Fan ownership to be rewarded by the Scottish Government.........

[Governor Tarkin]

30 minutes ago, Smithee said:

You might be reasonably minded but I wouldn't say you are neutral, you're a unionist and whether intended or not you carry the associated bias - of course you do, I carry the opposite bias, it would be daft to deny.

 

To be quite honest, I don't see why an independent Scotland should be saddled with hundreds of billions of debt when there's no legal obligation and there's never been an international understanding or precedent that this is the way things work.

 

Unionists who argue against independence feel there would be a mural obligation - that's a fairly weak reason to start a new nation with heavy debt it didn't build itself.

 

 

@coconut dougmade an excellent and emotive post maybe a couple of months ago with a compelling set of benefits that he could see for Scotland and our children upon withdrawal from the union (none of which were economic). I agreed unreservedly with every single last one of them, but nobody has accused me of being a seperatist.

 

Just because I question things that you, as a nationalist, hold as self evident and universal truths, doesn't make me a unionist either. 

 

I suspect that most level headed and pragmatic folk are swithering somewhere around the centre ground, which is borne out by the narrow margins on most indy polls. 

 

The question of national debt should not come down to legal obligation or technicality, it should be about fairness. Something that nationalists are keen to enunciate as a key tenet in the drive for Scottish independence.

If the seperatist position is that it is unjust to saddle a newly independent nation with a burden of debt that it didn't build itself, it is equally unjust to saddle the remaining nations of the union with the withdrwing nation's share of the debt. The division of assets likewise. 

 

It shouldn't need to be a zero sum game. 

[Unknown user]

15 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

 

@coconut dougmade an excellent and emotive post maybe a couple of months ago with a compelling set of benefits that he could see for Scotland and our children upon withdrawal from the union (none of which were economic). I agreed unreservedly with every single last one of them, but nobody has accused me of being a seperatist.

 

Just because I question things that you, as a nationalist, hold as self evident and universal truths, doesn't make me a unionist either. 

 

I suspect that most level headed and pragmatic folk are swithering somewhere around the centre ground, which is borne out by the narrow margins on most indy polls. 

 

The question of national debt should not come down to legal obligation or technicality, it should be about fairness. Something that nationalists are keen to enunciate as a key tenet in the drive for Scottish independence.

If the seperatist position is that it is unjust to saddle a newly independent nation with a burden of debt that it didn't build itself, it is equally unjust to saddle the remaining nations of the union with the withdrwing nation's share of the debt. The division of assets likewise. 

 

It shouldn't need to be a zero sum game. 

So we can agree that we are all different nations then, that's something.

It simply isn't Scotland's responsibility to equal out the injustices of Westminster's debt building and is imagine they'd renegotiate, arguing that they're a different legal entity now.

 

Frank argued with the legality and the debate's moved on to morality now because the point is ceded - that there's no legal obligation or precedent for this to happen.

And I'd have to say that it seems pretty unfair to land a newly independent Scotland with the equivalent of 60 grand debt for every single household and 2k a year of their taxes going to interest payments alone.

[Governor Tarkin]

37 minutes ago, Smithee said:

So we can agree that we are all different nations then, that's something.

 

 

I'm making my points on your terms, bud. Compromise on details can make bigger issues accesible, and in this instance doesn't weaken any of my points.

 

37 minutes ago, Smithee said:

It simply isn't Scotland's responsibility to equal out the injustices of Westminster's debt building and is imagine they'd renegotiate, arguing that they're a different legal entity now.

 

Westminster's debt building, just or otherwise, has taken place while we are a partner in a political, social, and economic union. That is a fact.

The different legal entity argument is a fudge. Are we Scotland, the once proud, and distinct nation that is reclaiming it's rightful place as a just and independent country in the interational community; or are we Sevco Scotland, a 'new legal entity' reformed from the old legal entity to avoid paying it's debts, but reatains the same stadium, players, and honours, sorry, the same lands, assets, and history?

 

37 minutes ago, Smithee said:

Frank argued with the legality and the debate's moved on to morality now because the point is ceded - that there's no legal obligation or precedent for this to happen.

 

 

I've never argued the legalities, but I wouldn't take anything for granted. If you want to drive an enormous wedge between the UK and an independent Scotland then this woukd be a great place to start.

 

The morality of it all should be self evident, unless, of course, you feel in your heart that Scotland has always been distinct, and in some way stood apart from the union. Unfortunately this notion is grounded in romanticism and not hard reality. We are where we are.

 

37 minutes ago, Smithee said:

And I'd have to say that it seems pretty unfair to land a newly independent Scotland with the equivalent of 60 grand debt for every single household and 2k a year of their taxes going to interest payments alone.

