebang to sink still further in the mud and what is UNDER the chassis scarcely bears thinking about, whoops, here's a pair of feet, haul out the body - good grierf it's Sir Walter Scott and next to him Walt Disney. Maybe they are planning a Scotch theme park.
And lets assume we finally assemble an engine three parts peat fuelled and one part atomic energy driven. Who gets to steer?
I do that's who!
And I'm selling tickets.
Contact Rich Enterprises (Transport and Tourism division) Toronto Canada.
Thank you all very much.

[Errogie]

I'm reassured sure that we can still assemble another parcel of rogues in the 21st. century!

I believe that one of the underlying reasons behind the first union with England was the fact that the country was on its uppers after a series of disasterous summers from the mini ice age and this was seen as a way to cash in on English food and relative prosperity by the merchant classes.

So does the topic of climate change and short fall in energy supplies rear its head again, and who looks like they have the upper hand this time around?

Any government that can't organise a dental service and whose leader attends prayers with George Bush doesn't exactly fill me with confidence so I'm all for throwing my lot in with the S.N.P. at the next election and I suspect many others will too.

[concerned resident]

Until a time comes when the people of Scotland realise that they are just lap dogs, of an english Government, we will continue to listen to scare mongers who say, that will fail, we will lose this and that, Scotland no dowt would have problems, but what country dosnt, it could only be an improvement on the Scottish Parliment, rubber stamping every thing sent up from Westminster, like a bunch of puppets, but costing us a lot of money. If there is to be a Scottish Parliment, it should have full powers, and then the people would feel like they are Scottish, not just a Tax payer who has to pay extra for petrol, a TV licence,
but not getting full service, higher business Rates, lack of investment, a 50's train service, i should'nt say that, i believe they had a better service then.
I will not go on, as i know that the Scottish people i am on about, are all but a few now, the rest are quite happy just being second class english citizens.

[Oddquine]

I guess it depends on what you are looking for...............if you are happy having nuclear weapons on your soil, an economy run for the benefit of London and the South of England, no voice at all in Europe to try and protect our fishing industry, cheap housing so that those from the south (and not just of England) can come in and pay more for housing for the good life than locals can afford for a basic life, and the continual carping about Scotland's "subsidies" and the "West Lothian Question" (none of which is our fault) so that you can be sure that you can be certain of tomorrow's wage and tax levels...........then it's not for you.

But if you think that it's about time the Scots stopped blaming all the problems with the Scottish economy on the Westminster Government, and got to a situation where we can live as equal neighbours with the rest of the UK by taking our own future into our own hands, and by doing so, produce a better relationship with them...............then independence is the only option, imo.

As for j4bberw0ck's if wanted to lose the banking and financial services industry from Edinburgh............and you get to that conclusion how?
You sound like the "union at all costs" crowd at the time of both referenda...........when they listed the first time round all those industries which would close if we voted for devolution.......and which closed anyway, even though we theoretically didn't..........and those ones the second time around which would move out of Scotland...........and didn't!

I have no objections to people giving me hard facts as to what Scotland has gained, and will gain in the future, from the union, but I do object to scaremongering for the sake of it.

I am for independence, btw....anyhow, anyway .........and hopefully before I die!

[percy toboggan]

Wouldn't independence be a sham?
You couldn't hope to declare it without the European Uninon to fall back on.
As so many of your strings will be pulled in Brussels, and not Edinburgh are you not just substituting another overlord, for the one you believe the Westminster government to be. On the very periphery of Europe, and with many more poorer nations now as members you might get shorter change from the EU than you imagine.

[Oddquine]

Wouldn't independence be a sham?
You couldn't hope to declare it without the European Uninon to fall back on.
As so many of your strings will be pulled in Brussels, and not Edinburgh are you not just substituting another overlord, for the one you believe the Westminster government to be. On the very periphery of Europe, and with many more poorer nations now as members you might get shorter change from the EU than you imagine.

But we are already hamstrung by the EU, but with no voice of our own...........and, to be frank, the Westminster Government doesn't bother too much with the effects of EU policies on the "peripheries" if it will get them a concession somewhere else.

So instead of getting the EU dictat filtered through the Westminster obsession with everything South of Watford, it would be at least the best we could do for ourselves.

We have no real say in what Westminster does in the UK and EU, given the 10 to 1 majority of non Scottish MPs........and I think we'd have as much, if not more, influence in the EU, if we decided to join...we could certainly not have less there than we have, or have ever had in Westminster.

Having members of the Cabinet who represent Scottish constituencies doesn't give us any more influence than that of being a small minority of the members of parliament...whatever the English voter thinks.

[percy toboggan]

In so much as Labour would have to work all the harder for English working class votes it could have a definite effect here - endless years of Toryism.
By then we might be 'up there' in a European backwater feeling flushed with us English pensions.
Que sera Que sera.

[Oddquine]

In so much as Labour would have to work all the harder for English working class votes it could have a definite effect here - endless years of Toryism.
By then we might be 'up there' in a European backwater feeling flushed with us English pensions.
Que sera Que sera.

Maybe that's some of the problem, though, pt........the English working class, particularly in the South, seem to be natural Tory voters, while the Tories don't even have now the rural consituencies which automatically voted for them in the past.

I do think that the politics and priorities of Westminster and the Scots are getting further apart with each successive election.

Maybe federalism would stop the independence bandwagon for a time, but I, for one, wouldn't want to be part of the UK-wide policies as presently mooted..........as in Trident,USA following and being the only country to slavishly follow every burp from the halls of the EU.........so even federalism won't stop me wanting eventual independence.

[Stewart]

I'm against the idea, personally. I don't see how Scotland could survive without the help of the rest of the UK.

I could always be wrong, mind you.

[Conscience]

Until a time comes when the people of Scotland realise that they are just lap dogs, of an english Government, we will continue to listen to scare mongers who say, that will fail, we will lose this and that, Scotland no dowt would have problems, but what country dosnt, it could only be an improvement on the Scottish Parliment, rubber stamping every thing sent up from Westminster, like a bunch of puppets, but costing us a lot of money. If there is to be a Scottish Parliment, it should have full powers, and then the people would feel like they are Scottish, not just a Tax payer who has to pay extra for petrol, a TV licence,
but not getting full service, higher business Rates, lack of investment, a 50's train service, i should'nt say that, i believe they had a better service then.
I will not go on, as i know that the Scottish people i am on about, are all but a few now, the rest are quite happy just being second class english citizens.

What 'English' government? :lol:

[mareng]

I guess Independance will only occur once the oil dries up?

I reckon that Scotland would survive nicely, especially as we would not need to subscribe to the nuclear deterrent and most of the army/navy/air force. I would subscribe to "hiding" under the same umbrella that Eire does just now.

Start charging more for the freshwater that we pump across the border (as much as the market will stand)

Scrap any notion of road pricing, leading to the possibility of a nice little industry in "Scottish-registered cars" that don't have to be fitted with "black boxes" - for shrewd English motorists...........

I'm always intrigued by the notion that any division of north sea oil and gas might favour England more than we Scots perceive.

As most North Sea installations have had call to bring in police officers for various reasons (assaults, fatal accidents etc) - the offshore "border" has already been decided. Any platform/field that has been officially visited by a Scottish Police Force is clearly........... Scottish.

Freedom!

[oldmarine]

Scotland has a choice: stand together united or take chances after becoming divided. There is a very large threat coming throughout the world: it is called Islam (Muslim). At least 10% of the world's Islam population is dedicated to controlling the world as they nearly did in the 1400 - 1500's.

[mareng]

Scotland has a choice: stand together united or take chances after becoming divided. There is a very large threat coming throughout the world: it is called Islam (Muslim). At least 10% of the world's Islam population is dedicated to controlling the world as they nearly did in the 1400 - 1500's.


What about our own "Tartan Taliban"?

So - are you saying that Eire is currently under increased threat of attack or control from Muslims than those in the UK?

sorry - I'm not seeing this.

[North Rhins]

My view of independence is based on what I have seen in Eire. They seem to have embraced the EU. The harbours that I came across were crammed with new, shiny, high tech fishing vessels. New houses springing up alongside roads built with EU money. They had converted to the Euro with the minimum of fuss. The Irish just got on with it and made it work.
The people I spoke to all agreed that there was a lot of ‘new’ money about. Admittedly all this was two years ago and was before the arrival of the East European countries. I’m not sure that there is going to be as much spare cash available.

[oldmarine]

What about our own "Tartan Taliban"?

So - are you saying that Eire is currently under increased threat of attack or control from Muslims than those in the UK?

sorry - I'm not seeing this.


I remember when people in the United Kingdom plus many other countries refused to believe that Nazi expansionists wanted to control the world. England, Scotland, and many other countries throughout the world came close to losing their freedom because they could not see that threat either. I served in the armed forces during WWII to remove the threat of losing our liberty. We must all be awake and prepared for the worst whether it comes during our time or later. It surely appears to be on the way. Know history when Neville Chamberlain said "not during our time."

