Scottish independence and devolution superthread

[AyrJambo]

9 hours ago, Des Lynam said:

 

It's only Denmark that are exempt and most of the other countries have failed to fulfill the convergence criteria. The EU have the Treaty on the functioning of the European Union. The problems we would face of keeping our current currency are many. 

 

We couldn't be in a monetary union with England and re join the EU. 

 

We could create a new currency and and peg it to the pound using a currency board. This would provide stability but we'd have no say over interest rates and have no lender of last resort. We'd have to hold our new currency close to the value of the euro to meet the convergence criteria like those countries that have joined the EU but haven't met the criteria yet have to do. 

 

A new currency with the creation of an independent central bank is a decent option but brings its own fiscal discipline issues. 

 

My original point to you was people are not going to vote for independence if serious financial instability fears are not answered in my opinion. There is a familiarity with the pound that people won't easily give up. At the end of the day most folks are only concerned with financial security and the Independence movement must convince the No voters that the economic outlook after a yes vote won't be as unstable as some suggest. 

 

I do agree that i think the EU would give us time but we'd also have the reality of a new currency and trying to deal with repairing relations with our neighbour and main trading partner. 

 

All these unknowns mean the SNP must offer a far better case for Independence than they have put forward to date. 

 

23 minutes ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

Good posting. 

Yes its the ecomonic question for me. 

 

There is never going to be a time when all the economic circumstances align to present the "perfect" opportunity for independence

You either want to be independent or you want to be dependent

Unionists seem to want those advocating independence (a normal state of affairs the world over) to be able to predict the future for them

In 2014 the unionist argument was that Scotland required the "broad shoulders of the UK" to survive and that we were "better together"

Since then we have had Brexit, rocketing fuel bills (in one of the most energy-rich countries in Europe!), cost of living crisis, soaring use of food banks, revolving door prime ministers not to mention unpredictables like Ukraine and Gaza

 

Can any unionist tell me what the rate of inflation will be in 5 years time in the UK? Or interest rates? Or the value of the £? Or food prices? Will there be further global conflicts? Or a government we voted for?

 

[Roxy Hearts]

17 minutes ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

Im trying,

👍

[AyrJambo]

1 hour ago, Jim_Duncan said:

You're one of those chaps that refuses to give his surname to the police, eh?

 I think you are getting confused between the very real nature of sovereignty in Scotland....

 

Sovereignty Remains with the People – this is the doctrine of popular sovereignty. It is also the purpose of government to serve the ‘common good’ by upholding the rights and interests of the people. This is the principle of the Primacy of the Common Good. So there is a compact between the lenders, (the people), and the borrowers, (the government).

 

and the dubious USA-based movement of the Sovereign Citizen

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_citizen_movement

 

 

[Australis]

11 hours ago, manaliveits105 said:

 

The 'ess n pee' = deid 

They are doing the dying fly.

And it's wonderful to watch.

 

 

 

[BlueRiver]

1 hour ago, AyrJambo said:

Yes it would  - there's currently no additional scrutiny of Scottish parliament legislation aside from the parliament itself

And a properly constituted independent state with sovereignty resting with the people would give us all a chance to shape how it might work

Any scrutinising body may not be elected it could be random selection similar to jury selection

 

...champing at the bit to get a letter through the door for 6 months of legislative scrutiny..... I know I am!! 😃

 

A good starting point for possibilities might also be the Swiss model of direct democracy

 

https://yoursforscotlandcom.wordpress.com/2023/06/28/popular-sovereignty-in-action-the-swiss-example/

 

Scottish Parliament is a devolved Parliament. You're comparing apples and oranges. 

 

In what way would we shape it any more so than any other country that has popular sovereignty? 

 

The Swiss model is fine but they don't scrutinise every piece of legislation. 

 

So in essence you're arguing for an unelected second chamber if it's just drawn by ballot and a few more referendum. 

 

I'm not champing to be involved because I have a job and a life and the idea of some imposition by the state on my time so I can sit reading technical legislation on which I have zero expertise doesn't appeal and wouldn't appeal to the vast majority of us. 

[AyrJambo]

1 hour ago, BlueRiver said:

 

Scottish Parliament is a devolved Parliament. You're comparing apples and oranges. 

 

In what way would we shape it any more so than any other country that has popular sovereignty? 

 

The Swiss model is fine but they don't scrutinise every piece of legislation. 

 

So in essence you're arguing for an unelected second chamber if it's just drawn by ballot and a few more referendum. 

 

I'm not champing to be involved because I have a job and a life and the idea of some imposition by the state on my time so I can sit reading technical legislation on which I have zero expertise doesn't appeal and wouldn't appeal to the vast majority of us. 

 

What part of

 

...properly constituted independent state...

 

is it that you're not getting?

[Roxy Hearts]

26 minutes ago, AyrJambo said:

 

What part of

 

...properly constituted independent state...

 

is it that you're not getting?

🤣👍

[AyrJambo]

2 hours ago, BlueRiver said:

I'm not champing to be involved because I have a job and a life and the idea of some imposition by the state on my time so I can sit reading technical legislation on which I have zero expertise doesn't appeal and wouldn't appeal to the vast majority of us. 

 

I'm sure you do as most on here will

I imagine it will be open to all but voluntary

[JudyJudyJudy]

Brilliant reply to “ Dougal ” 😂

 

 

[BlueRiver]

1 hour ago, AyrJambo said:

 

What part of

 

...properly constituted independent state...

 

is it that you're not getting?

 

The part where that doesn't exist yet but you keep going on about this sovereignty of the people as if it matters at all in a practical sense. 

[BlueRiver]

26 minutes ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

Brilliant reply to “ Dougal ” 😂

 

 

 

Probably posts on here. 

[JudyJudyJudy]

2 minutes ago, BlueRiver said:

 

Probably posts on here. 

Well I did wonder that 

[BlueRiver]

 

Just now, JudyJudyJudy said:

Well I did wonder that 

 

I'm wondering if our English settler colonising population will be allowed to take part in this unelected voluntary chamber. 

[BlueRiver]

I can't help but feel this is what happens when someone opens a book on constitutional theory for the first time, reads some concepts, reckons they're game changers and then cracks on. 

 

Literally hee haw matters a jot on how modern countries function. 

 

The US has popular sovereignty. I dare say plenty of dictatorships around the world claim they have too and that the will of the people is expressed through their ruler. 

 

Theoretical fun but doesn't even start to move the pieces on the chess board. 

 

So far we've got "let's allow a self-selecting group of lay folk to scrutinise legislation for X amount of time before we replace them with another self-selecting group of lay people" which would be more catastrophic than any House of Lords. Secondly we have "let's have more referenda on an undefined scope of legislation" which is a double-edged sword in and of itself as quite honestly the majority can easily be swayed with misinformation and we'd potentially have social change held back decades (and would have in the UK if things like abortion were put to a general vote). Neither of which would be precluded under the current form of sovereignty it must be said either. 

 

Personally can't wait to see them scrutinising legislation incorporating highly complex trade deals.

 

Anybody that's ever had to talk to a jury or sat on one would know that the most basic concepts of a fair trial are beyond the grasp of a hell of a lot of folk without beating it into them with a ****ing hammer so I for one can't wait to see what fresh hell this would unleash. 

[Roxy Hearts]

56 minutes ago, JudyJudyJudy said:

Brilliant reply to “ Dougal ” 😂

 

 

He's correct though! 

[BlueRiver]

6 minutes ago, Roxy Hearts said:

He's correct though! 

 

He's very selective in what he chooses. 

 

That flag also fought against tyranny in Europe and abolished the transatlantic slave trade.  I'm curious how any flag stands for inequality any more than any other as well. 

 

Was pre-1707 Scotland some kind of utopia without landed elites, aristocratic and monarchs? Would a saltire flying across every government building in Scotland exclusively suddenly wipe out inequality between Morningside and Muirhouse? 

 

Utter drivel from a saltire shagger. 

[frankblack]

17 minutes ago, Roxy Hearts said:

He's correct though! 