[mareng]

My view of independence is based on what I have seen in Eire. They seem to have embraced the EU. The harbours that I came across were crammed with new, shiny, high tech fishing vessels. New houses springing up alongside roads built with EU money. They had converted to the Euro with the minimum of fuss. The Irish just got on with it and made it work.
The people I spoke to all agreed that there was a lot of ‘new’ money about. Admittedly all this was two years ago and was before the arrival of the East European countries. I’m not sure that there is going to be as much spare cash available.

That is my appreciation of the situation with Eire, also.

Although there may be less money available now - I suspect that Scotland would not require as much?

[North Rhins]

The problem with the word ‘Independence,’ is where does it start and more to the point where does it stop.
Are we talking a complete break with England, Wales and Northern Ireland? If so what happens with such things as the NHS, Income tax, National Insurance, VAT, the Armed Forces, national security, to name but a few.
Nothing would give me greater pleasure than to see an independent, prosperous Scotland finally coming out of the shadows. But having said that is it as easy as putting a cross on a ballot paper?

[mareng]

Yup! Complete independance.

I think it is only the savings in Defence spending that will allow us to sort out our health (service)

I believe that a rising proportion of the English (especially in the south) are keen to "let us go"........... so let's do it while we still have some resources?

(We speak better "English" than they do, anyway!)

[Conscience]

I think you'll find a fair proportion of the English don't even give it a thought.

[mareng]

I think you'll find a fair proportion of the English don't even give it a thought.

As do a fair proportion of Scots.

However, this thread is subscribed to by people that are giving it a thought.

I'm thinking that we should continue to give it some thought, if that's okay with you?

So............... what exactly is your point?

[Conscience]

My point, in reply to your assertion that 'a rising proportion of the English (especially in the south) are keen to "let us go"', is that a fair proportion, if not the vast majority, of the English do not give Scots Independence a thought. Was I not clear enough?

[mareng]

My point, in reply to your assertion that 'a rising proportion of the English (especially in the south) are keen to "let us go"', is that a fair proportion, if not the vast majority, of the English do not give Scots Independence a thought. Was I not clear enough?

No, it was fairly clear and concise.......... but may infer that the people that didn't give it much (or any) thought - were reasonably happy with the current state of affairs. One might also conclude from this, that they perceive that they are net beneficiaries from the union?

As you rightly quote - I state that a rising proportion of the English are keen to let us go. I make no assertion as to the current level of that thought, only that it is on the increase. I stand by that assertion.

At the end of the day, we are posting on Caithness.org, not Dorset.org.

[Conscience]

Again. They do not consider themselves 'net beneficiaries' of the Union. For starters more tax money is spent per head in Scotland than in England. So they are not beneficiaries there. In Scotland the average university tuition fee is about £1,700, while in England it is £3,000, so they are not net beneficiaries there either. Ministers of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland can represent the whole of the UK at Brussels. Neither England as a whole, nor its proposed regions can do this, so they are not net beneficiaries there. And lastly, Scotland has a voice in its own Parliament, England does not, so they are not net beneficiaries there. All of this leads me to conclude that the English, if faced with an independent Scotland, would probably be better off.

[Oddquine]

Again. They do not consider themselves 'net beneficiaries' of the Union. For starters more tax money is spent per head in Scotland than in England. So they are not beneficiaries there. In Scotland the average university tuition fee is about £1,700, while in England it is £3,000, so they are not net beneficiaries there either. Ministers of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland can represent the whole of the UK at Brussels. Neither England as a whole, nor its proposed regions can do this, so they are not net beneficiaries there. And lastly, Scotland has a voice in its own Parliament, England does not, so they are not net beneficiaries there. All of this leads me to conclude that the English, if faced with an independent Scotland, would probably be better off.

And, as Mareng said, a rising proportion of the English are keen to let us go.

If you believe polls there are more English people wanting us to have Independence than Scots............59% to 52% as here.........
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/11/26/nunion26.xml

and more than 50% is a majority in anyone's book, I think.

I don't have a lot of sympathy for the English...they could have demanded federalism, but they sat on their hands!

[Conscience]

I don't have a lot of sympathy for the English...they could have demanded federalism, but they sat on their hands!

And how, exactly, could they have done that without an institutional body equivalent to the Scots Parliament, to speak for them?

[Oddquine]

And how, exactly, could they have done that without an institutional body equivalent to the Scots Parliament, to speak for them?

But we didn't have the institutional body of the Scottish Parliament.....did we?

So the English can jump up and down as we did.....after all........they have only themselves to blame that their own MPS, who could have out-gunned the regional assembly idea and demanded an English Parliament, didn't bother, haven't they?

[Conscience]

Ah, but the Scots have the SNP to shout for them. Any equivalent party in England is always denounced as ' far right' or 'neo-nazi' etc. by the British government, a government in which the major figures of the three main parties are all Scottish. To quote Jeremy Paxman, 'the English live under a Scottish Raj.'

[Oddquine]

Ah, but the Scots have the SNP to shout for them. Any equivalent party in England is always denounced as ' far right' or 'neo-nazi' etc. by the British government, a government in which the major figures of the three main parties are all Scottish. To quote Jeremy Paxman, 'the English live under a Scottish Raj.'

And you come to that conclusion how?

Wasn't aware there ever was an English National Party to be denounced until after 1999..up till then, too many English thought the UK was England...........and got a surprise when they realised we didn't think the same.

Afraid it is a Scottish Raj voted for by the UK, as Paxman well knows....and England is stuck with them until they do something about it, aren't they............. as he also knows.

It's just one of the penalties of having a Union, as we have found out over the years......you can get a Government you don't want (hence the cry for devolution/independence.) ;)

[Conscience]

Has anyone in Scotland ever been ordered to take down the Saltire because it may offend other nationalities? Such things happen in England all the time, cabbies ordered not to fly the St George Cross in case it offends, homeowners told to take down the flag in case it offends. Here's a quick copy and paste, I believe some may have switched titles recently.

Cabinet ministers:

Tony Blair, prime minister. Fettes-educated lord of all he surveys.
Gordon Brown, chancellor of the exchequer. Famously prudent son of manse holding national purse strings.
Lord Falconer of Thoroton, secretary of state for constitutional affairs. Old chum of Blair.
Alistair Darling, secretary of state for transport and Scotland, MP for Edinburgh Central. In charge of non-reserved Scottish matters and trains.
John Reid, secretary of state for health. Bluff, tough, safe pair of hands.
Ian McCartney, minister without portfolio. Sits for English constituency of Makerfield, machine politician.



Junior ministers:

Lynda Clark, advocate general for Scotland, MP for Edinburgh Pentlands. Keeps a low profile.
Anne McGuire, parliamentary under-secretary for Scotland. Hard-working Blair loyalist.
Adam Ingram, minister for armed forces. Enforced “reform” of Scottish regiments and cut RAF jobs.
Douglas Alexander, minister for trade. MSP Wendy’s Brownite little brother.
Nigel Griffiths, under-secretary of state for small business. Honest toiler.
Jim Murphy, whip. Former student firebrand turned Westminster enforcer.
Brian Wilson, prime minister’s special envoy for Iraq.


The point I'm making is you are sitting there weeping for poor hard done by Scotland, when in actual fact Scotland is not really all that hard done by, and is actually doing very nicely out of the Union.

[Jeemag_USA]

Brian Wilson, prime minister’s special envoy for Iraq.

And lead singer of the "Beach Boys" :lol:

[JAWS]

I don't think there would be much affect either way on England. The relatively small area of England called the West Midlands alone has a population larger than the whole of Scotland.

I can't say I've ever known the thought of Scotland becoming independent ever having been much of a topic of conversation in the average English Bar.
In the North of England you would probably get more interest asking how Accrington Stanley did in last Saturday's football game.
OK, so the Accrington Stanley part is a bit of an exaggeration, but only just.;)
You would certainly get more response with a moan about "them Southerners" in London than you would even in the middle of an SNP Meeting.

[Jeemag_USA]

I don't think there would be much affect either way on England. The relatively small area of England called the West Midlands alone has a population larger than the whole of Scotland.

I can't say I've ever known the thought of Scotland becoming independent ever having been much of a topic of conversation in the average English Bar.
In the North of England you would probably get more interest asking how Accrington Stanley did in last Saturday's football game.
OK, so the Accrington Stanley part is a bit of an exaggeration, but only just.;)
You would certainly get more response with a moan about "them Southerners" in London than you would even in the middle of an SNP Meeting.

I think if we do get independence we should annex the north of England into Scotland as far as the Tyne, I love Geordies and think they are more like Scots than they are English, mad s they are :lol:

[Oddquine]

Has anyone in Scotland ever been ordered to take down the Saltire because it may offend other nationalities? Such things happen in England all the time, cabbies ordered not to fly the St George Cross in case it offends, homeowners told to take down the flag in case it offends.

As far as I'm aware it is still illegal to fly a National flag except from a vertical flagpole without Council permission.

Can't say I've ever heard of anyone being told to remove a Saltire...but maybe that's because we are more law-abiding and less nationalistic.and don't stick it in Windows or fly it from taxis.........so there maybe isn't any great need to object.



Here's a quick copy and paste, I believe some may have switched titles recently.

Cabinet ministers:

Tony Blair, prime minister. Fettes-educated lord of all he surveys.
Gordon Brown, chancellor of the exchequer. Famously prudent son of manse holding national purse strings.
Lord Falconer of Thoroton, secretary of state for constitutional affairs. Old chum of Blair.
Alistair Darling, secretary of state for transport and Scotland, MP for Edinburgh Central. In charge of non-reserved Scottish matters and trains.
John Reid, secretary of state for health. Bluff, tough, safe pair of hands.
Ian McCartney, minister without portfolio. Sits for English constituency of Makerfield, machine politician.



Junior ministers:

Lynda Clark, advocate general for Scotland, MP for Edinburgh Pentlands. Keeps a low profile.
Anne McGuire, parliamentary under-secretary for Scotland. Hard-working Blair loyalist.
Adam Ingram, minister for armed forces. Enforced “reform” of Scottish regiments and cut RAF jobs.
Douglas Alexander, minister for trade. MSP Wendy’s Brownite little brother.
Nigel Griffiths, under-secretary of state for small business. Honest toiler.
Jim Murphy, whip. Former student firebrand turned Westminster enforcer.
Brian Wilson, prime minister’s special envoy for Iraq.


The point I'm making is you are sitting there weeping for poor hard done by Scotland, when in actual fact Scotland is not really all that hard done by, and is actually doing very nicely out of the Union.

And the point I am making is that having Scots, whether or not sitting for a Scottish Constituency, doesn't make the Scottish population feel less hard done by.........because the policies of every UK Government, regardless of party or nationality of MPs, legislate for the South of England.

The only Scots doing nicely out of the Union presently are the MPs.

With a Union using the system we have, you can get MPs in Cabinet from anywhere in the UK...........maybe it's just that the better ones at the moment are Scots.

I do however appreciate the postings from those who reduce the idea of Scottish nationalism to the level of sound bites telling us how England is now the underdog........so carry on with your remarks...........the tone of them can only serve to harden attitudes and confirm the need for independence.

Bear in mind, the remedy to all England's woes are in England's hands...and have nothing to do with us........you have 10 times more MPS....and, to my mind, that makes a vast majority....but you do have to have the will to change things.

[Conscience]

Ok. Scotland wins Independence from Britain and throws in its lot with Brussels:

First thing you will have to find is defence, unless you are willing to pay Britain to continue defending Scotland.
Britain will have to put in much more stringent border control, possibly including passport control and immigration control, because Scotland will immediately become a back door into Britain for illegal immigrants.
The Scottish Parliament will have to raise taxes because there will be no more money from Britain for health, education, policing, defence etc. Scotland might get lucky if it goes cap in hand to the EU, but bearing in mind all the recent, fiscally very poor additions to the EU, chances of that are slim.
Because the NHS is British and does not operate in foreign countries it will have to close in Scotland. Healthcare will therefore have to be financed locally or become a compulsory health insurance based system like Australia.
Roads will also have to be financed locally, so an alternative to the old British Road Tax will have to be found, road pricing perhaps?
The Scottish pound will have to be set free from the British pound as a seperate currency. But then there's always the Euro. Good luck with the exchange rates.
Benefits will have to be seperated from the British Benefits system. A whole new raft of legislation will have to be created to take care of that.



'The only Scots doing nicely out of the Union presently are the MPs.'

The fact that more government money is spent per head in Scotland than any other part of Britain shows that statement to be untrue.

'but maybe that's because we are more law-abiding and less nationalistic.'

Just look at football to see how untrue that is! Most England supporters will support Scotland against foreign opposition. Most Scotland supporters will support any foreign team rather than England. Where do you hang your Argentina shirt? ;)

[j4bberw0ck]

Seems to me that there are some very muddled excuses for "thinking" in here which are more about Scottish Nationalism than the real world.

Let me start with this:


Where has the oil gone? The oil is still in the "North" sea major oil companies operate from Aberdeen were the heart of the oil industrys and oil rigs are from. So the majority of the oil is indeed still in scotland. How much money each year does the government make from "Scottish oil"?

North Sea reserves are basically in two chunks - economically recoverable, and not economically recoverable. The higher the price of oil, the more reserves shift into the "recoverable" bracket. But without high and stable prices, oil companies won't invest in developing marginally recoverable fields. Fact: oil and gas reserves which are recoverable have been plundered and what's left will be gone within decades. Then either oil prices rise to make more recoverable, or the industry shuts their assets down. If you add to this all the climate change stuff about fossil fuels, you have to consider that within a short (by which I mean a few decades) timescale, oil is just as likely to be a dead duck as still providing jobs.

And since Scotland is part of the UK, there is no such thing as Scottish oil except in the minds of the Braveheart Mob, never has been, and it's tough for me to see how independence would change that.


I guess it depends on what you are looking for...............if you are happy having nuclear weapons on your soil, an economy run for the benefit of London and the South of England, no voice at all in Europe to try and protect our fishing industry, cheap housing so that those from the south (and not just of England) can come in and pay more for housing for the good life than locals can afford for a basic life, and the continual carping about Scotland's "subsidies" and the "West Lothian Question" (none of which is our fault) so that you can be sure that you can be certain of tomorrow's wage and tax levels...........then it's not for you.

Ah, the perennial cries of the Brayfarts (sorry, it's my accent)! We don't need nuclear weapons. Economy run for the benefit of London. An independent Scotland and a glorious fishing industry! News for you boys: first, all the stuff about Trident and the 25 billion or so. It gets reported as though the Government just has to write a cheque for the money out of this years' income. Wrong. It'll take 25 years to roll out the Trident replacement program because of the size and complexity of the project. The expenditure spread over 25 years is a drop in the bucket, and as far as the few million taxpayers in Scotland are concerned amounts to pence.

An economy run from London? Ask yourselves why the people of Germany, France, Italy, Portugal, Finland, Spain and most of the rest of the EU want out of the euro? Because their economies are being run for the benefit of European federalist ideals. The French are in open revolt in the EU because they thing the eurozone is run for Germany's benefit as biggest economy. Italy is in a huge economic mess for the same reason. France has the highest rate of unemployment since the sixties. Portugal was brought to its knees by the EU who took over direct control of their economy from Brussels when Portugal, suffering inflation because their economy didn't suit the eurozone policies, refused to implement tax rises and slash government spending to contain it. The EU forced changes through and Portugal dived into recession and the highest rates of unemployment it had ever seen.

On that scale, Scotland doesn't even figure on the EU radar. You think Westminster's bad? Try Brussels. One size does not fit all.

Oh, and the Scottish fishing industry? What fish? You can't change the fact that the Spaniards have had it away on their toes with most of what there was, but I can't see a dozen trawlers and two dozen small cod supporting a Scottish economy, can you? (Yes, I exaggerate for effect, and for humour. But the truth is there to see).


As for j4bberw0ck's if wanted to lose the banking and financial services industry from Edinburgh............and you get to that conclusion how?
You sound like the "union at all costs" crowd at the time of both referenda...........when they listed the first time round all those industries which would close if we voted for devolution.......and which closed anyway, even though we theoretically didn't..........and those ones the second time around which would move out of Scotland...........and didn't!

I have no objections to people giving me hard facts as to what Scotland has gained, and will gain in the future, from the union, but I do object to scaremongering for the sake of it. (my emphasis)

Ah, the sickly smell of hypocrisy :lol:

I get to that conclusion for a couple of reasons. First, a few years ago Standard Life, that pride of Scotland, was actively making plans to close offices, lay off staff and move to England if the SNP won the then election. This was widely reported at the time, having been leaked to the media. It caused SL major embarrassment. Other major financial institutions were believed to be following suit. Significantly, none would comment.

Second, if Scotland is to benefit so much from Brussels' largesse, it'll have to join the eurozone. London remains the financial capital of the world, so you add an unacceptable additional risk to these huge companies - currency fluctuation (£ against € if they have to account in € for the massive amount of capital in £ employed elsewhere). Observe what's happened in recent times: Bank of Scotland still registered in Scotland and has its HO there, but owned entirely by Halifax, safely HQ'd in England. Lots of admin jobs have gone south. Why wouldn't the rest follow? RBoS is now a global company and already registered in England. It has (and uses) all the facilities of the former NatWest in London and elsewhere in England.

These companies are in business to make profits. Give them hassle, they'll move.


I, for one, wouldn't want to be part of the UK-wide policies as presently mooted..........as in Trident,USA following and being the only country to slavishly follow every burp from the halls of the EU.........so even federalism won't stop me wanting eventual independence. (again, my emphasis)

And you think that by being in the eurozone (since Scotland doesn't actually have its own currency it would have to join) you won't be slavishly following every burp emanating from the EU gravytrainers?


I reckon that Scotland would survive nicely, especially as we would not need to subscribe to the nuclear deterrent and most of the army/navy/air force. I would subscribe to "hiding" under the same umbrella that Eire does just now.