 

Total shite.  Scots were amongst the worst in the slave trade for starters.

 

The whole reason we signed up to the union was because of greed related to the slave trade.  Darien Scheme bankrupted the economy.

[BlueRiver]

1 minute ago, frankblack said:

 

Total shite.  Scots were amongst the worst in the slave trade for starters.

 

The whole reason we signed up to the union was because of greed related to the slave trade.  Darien Scheme bankrupted the economy.

 

You're wrong Frank. Pre-1707 Scotland was advocating for the abolition of the slave trade, had no inequality, was not in the slightest bit racist, and was on a noble crusade against tyranny of all types from all comers. 

 

[BlueRiver]

1 minute ago, Jim_Duncan said:

William Wallace used to go riding around on his big LGBT+ unicorn, firing Scottish Groats out of his willie and singing 'Yes sir, I can boogie' so loud that the English all hid behind Hadrian's wall and invented slavery to counteract his menace.

 

😂😂😂 William "man of the common folk" Wallace. 

 

He wasn't the beneficiary of any types of nepotism or elitism. Good salt of the earth William. 

[frankblack]

19 minutes ago, BlueRiver said:

 

You're wrong Frank. Pre-1707 Scotland was advocating for the abolition of the slave trade, had no inequality, was not in the slightest bit racist, and was on a noble crusade against tyranny of all types from all comers. 

 

 

I take it you missed the smilie! 😆

[frankblack]

30 minutes ago, BlueRiver said:

 

He's very selective in what he chooses. 

 

That flag also fought against tyranny in Europe and abolished the transatlantic slave trade.  I'm curious how any flag stands for inequality any more than any other as well. 

 

Was pre-1707 Scotland some kind of utopia without landed elites, aristocratic and monarchs? Would a saltire flying across every government building in Scotland exclusively suddenly wipe out inequality between Morningside and Muirhouse? 

 

Utter drivel from a saltire shagger. 

 

Spot on 👍

[periodictabledancer]

35 minutes ago, frankblack said:

 

Total shite.  Scots were amongst the worst in the slave trade for starters.

 

The whole reason we signed up to the union was because of greed related to the slave trade.  Darien Scheme bankrupted the economy.

They weren't anywhere NEAR being the "worst", that is hysterical nonsense. 

Scots were undeniably active in the Caribbean plantations (even Rabbie Burns considered going there due to the fortunes that could be made). 

Why on earth you self loathing lot make this stuff up is unbelievable. 

[Roxy Hearts]

39 minutes ago, frankblack said:

 

Total shite.  Scots were amongst the worst in the slave trade for starters.

 

The whole reason we signed up to the union was because of greed related to the slave trade.  Darien Scheme bankrupted the economy.

Unionist Scots, like yourself. Scots are part of the British Empire and current establishment. Can't escape history!

[BlueRiver]

Everybody that did evil things is a Unionist. 

 

Alba gu Braigh

[frankblack]

22 minutes ago, periodictabledancer said:

They weren't anywhere NEAR being the "worst", that is hysterical nonsense. 

Scots were undeniably active in the Caribbean plantations (even Rabbie Burns considered going there due to the fortunes that could be made). 

Why on earth you self loathing lot make this stuff up is unbelievable. 

 

This post above is a poster case in denial and complete delusion.

 

Perhaps you want to look at Dundas Street or Edinburgh's new town origins and the same in Glasgow city centre.

 

Unbelievable head in the sand stuff.

[frankblack]

32 minutes ago, Roxy Hearts said:

Unionist Scots, like yourself. Scots are part of the British Empire and current establishment. Can't escape history!

 

Lay off the smack and look at the reality.

 

Everyone who criticises the SNP is apparently a unionist empirical Scot.   This is what the nationalists want.  Group everyone who doesn't agree with them as the same Unionist "evil".

Edited March 23 by frankblack

[Tazio]

34 minutes ago, periodictabledancer said:

They weren't anywhere NEAR being the "worst", that is hysterical nonsense. 

Scots were undeniably active in the Caribbean plantations (even Rabbie Burns considered going there due to the fortunes that could be made). 