Ah, yes, that umbrella. And what a lovely umbrella it is. It's there when the sun shines but when it's wet and windy it's nowhere to be seen. Let's look at Eire as an example... They were effectively a second- or third-world economy and then joined the eurozone. Money flowed in! Lots and lots of lovely money. The government spent lots of it encouraging American hi-tech companies like Motorola, Gateway, Dell, and a whole shedload of others to breeze in and pay high wages to Ireland's educated elite. People flowed back to the Auld Sod from all over the world. Money not only flowed in, but revolved faster in the economy and before you knew it, property prices were higher than London and no one could afford a house, the gap between rich and poor was greater than ever, and inflation was running at 10% per annum. So the spending stopped.... and all the big employers moved out, taxes had to rise to contain inflation (because their interest rates were controlled by Brussels and they wouldn't raise rates because Germany was teetering on recession - again) and so recession took over.

Since Eire joined the eurozone, so have a loads of other countries, all poorer than Eire was. There are more people at the party now, and in Romania they earn £30 a week.... that's where your EU contribution is going, folks. Scotland is relatively prosperous and I reckon you can forget a pipe of money extending from say Zeebrugge to come ashore in Fife.

<<<<<<continued next post as max length exceeded - d'ohhh>>>>>

[JAWS]

I think if we do get independence we should annex the north of England into Scotland as far as the Tyne, I love Geordies and think they are more like Scots than they are English, mad s they are :lol:Don't be so small minded! At least as far South to include North Yorkshire in the east and Cumbria and Lancashire north of the Ribble in the west.
It wouldn't take much to get them to join Scotland to gang up on those nasty, grasping, "Southern Softies"! ;)

And you're probably quite right about the Geordies, I don't know what language they speak but it's certainly not anything resembling English. The best description I would give it is that it’s “Unique”! (And I’ve run out of Smilies so Giggles will have to do!)

[Conscience]

Don't be so small minded! At least as far South to include North Yorkshire in the east and Cumbria and Lancashire north of the Ribble in the west.
It wouldn't take much to get them to join Scotland to gang up on those nasty, grasping, "Southern Softies"! ;)

And you're probably quite right about the Geordies, I don't know what language they speak but it's certainly not anything resembling English. The best description I would give it is that it’s “Unique”! (And I’ve run out of Smilies so Giggles will have to do!)

Good luck persuading Yorkshiremen they are anything other than English! :lol:

[j4bberw0ck]

Any platform/field that has been officially visited by a Scottish Police Force is clearly........... Scottish.
Freedom!

Nice concept. I presume your tongue was firmly in your cheek when you said this. Heaven help us all if national jurisdiction is decided by which copshop you phone!


My view of independence is based on what I have seen in Eire. They seem to have embraced the EU. The harbours that I came across were crammed with new, shiny, high tech fishing vessels. New houses springing up alongside roads built with EU money. They had converted to the Euro with the minimum of fuss. The Irish just got on with it and made it work.
The people I spoke to all agreed that there was a lot of ‘new’ money about. Admittedly all this was two years ago and was before the arrival of the East European countries. I’m not sure that there is going to be as much spare cash available.

Please see comment above about Eire.


The problem with the word ‘Independence,’ is where does it start and more to the point where does it stop.
Are we talking a complete break with England, Wales and Northern Ireland? If so what happens with such things as the NHS, Income tax, National Insurance, VAT, the Armed Forces, national security, to name but a few.
Nothing would give me greater pleasure than to see an independent, prosperous Scotland finally coming out of the shadows. But having said that is it as easy as putting a cross on a ballot paper?

Now you're talking. A few of the hard practical items that the Brayfarts conveniently miss.


I think it is only the savings in Defence spending that will allow us to sort out our health (service)

Hehehehe... good luck. Health spending is a bottomless pit for money as there are always higher expectations, new drug treatments and surgical interventions. Oh, and new GP contracts, of course, because politicians are too stupid to negotiate properly in the first place. I don't know what proportion of total defence spending is funded by Scotland; but to "sort out" the health service in a country characterised by wide open spaces and a scattered population - all of whom want to be treated equally in terms of access to services - would always take more money than was available. The problem of healthcare is one that can't be solved just by pouring money in.


I believe that a rising proportion of the English (especially in the south) are keen to "let us go"........... so let's do it while we still have some resources?

What would those resources be, sufficient to support a population which is in decline? I'm saying there aren't any; just genuinely puzzled as to what they are.


(We speak better "English" than they do, anyway!)

I'd go with that, at least :lol:


The only Scots doing nicely out of the Union presently are the MPs.

I love the sound of a sweeping statement first thing in the morning.


With a Union using the system we have, you can get MPs in Cabinet from anywhere in the UK...........maybe it's just that the better ones at the moment are Scots.

I do however appreciate the postings from those who reduce the idea of Scottish nationalism to the level of sound bites telling us how England is now the underdog........so carry on with your remarks...........the tone of them can only serve to harden attitudes and confirm the need for independence.Sadly, you're right about the quality of English politicians. But the Scots lot are no great shakes either, in many cases. I think it's to do with the sort of people attracted to the role rather than their place of birth. It could also be argued that the fact of so many Scots in the Westminster Cabinet was another expression of the old saw that Scotland is principally famous for its two exports - beef, and professors. In other words, the brightest leave (sorry, no insult intended).

[Oddquine]

Ok. Scotland wins Independence from Britain and throws in its lot with Brussels:

First thing you will have to find is defence, unless you are willing to pay Britain to continue defending Scotland.
Britain will have to put in much more stringent border control, possibly including passport control and immigration control, because Scotland will immediately become a back door into Britain for illegal immigrants.
The Scottish Parliament will have to raise taxes because there will be no more money from Britain for health, education, policing, defence etc. Scotland might get lucky if it goes cap in hand to the EU, but bearing in mind all the recent, fiscally very poor additions to the EU, chances of that are slim.
Because the NHS is British and does not operate in foreign countries it will have to close in Scotland. Healthcare will therefore have to be financed locally or become a compulsory health insurance based system like Australia.
Roads will also have to be financed locally, so an alternative to the old British Road Tax will have to be found, road pricing perhaps?
The Scottish pound will have to be set free from the British pound as a seperate currency. But then there's always the Euro. Good luck with the exchange rates.
Benefits will have to be seperated from the British Benefits system. A whole new raft of legislation will have to be created to take care of that.

On independence, as in any divorce, we would expect to get our share of the assets of the UK, into which we have been paying for 300 years..hopefully by negotiation...but not by the type of yes-men who negotiated the original Union.

Out of interest if the £11.2 billion deficit, before including oil revenues, that some people say makes Scotland an economic no-hoper, what does this say for the United Kingdom as a whole which, according to Treasury forecasts, is heading for a deficit of £34.8 billion in 2006-7? Is anyone suggesting that the UK cannot stand on its own feet economically ?




'The only Scots doing nicely out of the Union presently are the MPs.'

The fact that more government money is spent per head in Scotland than any other part of Britain shows that statement to be untrue.

'but maybe that's because we are more law-abiding and less nationalistic.'

Just look at football to see how untrue that is! Most England supporters will support Scotland against foreign opposition. Most Scotland supporters will support any foreign team rather than England. Where do you hang your Argentina shirt? ;)

As far as I was aware, the money Scotland receives is related to the lack of spending in Scotland in the first 200 years of the Union, and is a catch-up policy to redress the neglect.........so I suppose when we have caught up, the levels will drop.

Been a long time since Scotland supporters went wild abroad, hasn't it.........and anyway, what has that to do with what I said....we were talking about flying flags on taxis and being told to take them down(because they are illegal) not about football supporters.

I don't have an Argentina shirt...........and I don't have a Scotland one either!

[Oddquine]

Seems to me that there are some very muddled excuses for "thinking" in here which are more about Scottish Nationalism than the real world.

Let me start with this:



North Sea reserves are basically in two chunks - economically recoverable, and not economically recoverable. The higher the price of oil, the more reserves shift into the "recoverable" bracket. But without high and stable prices, oil companies won't invest in developing marginally recoverable fields. Fact: oil and gas reserves which are recoverable have been plundered and what's left will be gone within decades. Then either oil prices rise to make more recoverable, or the industry shuts their assets down. If you add to this all the climate change stuff about fossil fuels, you have to consider that within a short (by which I mean a few decades) timescale, oil is just as likely to be a dead duck as still providing jobs.

And since Scotland is part of the UK, there is no such thing as Scottish oil except in the minds of the Braveheart Mob, never has been, and it's tough for me to see how independence would change that.

The Continental Shelf Act 1964 and the Continental Shelf (Jurisdiction) Order 1968 defines the UK North Sea maritime area to the north of latitude 55 degrees north as being under the jurisdiction of Scots law, meaning that 90% of the UK's oil resources were under Scottish jurisdiction. In addition section 126 of the Scotland Act 1998 defines as Scottish waters the internal waters and territorial sea of the United Kingdom as are adjacent to Scotland.



This will still be the case on any divorce.






Ah, the perennial cries of the Brayfarts (sorry, it's my accent)! We don't need nuclear weapons. Economy run for the benefit of London. An independent Scotland and a glorious fishing industry! News for you boys: first, all the stuff about Trident and the 25 billion or so. It gets reported as though the Government just has to write a cheque for the money out of this years' income. Wrong. It'll take 25 years to roll out the Trident replacement program because of the size and complexity of the project. The expenditure spread over 25 years is a drop in the bucket, and as far as the few million taxpayers in Scotland are concerned amounts to pence.