Why on earth you self loathing lot make this stuff up is unbelievable. 

Percentage wise Scottish ownership of plantations in the Caribbean was very large and in the 1700’s one third of Jamaican plantations were Scottish owned. . It’s no coincidence that a lot of people there have Scottish surnames. 

[frankblack]

13 minutes ago, Jim_Duncan said:

I had a drinking game for a while: take a shot every time one of your posts says Unionist or Unionism. 
 

My liver packed in. 

 

🤭

[periodictabledancer]

1 hour ago, Tazio said:

Percentage wise Scottish ownership of plantations in the Caribbean was very large and in the 1700’s one third of Jamaican plantations were Scottish owned. . It’s no coincidence that a lot of people there have Scottish surnames. 

I know, that's why I specifically referenced plantations as opposed to "the slave trade" , which had been happening for centuries before anyone went to the Caribbean. 

And it's also worth mentioning the vast majority of plantation owners were highlanders who thought nothing of forcibly expelling people from their homes and deporting them into dire poverty in Canada. 

[AyrJambo]

3 hours ago, BlueRiver said:

I can't help but feel this is what happens when someone opens a book on constitutional theory for the first time, reads some concepts, reckons they're game changers and then cracks on. 

 

Literally hee haw matters a jot on how modern countries function. 

 

The US has popular sovereignty. I dare say plenty of dictatorships around the world claim they have too and that the will of the people is expressed through their ruler. 

 

Theoretical fun but doesn't even start to move the pieces on the chess board. 

 

So far we've got "let's allow a self-selecting group of lay folk to scrutinise legislation for X amount of time before we replace them with another self-selecting group of lay people" which would be more catastrophic than any House of Lords. Secondly we have "let's have more referenda on an undefined scope of legislation" which is a double-edged sword in and of itself as quite honestly the majority can easily be swayed with misinformation and we'd potentially have social change held back decades (and would have in the UK if things like abortion were put to a general vote). Neither of which would be precluded under the current form of sovereignty it must be said either. 

 

Personally can't wait to see them scrutinising legislation incorporating highly complex trade deals.

 

Anybody that's ever had to talk to a jury or sat on one would know that the most basic concepts of a fair trial are beyond the grasp of a hell of a lot of folk without beating it into them with a ****ing hammer so I for one can't wait to see what fresh hell this would unleash. 

 

Who said anything about self-selecting - only you

What is the current offer in UK - vote every four or five years and get whatever government voters in England choose?

 

The whole point of self-determination is to be able to choose whatever form of government we want according to our needs

[BlueRiver]

Just now, AyrJambo said:

 

Who said anything about self-selecting - only you

What is the current offer in UK - vote every four or five years and get whatever government voters in England choose?

 

The whole point of self-determination is to be able to choose whatever form of government we want according to our needs

 

You said voluntary. If something is done on a voluntary basis it stands to reason the group is therefore self-selecting as they've volunteered. 

 

 

Self-determination has typically meant we've opted en masses across the western world for representative democracy with electoral cycles. That's what works for people living in nation states. 

 

So again you've offered absolutely nothing to defend why you think popular sovereignty is such a game changing idea to throw about. 

 

But **** it I'm on board, let's have wee Steve from down the road try and wrap his head around macroeconomic fiscal bills and scrutinise them after 30 years working as a bartender. The good times will roll. 

[Roxy Hearts]

6 hours ago, frankblack said:

 

Lay off the smack and look at the reality.

 

Everyone who criticises the SNP is apparently a unionist empirical Scot.   This is what the nationalists want.  Group everyone who doesn't agree with them as the same Unionist "evil".

Do you believe Scotland is better served in the union or not? If so, you're a unionist. What's so hard for you?

 

5 hours ago, Jim_Duncan said:

I had a drinking game for a while: take a shot every time one of your posts says Unionist or Unionism. 
 

My liver packed in. 

So what! Same as above. You love the union but scared to admit it! Typical cowards and expected!