But it is pence we don't want to spend...........one good reason for independence is getting rid of Trident.and if it is the only benefit we get, that is fine by me.



An economy run from London? Ask yourselves why the people of Germany, France, Italy, Portugal, Finland, Spain and most of the rest of the EU want out of the euro? Because their economies are being run for the benefit of European federalist ideals. The French are in open revolt in the EU because they thing the eurozone is run for Germany's benefit as biggest economy. Italy is in a huge economic mess for the same reason. France has the highest rate of unemployment since the sixties. Portugal was brought to its knees by the EU who took over direct control of their economy from Brussels when Portugal, suffering inflation because their economy didn't suit the eurozone policies, refused to implement tax rises and slash government spending to contain it. The EU forced changes through and Portugal dived into recession and the highest rates of unemployment it had ever seen.

On that scale, Scotland doesn't even figure on the EU radar. You think Westminster's bad? Try Brussels. One size does not fit all.

I think what I say is that it is an economy run for the benefit of London and the South....we are all aware that it has always been run from London! :roll:



Oh, and the Scottish fishing industry? What fish? You can't change the fact that the Spaniards have had it away on their toes with most of what there was, but I can't see a dozen trawlers and two dozen small cod supporting a Scottish economy, can you? (Yes, I exaggerate for effect, and for humour. But the truth is there to see).

And would you care to remind me which of the successive UK Governments agreed to let the EU take charge of Scotland's fishing quota's producing the decimation of the industry.......and which of the EuroMPs happily agree with the quotas time after time?



Ah, the sickly smell of hypocrisy :lol:

I get to that conclusion for a couple of reasons. First, a few years ago Standard Life, that pride of Scotland, was actively making plans to close offices, lay off staff and move to England if the SNP won the then election. This was widely reported at the time, having been leaked to the media. It caused SL major embarrassment. Other major financial institutions were believed to be following suit. Significantly, none would comment.

Second, if Scotland is to benefit so much from Brussels' largesse, it'll have to join the eurozone. London remains the financial capital of the world, so you add an unacceptable additional risk to these huge companies - currency fluctuation (£ against € if they have to account in € for the massive amount of capital in £ employed elsewhere). Observe what's happened in recent times: Bank of Scotland still registered in Scotland and has its HO there, but owned entirely by Halifax, safely HQ'd in England. Lots of admin jobs have gone south. Why wouldn't the rest follow? RBoS is now a global company and already registered in England. It has (and uses) all the facilities of the former NatWest in London and elsewhere in England.

These companies are in business to make profits. Give them hassle, they'll move.

I'll wait and see who moves, thanks. And what hassle would they get anyway?

I note you didn't comment on all those firms which would close if Scotland voted for devolution in 1979...and still closed within months when we didn't.

Hypocrisy?




Ah, yes, that umbrella. And what a lovely umbrella it is. It's there when the sun shines but when it's wet and windy it's nowhere to be seen. Let's look at Eire as an example... They were effectively a second- or third-world economy and then joined the eurozone. Money flowed in! Lots and lots of lovely money. The government spent lots of it encouraging American hi-tech companies like Motorola, Gateway, Dell, and a whole shedload of others to breeze in and pay high wages to Ireland's educated elite. People flowed back to the Auld Sod from all over the world. Money not only flowed in, but revolved faster in the economy and before you knew it, property prices were higher than London and no one could afford a house, the gap between rich and poor was greater than ever, and inflation was running at 10% per annum. So the spending stopped.... and all the big employers moved out, taxes had to rise to contain inflation (because their interest rates were controlled by Brussels and they wouldn't raise rates because Germany was teetering on recession - again) and so recession took over.

Since Eire joined the eurozone, so have a loads of other countries, all poorer than Eire was. There are more people at the party now, and in Romania they earn £30 a week.... that's where your EU contribution is going, folks. Scotland is relatively prosperous and I reckon you can forget a pipe of money extending from say Zeebrugge to come ashore in Fife.

<<<<<<continued next post as max length exceeded - d'ohhh>>>>>

Look, j4bberw0ck, I can assure you you are wasting your breath producing your version of a future Scottish economy...............I'm not interested. I really just want out from under England's thumb...........as simple as that.

I'm quite confident that we Scots are as capable as any other nation of hoeing our own furrow.........and I think it is about time we were allowed to sink or swim like any other country in the world.

Why do you have a problem with that? It is my opinion, and as a lifetime Nationalist, I get annoyed at the "you can't afford it" and the "subsidy junkie" crowd...and wonder why some people can't see exactly why some of us think the Union came to the end of its useful life some time ago....partly because of attitudes like that.

[Conscience]

I'm not interested. I really just want out from under England's thumb...........as simple as that.

You think you are under England's thumb? You really need to throw away that copy of Braveheart! :lol:
I am inclined to agree with you. Lets break up Britain. Total seperation. Close the borders, end all cross border cooperation. It won't be the English cursing the decision after 18 months. England has jobs, industries, banking, imports, exports. What will become of Scotland? Other than becoming a quaint theme park for dewy eyed fifth generation Scottish/American tourists to cluck at and buy a souvenir skean dhu?



as a lifetime Nationalist,

That explains a lot.

[Oddquine]

You think you are under England's thumb? You really need to throw away that copy of Braveheart! :lol:
I am inclined to agree with you. Lets break up Britain. Total seperation. Close the borders, end all cross border cooperation. It won't be the English cursing the decision after 18 months. England has jobs, industries, banking, imports, exports. What will become of Scotland? Other than becoming a quaint theme park for dewy eyed fifth generation Scottish/American tourists to cluck at and buy a souvenir skean dhu?

Ach, Conscience...........I'd rather be in a theme park than be a UK citizen!

And excuse me.......but what on earth did you think my politics were? :confused

[Conscience]

And excuse me.......but what on earth did you think my politics were? :confused

I don't know, are you a Tory Nationalist (most likely) a Socialist Nationalist or a Liberal Nationalist?
What I meant was, Nationalists are never objective. They are blind to reason. You only have to look at the BNP to see that.

[Oddquine]

I don't know, are you a Tory Nationalist (most likely) a Socialist Nationalist or a Liberal Nationalist?
What I meant was, Nationalists are never objective. They are blind to reason. You only have to look at the BNP to see that.

My politics at the moment are solely independence..........but I guess in an independent Scotland I'd likely vote Liberal.

The BNP are no more a Nationalist party than the Klu Klux Klan are!

[Conscience]

It isn't a big step from 'Independence for Scotland!' to 'Scotland for the Scottish!'

[j4bberw0ck]

Look, j4bberw0ck, I can assure you you are wasting your breath producing your version of a future Scottish economy...............I'm not interested. I really just want out from under England's thumb...........as simple as that.

Thank you. I think you just proved my introductory point. This isn't about reason, it's about nationalism, and hang reality.

Funnily enough until you pulled the whole structure down you'd made some interesting and valid points.


I'm quite confident that we Scots are as capable as any other nation of hoeing our own furrow.........and I think it is about time we were allowed to sink or swim like any other country in the world.

Why do you have a problem with that? It is my opinion, and as a lifetime NationalistStrangely, I have no problem with it at all. I agree with you that "we Scots" - and I realise I may cause offence when I include myself in that description as a taxpayer and long-time resident, but that's just hard luck - are as capable as others of running a country. It's hardly my decision to make, anyway. Just trying to point out that wishing for something on emotional grounds won't necessarily make it work in reality.

But since we've actually got down the the root of it - "it's the English! The nasty English!" I think that's enough from me for now.

[scotsboy]

I am quite happy with the status quo, Scotsboy is a Unionist!!

[Oddquine]

Thank you. I think you just proved my introductory point. This isn't about reason, it's about nationalism, and hang reality.

Funnily enough until you pulled the whole structure down you'd made some interesting and valid points.

I can argue the points as well as anyone..........but frankly I'm getting fed up with trying to counteract people like Conscience, so have decided there is no point in trying to talk politics and be serious.

I'll just make stupid remarks and spurious statements...if you can't beat 'em...join 'em...............in anything but a Union! ;)

[Oddquine]

It isn't a big step from 'Independence for Scotland!' to 'Scotland for the Scottish!'

It's the Scots you are talking about..............not the English..........anyone who lives in Scotland is Scottish as far as I'm concerned, whether by birth or choosing.

[percy toboggan]

Ach, Conscience...........I'd rather be in a theme park than be a UK citizen!



Oh dear. How bitter you sound Oddquine . What ever is the matter? Theme Parks often have a lean time in winter, and it could be a long hard winter indeed.

As someone said most English people have a lot of time for Scots but there is a natural reaction to some of this independence movement. There could even come a time when the majority of ENGLISH do not support the union.

Scotland is a country in it's own right in all but the fine detail. The fine detail brings benefits you may well come to miss. Cutting off ones nose to spite ones face is never a good idea.

You seem to have very low opinion of the English, which is regrettable from where I'm sitting. I've no doubt that a fair number are obnoxious arrogant creatures, but is Scotland totally devoid of such characteristics. I'd guess not.
If you get your way I wish you well, but I for one will lament any divorce of our nation.

[Oddquine]

Oh dear. How bitter you sound Oddquine . What ever is the matter? Theme Parks often have a lean time in winter, and it could be a long hard winter indeed.

As someone said most English people have a lot of time for Scots but there is a natural reaction to some of this independence movement. There could even come a time when the majority of ENGLISH do not support the union.

According to the polls, the majority of English don't support the Union! :D

And I'm not bitter...........just pig sick of the constant anti-Scot posting in all the forums I am on ever since we got devolution.

Does anyone really expect people who have been outvoted by English MPs at every turn on Scottish legislation to care at all about the fact that the English perceive our 59 or so MPs' votes are enough to counteract the votes of 592 English members?

It is hardly our fault that those English MPs vote party lines, rather than for the benefit of their constituents, is it?



Scotland is a country in it's own right in all but the fine detail. The fine detail brings benefits you may well come to miss. Cutting off ones nose to spite ones face is never a good idea.

You seem to have very low opinion of the English, which is regrettable from where I'm sitting. I've no doubt that a fair number are obnoxious arrogant creatures, but is Scotland totally devoid of such characteristics. I'd guess not.
If you get your way I wish you well, but I for one will lament any divorce of our nation.

Problem is that the fine detail is the UK pretensions to importance as in nuclear weapons and illegal wars.

Personally, I'd rather be poor and Scottish than rich and British.

And I don't have a poor view of the English, just of some I have met online......and the Westminster Government, which isn't all English.

As most of the forums to which I belong have predominantly English memberships, and this is a topic which comes up ad nauseam, I did hope that this one might be different..........not as in no discussion.........but as in no patronising and facetiousness.

But I was wrong. Pity! :(

[Conscience]

And I don't have a poor view of the English, just of some I have met online......and the Westminster Government, which isn't all English.

Thats a change of tune from your earlier post where you said "I really just want out from under England's thumb.." and now you are surprised that people react to your witterings?


As most of the forums to which I belong have predominantly English memberships, and this is a topic which comes up ad nauseam, I did hope that this one might be different..........not as in no discussion.........but as in no patronising and facetiousness.

But I was wrong. Pity! :(

Well if you were to tone things down from 'Its all the fault of the English' you might get taken a little more seriously.

[mareng]

The Continental Shelf Act 1964 and the Continental Shelf (Jurisdiction) Order 1968 defines the UK North Sea maritime area to the north of latitude 55 degrees north as being under the jurisdiction of Scots law, meaning that 90% of the UK's oil resources were under Scottish jurisdiction. In addition section 126 of the Scotland Act 1998 defines as Scottish waters the internal waters and territorial sea of the United Kingdom as are adjacent to Scotland.

This will still be the case on any divorce.



Hang on........ I never got any of that when I split from my ex?

On a serious note.......... thanks for taking the time to quote what I never researched. I presume that any platform incidents caused police forces to consult the documents you quote for jurisdiction purposes.

On a non-specific note........... I haven't seen a thread that provoked more thought, based on responses from other posters, than this one.

I'm not saying I'm altering my stance........... but it is food for thought.

(better than discussing pizza toppings)

[Oddquine]

Thats a change of tune from your earlier post where you said "I really just want out from under England's thumb.." and now you are surprised that people react to your witterings?


Well if you were to tone things down from 'Its all the fault of the English' you might get taken a little more seriously.

Well, you would know about wittering! :roll:

I tried to give my point of view reasonably....to be counteracted by the kind of facetious patronising from the likes of you that I resent...so if I "wittered", as you call it, I was simply replying like for like.

Wouldn't you conclude that with 592 English MPs against around 59 Scots ones, the English MPs have a greater say on what happens in the Union than we have? Pretty large thumb, imo.

I would very much appreciate being told where I have said anything which lets you conclude that I have been saying anything was the fault of the English..........unless you count the Westminster Government as being an English Parliament, of course.

All I have blamed the English for, as far as I'm aware, was letting themselves get into the situation they continually gripe about.

[j4bberw0ck]

I'm not going to get into a debate about whether the Scots or the English are the world's worst whingers - both nations have a strong claim - but this article (http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=51&id=1847872006) is interesting, particularly in relation to asset ownership.

[Oddquine]

I'm not going to get into a debate about whether the Scots or the English are the world's worst whingers - both nations have a strong claim - but this article (http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=51&id=1847872006) is interesting, particularly in relation to asset ownership.

Have to say I wasn't aware that the SNP were basing their arguments for the economics of an independent Scotland on the sole basis of oil anymore. You'd honestly think that there was nothing else in Scotland, to hear some people.

If the Westminster Government hadn't lied about the oil in 1975/6 and during the devolution referendum, things might be different now..........but they did..........and here we are still.
Anyway, on past performance, who's to say they aren't still lying.....after all the SNP are on the up, and the Unionists are running worried.......like in 1979. ;)

Don't know about the assets............guess that will depend if an international court decides if the border is off Berwick on Tweed or Carnoustie.

Westminster handed over a huge area of Scottish fishing grounds in the North Sea to England, moving the legal boundary between Scottish and English fisheries at an angle some 60 miles north from Berwick on Tweed to Carnoustie...and I'm guessing they'll try to make that stick as a de facto boundary come any independence negotiations.............we'll see! :roll:

[Conscience]

and I'm guessing they'll try to make that stick as a de facto boundary come any independence negotiations.............we'll see! :roll:


Well if there are any fishing boundary disputes the Scottish Navy can sink the English trawlers.

[Oddquine]

Well if there are any fishing boundary disputes the Scottish Navy can sink the English trawlers.

And that's just the kind of inane comment I've grown to expect from you in your short membership.............anyway, when we divvy up the assets, I'm sure there are enough Scottish sailors to man the ship we'd get! :Razz

[j4bberw0ck]

(a) I thought you didn't want to pay for defence :lol:
(b) What ships? Announced today that more cutbacks in the Navy will reduce it to one obsolete frigate, 3 Laser dinghies, 2 rowing boats and a kayak (Special Boat Service, for the use of) :lol:

[Oddquine]

(a) I thought you didn't want to pay for defence
(b) What ships? Announced today that more cutbacks in the Navy will reduce it to one obsolete frigate, 3 Laser dinghies, 2 rowing boats and a kayak (Special Boat Service, for the use of)

a) Happy to pay for defence....just not nuclear..........and no attacking allowed! ;)

b) We'll convert some of those trawlers being decommissioned right left and centre..........or maybe set up watchtowers on our oilrigs! Be one use of them when the oil runs out! :lol:

[j4bberw0ck]

maybe set up watchtowers on our oilrigs! Be one use of them when the oil runs out! :lol:

paraphrasing: when the money runs out :lol: .

Best use of them would be to sink them where they're tethered to provide a protected environment for fish and marine life. But I digress. D'ohhhh

[percy toboggan]

THe truth is when a referendum comes the Scots will bottle it and settle for the status quo. I'd rather be comfortably off and Scottish than comfortably off and English. I've never been rich anyway, and I am undeniably English so I'll just have to lump it.
Incidentally 59 Scots MP's and 500+ others sound slike a fair enough split when population is considered. If my own understanding of UK population is anywhere near accurate it's almost bob on!

To the right of me as I speak is a huge framed movie poster proclaiming the film Braveheart. The walls in this house are peppered with pictures of Lochs, mountainsides and beaches in western Scotland. In truth it's the land I love, not its' people within whom there are good and bad , like anywhere else. When I really consider what this would mean to Scottish folk I'm tempted to think 'phew, would it really be worth all that effort to be reduced in influence to a state the size of Luxembourg?' or If I'm in trouble abroad what will the Scottish consul do for me in his one bedroomed flat, as opposed to all those folk at the British embassy?

Lets unite together and turn on the real enemy. The European Onion.

[Oddquine]

THe truth is when a referendum comes the Scots will bottle it and settle for the status quo. I'd rather be comfortably off and Scottish than comfortably off and English. I've never been rich anyway, and I am undeniably English so I'll just have to lump it.
Incidentally 59 Scots MP's and 500+ others sound slike a fair enough split when population is considered. If my own understanding of UK population is anywhere near accurate it's almost bob on!

I'm hoping not, PT, but I'd not be surprised, all these hundreds of years being the underdog and being told we couldn't manage without mother England's largesse does tend to impinge on the subconcious.........and it has become louder and more threatening nowadays.



To the right of me as I speak is a huge framed movie poster proclaiming the film Braveheart. The walls in this house are peppered with pictures of Lochs, mountainsides and beaches in western Scotland. In truth it's the land I love, not its' people within whom there are good and bad , like anywhere else. When I really consider what this would mean to Scottish folk I'm tempted to think 'phew, would it really be worth all that effort to be reduced in influence to a state the size of Luxembourg?' or If I'm in trouble abroad what will the Scottish consul do for me in his one bedroomed flat, as opposed to all those folk at the British embassy?

Lets unite together and turn on the real enemy. The European Onion.

'would it really be worth all that effort to be reduced in influence to a state the size of Luxembourg?'...............my answer would be yes.............because it is a LOT more influence than Scotland has as a member of the UK, and we will have a voice in the world...maybe not a loud one...but then England's won't be as loud either.