[jack D and coke]

13 hours ago, Jim_Duncan said:

It's all a load of waffle. Minimal government, staying the feck out of people's lives and protecting the most vulnerable in society is all we need. Whether that government waves a wee blue and white flag or a wee red, white and blue flag makes no difference in the long run.

Aye it’s how I’ve started to feel too. 
I got proper into the Indy thing..not cos I hate anyone or I think everything would suddenly be great but I did think it was the next necessary step for Britain to modernise and for Scotland to basically get off its arse. 
I guess we want to stay under our ma’s skirt. 

Dependence. 
 

[frankblack]

7 hours ago, Roxy Hearts said:

Do you believe Scotland is better served in the union or not? If so, you're a unionist. What's so hard for you?

 

- The question is do you believe the SNP have been honest about what independence would cost the people?

- Do you trust a party that won't discuss these details and is currently facing a huge budget deficit due to their incompetence?

- Do you trust a party that is under police investigation for fraud in its own accounts to have full fiscal control of our economy?   You saw what Liz Truss managed, and these clowns at Holyrood make her look like Stephen Hawking. 

- You only need to look at their 2014 white paper and all its cards were dependent on Oil and Gas.  That industry crashed a matter of weeks later.  What was their fallback?

- What will the currency be and what effect will that have on Scottish jobs?

 

7 hours ago, Roxy Hearts said:

So what! Same as above. You love the union but scared to admit it! Typical cowards and expected!

 

You have your head in the sand.  Independence at any cost is fine by you.  I'm guessing you have nothing to lose if these clowns cost you your job and devalue any savings.

[TallPaul]

[Radio Ga Ga]

51 minutes ago, TallPaul said:

What a feckin Roaster

[manaliveits105]

[The Mighty Thor]

1 hour ago, frankblack said:

 

- The question is do you believe the SNP have been honest about what independence would cost the people?

- Do you trust a party that won't discuss these details and is currently facing a huge budget deficit due to their incompetence?

- Do you trust a party that is under police investigation for fraud in its own accounts to have full fiscal control of our economy?   You saw what Liz Truss managed, and these clowns at Holyrood make her look like Stephen Hawking. 

- You only need to look at their 2014 white paper and all its cards were dependent on Oil and Gas.  That industry crashed a matter of weeks later.  What was their fallback?

- What will the currency be and what effect will that have on Scottish jobs?

 

 

You have your head in the sand.  Independence at any cost is fine by you.  I'm guessing you have nothing to lose if these clowns cost you your job and devalue any savings.

Ah Frankie boy many words and no sense again.

 

Let's run through the arguments again

 

What's the cost of independence? 

No one knows. No one can know. What we do know is the cost of being better together. It's getting on for 5% of GDP, living standards from the 70s, wage growth a fraction of our G7 partners, higher inflation and lower prospects. All provable facts since 2014. 

What does staying in the Union look like?

 

The SNP fraud. More than 2 years of investigation, Fred West tents and thousands of police man hours for? Zero. Absolutely nothing. 

 

Are you genuinely trying to use Liz Truss as an argument against independence? 😂 think about it. 

 

Ah the old oil and gas red herring. Oil and gas has kept the UK afloat since the 1970s and successive Westminster governments have spunked that golden bounty to leave us with a national debt racing towards £3 trillion. How does that compare with other North Sea Oil and gas countries?

 

Currency? 😂

 

Scotland is a poorer country since 2014 solely by having its economic and fiscal  policy dictated to it by Westminster. Fact. 

 

 

[AyrJambo]

23 hours ago, AyrJambo said:

 

 

There is never going to be a time when all the economic circumstances align to present the "perfect" opportunity for independence

You either want to be independent or you want to be dependent

Unionists seem to want those advocating independence (a normal state of affairs the world over) to be able to predict the future for them

In 2014 the unionist argument was that Scotland required the "broad shoulders of the UK" to survive and that we were "better together"

Since then we have had Brexit, rocketing fuel bills (in one of the most energy-rich countries in Europe!), cost of living crisis, soaring use of food banks, revolving door prime ministers not to mention unpredictables like Ukraine and Gaza

 

Can any unionist tell me what the rate of inflation will be in 5 years time in the UK? Or interest rates? Or the value of the £? Or food prices? Will there be further global conflicts? Or a government we voted for?