I've never been abroad, but from all I hear and read, an efficient Scottish Consul in a one-bedroomed flat would be as useful as all the jobsworthys in British Embassies around the world. It's the support the officials get from home that counts.

[Conscience]

I've never been abroad, but from all I hear and read, an efficient Scottish Consul in a one-bedroomed flat would be as useful as all the jobsworthys in British Embassies around the world. It's the support the officials get from home that counts.

Have you been out of Scotland? I'm not being facetious or anything.

[Oddquine]

Have you been out of Scotland? I'm not being facetious or anything.

Been to England four times in my life.

Don't have a passport, and don't intend to get one (no intentions of flying or going in a boat if I can avoid it)............but I have seen most of Scotland.

Only place left I really want to see is Orkney.

[percy toboggan]

Been to England four times in my life.

Don't have a passport, and don't intend to get one (no intentions of flying or going in a boat if I can avoid it)............but I have seen most of Scotland.

Only place left I really want to see is Orkney.

Travel does broaden the mind Oddquine but if you're happy where you are then fair doo's. After visiting four continents, eleven U.S. states, and fifteen - ish countries the only place I want to see more of now is dear auld Scotland.

Your only a hop away from Orkney lass - get over there one day when the weather is calm.Orkney is on my list too but I want a day when the boat is rocking. Those stones at Brodgar, and those on t'other side at Callanish are priorites. Hope I make it before you seal the borders :Razz

[Oddquine]

Travel does broaden the mind Oddquine but if you're happy where you are then fair doo's. After visiting four continents, eleven U.S. states, and fifteen - ish countries the only place I want to see more of now is dear auld Scotland.

Your only a hop away from Orkney lass - get over there one day when the weather is calm.Orkney is on my list too but I want a day when the boat is rocking. Those stones at Brodgar, and those on t'other side at Callanish are priorites. Hope I make it before you seal the borders :Razz

Maybe so, but heat kills me, and I don't like crowds! Anyway, I'm mostly interested in old places and history, and there are still more than enough in Scotland for me to see yet........I've never really understood people who take holidays through choice...........I only ever did for the kids. I prefer long weekends.

Travel only broadens the mind if the mind is narrow, imo.

I don't see what it can teach me that I can't find out in other ways

That's the problem..........Orkney=boat, and I've not plucked up the courage yet.........but someday I will.

[Whitewater]

[QUOTE=Oddquine;
Don't have a passport, and don't intend to get one (no intentions of flying or going in a boat if I can avoid it)............but I have seen most of Scotland.

Only place left I really want to see is Orkney.[/QUOTE]

Well you won't be able to see Orkney unless you go on a boat or a plane.

I've always been open minded about an independent Scotland. The one thing that always comes to mind about the Union of the Parliaments is that the Scottish Parliament at the time of the Union was adjourned. It was not dissolved.

I often wonder why the SNP have not followed up on this point.

I also have voted for the SNP in my young days. Now I often wonder what they have to offer after Independence (if ever) has been gained. Alex Salmond is a great politician, had he been a member of any of the other British parties I'm sure he could have been Prime Minister.

An independent Scotland for me now does not have the same appeal as it had in my younger days. All the arguments for and against independence have been well mooted on this thread, some points I agree with others I don't (points both for and against). When you know that my family were with both sides at Culloden you will know the sort of quandary one gets into.

I'm Scottish born and bred (Caithness to be exact) and very proud of it, I have lived abroad and returned to this wonderful country, had I stayed abroad I would probably have been better off with higher salary and a greater portion of my salary available for liesure, but that was the choice I made. We live in one of the best Countries (Great Britian) in the world, you only need to look at the number of imigrants (both legal and illegal) who come to live here, not just from Europe and the middle East but also many from Canada, New Zealand and Australia who make their homes here. These people would not do it if they were not bettering themselves.

I support my country "SCOTLAND" in every way I can, I like the way we are, I have never found that being part of Britain made me any less of a Scot, in fact I think it made me more so as I had to stand up and make a very proud statement to the world, being British does not stop me wearing my kilt or yelling my head off at Murrayfield.

I'm not for Independence now, I'm a Unionist for many of the reasons which have already been mentioned on this thread.

[Conscience]

Maybe so, but heat kills me, and I don't like crowds! Anyway, I'm mostly interested in old places and history, and there are still more than enough in Scotland for me to see yet........I've never really understood people who take holidays through choice...........I only ever did for the kids. I prefer long weekends.

Travel only broadens the mind if the mind is narrow, imo.

I don't see what it can teach me that I can't find out in other ways

That's the problem..........Orkney=boat, and I've not plucked up the courage yet.........but someday I will.

All of 'abroad' is not hot. Iceland is stunningly beautiful. Go to Australia in August and the weather will be the same as a British autumn. Europe has pretty much that same climate as us too. Finland, Lapland, Norway are all beautiful with cool climates. New Zealand has a climate like ours too.


Too many people assume going abroad means going to the Mediterranean in 40 degree heat.

[Oddquine]

All of 'abroad' is not hot. Iceland is stunningly beautiful. Go to Australia in August and the weather will be the same as a British autumn. Europe has pretty much that same climate as us too. Finland, Lapland, Norway are all beautiful with cool climates. New Zealand has a climate like ours too.


Too many people assume going abroad means going to the Mediterranean in 40 degree heat.

Even if I was prepared to spend money on leaving one stunningly beautiful country for a couple of weeks in another....I'm not prepared to fork out for a passport, and even less now there is so much more hassle.

[percy toboggan]

[quote=Oddquine;179047]

Travel only broadens the mind if the mind is narrow, imo.

quote]
As a self-confessed non-traveller with extremely limited experience of the world , you would say that only if you wished to demean those who choose to travel and claim it increases knowledge.

[Oddquine]

[quote=Oddquine;179047]

Travel only broadens the mind if the mind is narrow, imo.

quote]
As a self-confessed non-traveller with extremely limited experience of the world , you would say that only if you wished to demean those who choose to travel and claim it increases knowledge.

I'd be interested to know what you have learned about a country that can't be found out on the internet?

I did say, in my opinion.........yours is obviously different..which is why you travel and I don't, maybe?

[percy toboggan]

[quote=percy toboggan;179330]

I'd be interested to know what you have learned about a country that can't be found out on the internet?

I did say, in my opinion.........yours is obviously different..which is why you travel and I don't, maybe?
THE INTERNET? Oh come on.
The smells, the sounds, the food.
The people. An Arab medina - haggling. A bar in Montana,
drinking with latterday cowboys wearing spurs and driving huge pick up trucks. The heat , desert winds, the sand stinging your face. I'm talking physical experiences here not just looking at facts and photographs.
To sample the joys of FRance. Riding through her on a motorbike, immersed IN the landscape, part of it. The chill on ones face as hills are topped and the land rises. The general look of a land. The bustling of Naples and the view form Vesuvius. The awesome road up to Amalfi, hugging the coastline with supreme vistas. Wondering how those houses were stacked up on those hillsides.

Yellowstone Park. Smell the sulphur from erupting , boiling geezers. The ground boiling and smoking. The colours and the Colorado River snaking through sandy canyons of gold and pale yellow, crashing torrents of water.

The internet might be a powerful tool but it will never replace travel. To even suggest such a thing suggests you and I are on entirely differing wavelengths. That said, I respect you and your view but you need to get about more.

[golach]

[quote=Oddquine;179332
I'd be interested to know what you have learned about a country that can't be found out on the internet?
[/quote]
Sorry Oddquine I have to disagree with you on this issue, I joined the Merchant Navy as a 16 year old and travelled the world for 8 years, I could turn this thread blue with some of the yarns I could tell, but I met more people of many different countries and cultures, not all I liked, but that is life, I lived on some ships in squalour, I learned to live and work with many different seamen from all over the UK and other places.
I experienced tempratures of 140F in the Persian Gulf, where you were fined for not wearing a shirt or a hat on deck, and you got curry for breakfast to heat up your blood stream, to the other extreme of 30 below in the Bell Isle Straits off Newfoundland.
All these experiences were my growing up period and I learned a lot, not all good.:)
Now I have taken Mrs G to nearly every country on the Mediterranean on holiday even to the US and Canada, she has enjoyed the travel experience also.
But I agree, coming home is always good, having tasted pasta in Sorrento, kebabs in Turkey, Paella in Seville, and a Meze in Cyprus, coming back to a plate of Mince and Tatties always tastes sweeter.
None of the above can be experienced by looking on the Internet, sadly, as it would be much cheaper [lol]

[Oddquine]

To even suggest such a thing suggests you and I are on entirely differing wavelengths. That said, I respect you and your view but you need to get about more.

In your opinion! :roll:

The world would be in a sorry state if everyone became a tourist because they feel they are missing out on something if they don't. Won't be many unspoiled places left!

I honestly don't feel I am missing out on anything.

You may well dislike my saying that to broaden your mind you need to have a narrow one in the first place.......but equally I resent the implication that people who prefer to get to know their own country before taking jaunts abroad are not broad-minded simply because they choose not to, can't afford to or are unable to travel. In fact, couldn't you say that that yours is a rather narrow-minded view?