 

Anyone?

[TallPaul]

I watched an article few nights ago talking to people in Dublin. They were all concerned about fuel bills and the cost of living crisis. I found it really weird as they are an independent EU country and the Nats would have us believe all of the above is Brexit and Tory made.

[Roxy Hearts]

2 hours ago, frankblack said:

 

- The question is do you believe the SNP have been honest about what independence would cost the people?

- Do you trust a party that won't discuss these details and is currently facing a huge budget deficit due to their incompetence?

- Do you trust a party that is under police investigation for fraud in its own accounts to have full fiscal control of our economy?   You saw what Liz Truss managed, and these clowns at Holyrood make her look like Stephen Hawking. 

- You only need to look at their 2014 white paper and all its cards were dependent on Oil and Gas.  That industry crashed a matter of weeks later.  What was their fallback?

- What will the currency be and what effect will that have on Scottish jobs?

 

 

You have your head in the sand.  Independence at any cost is fine by you.  I'm guessing you have nothing to lose if these clowns cost you your job and devalue any savings.

As soon as I read Liz Truss, I stopped! Enjoy your day.

[The Mighty Thor]

16 minutes ago, TallPaul said:

I watched an article few nights ago talking to people in Dublin. They were all concerned about fuel bills and the cost of living crisis. I found it really weird as they are an independent EU country and the Nats would have us believe all of the above is Brexit and Tory made.

The 'nats' and anyone with cognitive function would have you believe the high fuel bills in the UK are higher than in Europe because of Tory economic policy and the cost of living crisis deeper than in Europe because of Tory economic policy.

 

Both of which are exacerbated because of the Tory party and the half wits that vote for and support them .

[Japan Jambo]

On 22/03/2024 at 19:44, Lord Montpelier said:

I thought the nationalists were all for inward migration and the economic and cultural benefits that can bring

 

But maybe I was wrong and it's a more selective philosophy 

English = too white perhaps?

[Japan Jambo]

On 22/03/2024 at 21:51, Jim_Duncan said:

 

My grandad was from Somerset. He lived in Edinburgh for work.

 

I'll most likely be on one of the trains when Reichsführer Ayr Jambo starts plotting a solution to this whole issue. Wan Folk. Wan State. Wan Ker. 

🤣

[John Findlay]

1 hour ago, The Mighty Thor said:

The 'nats' and anyone with cognitive function would have you believe the high fuel bills in the UK are higher than in Europe because of Tory economic policy and the cost of living crisis deeper than in Europe because of Tory economic policy.

 

Both of which are exacerbated because of the Tory party and the half wits that vote for and support them .

Hell of a lot of halfwits UK wide.

 

[Des Lynam]

4 hours ago, frankblack said:

 

-  You saw what Liz Truss managed, and these clowns at Holyrood make her look like Stephen Hawking. 

- You only need to look at their 2014 white paper and all its cards were dependent on Oil and Gas.  That industry crashed a matter of weeks later.  What was their fallback?

-

That will be the Liz Truss that cost the UK £30 billion Frank. £30 billion. 

[Nucky Thompson]

Whit aboot ra Toaries 

[Gundermann]

4 minutes ago, Des Lynam said:

That will be the Liz Truss that cost the UK £30 billion Frank. £30 billion. 

 

It's OK to lose £30bn as long as you know the currency lost.

[frankblack]

17 minutes ago, Des Lynam said:

That will be the Liz Truss that cost the UK £30 billion Frank. £30 billion. 

 

Yip.  Just a drip in the ocean compared to the damage the clowns at Holyrood would do to Scotland's economy and jobs with no plan and zero concrete policies published.

[frankblack]

16 minutes ago, Gundermann said:

 

It's OK to lose £30bn as long as you know the currency lost.

 

Liz Truss is the Tory equivalent of our first minister.  Neither fit for purpose.

 

The SNP racked up a £1.5bn budget shortfall at Holyrood despite not having anything like the same financial responsibilities.