[Oddquine]

Sorry Oddquine I have to disagree with you on this issue, I joined the Merchant Navy as a 16 year old and travelled the world for 8 years, I could turn this thread blue with some of the yarns I could tell, but I met more people of many different countries and cultures, not all I liked, but that is life, I lived on some ships in squalour, I learned to live and work with many different seamen from all over the UK and other places.
I experienced tempratures of 140F in the Persian Gulf, where you were fined for not wearing a shirt or a hat on deck, and you got curry for breakfast to heat up your blood stream, to the other extreme of 30 below in the Bell Isle Straits off Newfoundland.
All these experiences were my growing up period and I learned a lot, not all good.:)
Now I have taken Mrs G to nearly every country on the Mediterranean on holiday even to the US and Canada, she has enjoyed the travel experience also.
But I agree, coming home is always good, having tasted pasta in Sorrento, kebabs in Turkey, Paella in Seville, and a Meze in Cyprus, coming back to a plate of Mince and Tatties always tastes sweeter.
None of the above can be experienced by looking on the Internet, sadly, as it would be much cheaper [lol]

But you started travelling at a young age, golach....I wasn't in a position to do that. If I had been, maybe I'd feel differently now, but by the time I was in a position to holiday out of the UK, I had no inclination to do so.

I'd much rather learn to work/live with all the nationalities and cultures within the UK..........and that is something that doesn't always follow on from travelling abroad.

You don't really learn about a country by travelling, as far as I can see...........you meet people in a specific area, which doesn't necessarily mean mixing with the native population at all, you see their way of life and experience the cuisine and weather for a couple of weeks a year.........and that tells you as little about the country as I found out about England over four holidays in the Yorkshire area.

The internet gives a broader view, imo.

[percy toboggan]

[quote=percy toboggan;179337]
In fact, couldn't you say that that yours is a rather narrow-minded view?
I could, but I won't. You're arguing for arguings sake and most reasonable people will see that. Who says one only has to travel to 'unspoilt' places to learn new things? Unless you define the term 'unspoilt' it means nothing anyway. Please do not bother to define it because I've lost interest in your opinion now to be honest. I suspect you never had much interest in mine as I live more than a couple of hundred miles away from where you do.:confused

[Jeemag_USA]

You don't really learn about a country by travelling, as far as I can see...........you meet people in a specific area, which doesn't necessarily mean mixing with the native population at all, you see their way of life and experience the cuisine and weather for a couple of weeks a year.........and that tells you as little about the country as I found out about England over four holidays in the Yorkshire area.

The internet gives a broader view, imo.

Not arguing with you directly, your entitled to your opinion, and I know this has nothing to do with Scottish Independence. But you learn an awful lot about a country by travelling in it. If you travel through with your eyes closed then you won't. Every country i have travelled to I have learned a lot simply because I went out of my way to learn and to mix with local people, I don't see the point of going to a country and coming back with no further knowledge of it. You can't really learn anything about life in Indiana by browsing the internet other than stuff sites will want you to read to get you to come here? But thats just me, when I end up in a place away from home I am naturally inquisitive, I want to know where places got their name from, how old is the place, who settled it, what goes on here and so on.

My last trip away from home was to Miami, and I really wasn't looking forward to it because all I had learned about Miami was from TV and the Internet and it didn't paint a picture of somewhere I woudl like to be. But when I went down I stayed with local people who were of mixed background from Honduras and the USA, we stayed in a pretty rough area inhabited mosty by Cubans, Dominicans and Puerto Ricans. At first I was a little worried about my surroundings but by time I left I was already wanting to come back. I hung around with locals, rode public transport, visited places off the beaten track, it was fantastic, and I learned an awful lot about Miami its american history, the history of latins there and especially Cubans. So my picture of Miami is no longer one of miles of beachfront hotels, high crime rates, roving camera crews following cop cars for stuff to film or of babes in speedboats drinking champagne. I am now very glad I went, and probably the next time I go back I will try to learn more.

Guess what I am trying to say is its up to the individual how much you learn of a place when you visit it, if you just want to sit on your bum on a deckchair and drink margaritas thats fine, or you can venture further and learn about the area and its people. But nobody can travel to a place and not really learn anything, no matter how blinkered they are, even if you come home knowing their buses are green, their trains are red and the drink is cheap, you have something to relate to others about your experience?

But like you Oddquine, I agree there is a lot to see in Scotland and I have not seen nearly 25% of it, and will never tire from travelling around it and would gladly swap Miami for a days fishing on the Naver :lol:

[Oddquine]

I could, but I won't. You're arguing for arguings sake and most reasonable people will see that. Who says one only has to travel to 'unspoilt' places to learn new things? Unless you define the term 'unspoilt' it means nothing anyway. Please do not bother to define it because I've lost interest in your opinion now to be honest. I suspect you never had much interest in mine as I live more than a couple of hundred miles away from where you do.:confused

PT...........I made the comment

I've never been abroad, but from all I hear and read, an efficient Scottish Consul in a one-bedroomed flat would be as useful as all the jobsworthys in British Embassies around the world. It's the support the officials get from home that counts.

in reply to a disparaging one of yours re Scottish Consuls from the vantage point of guesswork.

Now, even though I saidI've never been abroad, I politely replied to a question which asked if I'd ever been out of Scotland, because I had been in England, from which you proceeded to tell me that travelling abroad does broaden the mind........insinuating that anyone who hasn't travelled does not have as broad a mind as the likes of you do.

From there, this thread appears to have become a discussion of the levels of my narrow-mindedness because I have no wish to/ability to/money to travel overseas....and you certainly don't know which........... making your remarks not only patronising, but rather insensitive!

If you wanted to be patronising, why didn't you just reply patronisingly to my comment on your remarks re Scottish consuls...........there appears to be no shortage of patronising and disparaging Scotland on here........so why make it personal ?

I don't have a problem with your opinion of people who don't go abroad...........but it is one opinion, no better than mine..........and nothing to do with this thread.

[Conscience]

Travelling does not necessarily broaden the mind. However, it does broaden a person's experiences and world view. You come to realise the peoples of the world are not all that different. We all laugh, cry, love, dance, sing, eat, drink etc.
It is only the politicians who screw it all up for the rest of us.

[Oddquine]

Not arguing with you directly, your entitled to your opinion, and I know this has nothing to do with Scottish Independence. But you learn an awful lot about a country by travelling in it. If you travel through with your eyes closed then you won't. Every country i have travelled to I have learned a lot simply because I went out of my way to learn and to mix with local people, I don't see the point of going to a country and coming back with no further knowledge of it. You can't really learn anything about life in Indiana by browsing the internet other than stuff sites will want you to read to get you to come here? But thats just me, when I end up in a place away from home I am naturally inquisitive, I want to know where places got their name from, how old is the place, who settled it, what goes on here and so on.

I agree, Jeemag.....but I feel there is a distinct difference between accepting information and correction from people who, because of work/family commitments, have spent an appreciable length of time living/working in foreign lands, and gaining insight into other areas of the same country by holidaying there ..............and listening to those who spend a couple of weeks in an hotel/self catering base on holiday in a different place every year. Frankly, I'd think it a waste of time, money and energy if all I came back with was a taste for the local cuisine, and a knowledge of the local bus colours.



But like you Oddquine, I agree there is a lot to see in Scotland and I have not seen nearly 25% of it, and will never tire from travelling around it and would gladly swap Miami for a days fishing on the Naver :lol:

That is mostly my point, Jeemag.

I may not have been abroad, but how many who have been abroad have holidayed in/ explored the areas around..........Edinburgh, Glasgow, York, Stirling, Oban, Ullapool, Skye, Dumfries, Fort William, Doune, Falkland, Culross, Dunoon, Inveraray, Blair Atholl, Ayr, Jedburgh, Melrose, Bannockburn, Scarborough, Inverness, Tongue, Durness, Scourie, St Andrews, Anstruther, Wick, Halkirk, Pitlochry, Killin, Aboyne, Braemar, Thirsk, Aberdeen, Alness, Bathgate, Invergordon, Lairg, Aviemore, Loch Lomond, Elgin, Forres, Tomintoul, Banff, Dundee, Perth, Helensburgh, Kirkcudbright, Newton Stewart, Castle Douglas, North Berwick, Leadhills, Ripon, Otley......and that is just off the top of my head.

All I am interested in is the politics/human rights/history of other countries, and I use internet access to research/back them up.

I'm inclined to think that a couple of weeks holiday in any one place won't give me any insight in depth into that...........and I can't see that experiencing the temperatures, smells, atmospheres or lifestyles in other countries would improve me in any way.

[Oddquine]

Travelling does not necessarily broaden the mind. However, it does broaden a person's experiences and world view. You come to realise the peoples of the world are not all that different. We all laugh, cry, love, dance, sing, eat, drink etc.
It is only the politicians who screw it all up for the rest of us.

But I know that anyway, Conscience.....simply by not thinking that I am better than or different to anyone else.........................and by not trusting any politician as far as I can throw them.....and at 5'1" and around 7 stone........that ain't very far at all!