 

Conversely, it's equally unfair to transfer Scotlands proportional share of the UK debt on to the working class folks of the remaining UK just because there's more of them to share it amongst and basically, they are not us. 🤷‍♂️

 

 

Edited April 18, 2021 by Governor Tarkin

[frankblack]

2 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

I'm making my points on your terms, bud. Compromise on details can make bigger issues accesible, and in this instance doesn't weaken any of my points.

 

 

Westminster's debt building has taken place while we are a partner in a political, social, and economic union. That is a fact.

The different legal entity argument is a fudge. Are we Scotland, the once proud, and distinct nation that is reclaiming it's rightful place as a just and independent country in the interational community; or are we Sevco Scotland, a 'new legal entity' reformed from the old legal entity to avoid paying it's debts, but reatains the same stadium, players, and honours, sorry, the same lands, assets, and history?

 

 

I've never argued the legalities, but I wouldn't take anything for granted. If you want to drive an enormous wedge between the UK and an independent Scotland then this woukd be a great place to start.

 

The morality of it all should be self evident, unless, of course, you feel in your heart that Scotland has always been distinct, and in some way stood apart from the union.

 

 

Conversely, it's equally unfair to transfer Scotlands proportional share of the UK debt on to the working class folks of the remaining UK just because there's more of them to share it amongst and basically, they are not us. 🤷‍♂️

 

Well said GT.  I was going to reply on much the same lines.

 

The issue on legalities isn't ceded, that would have to be confirmed during settlement negotiations.  Its pretty naive to assume that there aren't extremely complex legal obligations untangling the legal and economic systems.

[Unknown user]

6 minutes ago, frankblack said:

 

Well said GT.  I was going to reply on much the same lines.

 

The issue on legalities isn't ceded, that would have to be confirmed during settlement negotiations.  Its pretty naive to assume that there aren't extremely complex legal obligations untangling the legal and economic systems.

And again, if agreed to then of course there would be a legal obligation.

 

But without agreement the centuries of international legal precedent says there's no legal obligation.

[Roxy Hearts]

2 hours ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

They could start by abolishing faith based schools. Children are a blank canvas. Difference is learned. 

 

 

Sectarianism is the fault of the union.

I suppose cancer and Aids are too. 

 

 

Spot on, Ausseh. These are the sort of discussions we should be having about a vision for a progressive, independent Scotland. 

 

 

I'm fairly neutral in all this, Schmitt, but can't get my head around folk thinking that Scotland has no moral obligation to accept a proportional share of the UK debt on independence. 

I didn't say it was the fault of the union but there are issues within it.

 

Schools as you mentioned.

Football teams formed which grew with religious intolerance. Look at Sevco, the most bigoted of all with many supporting the union.

Troubles in Ireland.

Places of worship.

Media 

I could go but you get my drift.

[frankblack]

15 minutes ago, Smithee said:

And again, if agreed to then of course there would be a legal obligation.

 

But without agreement the centuries of international legal precedent says there's no legal obligation.

 

Your opinion about so called centuries of international legal precedent is not something you can conclusively prove has any bearing on separation negotiations.  I'd imagine any existing legal documents, dating back to the act of union itself, would be the legal starting point.

 

In any case, you haven't explained why the SNP had a negotiated settlement of assets and liabilities in their 2013 white paper.  It looks to me that they ceded the point that assets and liabilities had to be split in a fair way based on population percentage, for example.

 

Your argument that debt accrued by Westminster on behalf of Scotland isn't Scotland's responsibility.  I don't recall the SNP objecting to the chancellor's furlough money, which comes from government borrowing.  Why isn't it fair that Scotland takes its share of debt like this?  Are you saying the furlough scheme have excluded Scotland and put a considerable number of people and businesses out of work and in serious financial difficulty?

Edited April 18, 2021 by frankblack

[Governor Tarkin]

11 minutes ago, Roxy Hearts said:

Look at Sevco, the most bigoted of all with many supporting the union.

 

 

Clearly.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 18, 2021 by Governor Tarkin

[Jeffros Furios]

28 minutes ago, frankblack said:

 

Well said GT.  I was going to reply on much the same lines.

 

The issue on legalities isn't ceded, that would have to be confirmed during settlement negotiations.  Its pretty naive to assume that there aren't extremely complex legal obligations untangling the legal and economic systems.

If Independent and  we needed to borrow money from the Bank of England would Westminster not advise them not to unless we took our share of the national debt ?

I don't know myself and would that leave us the EU as our only source of funds ?

 

[Unknown user]

6 minutes ago, frankblack said:

 

Your opinion about so called centuries of international legal precedent is not something you can conclusively prove has any bearing on separation negotiations.  I'd imagine any existing legal documents, dating back to the act of union itself, would be the legal starting point.

 

In any case, you haven't explained why the SNP had a negotiated settlement of assets and liabilities in their 2013 white paper.  It looks to me that they ceded the point that assets and liabilities had to be split in a fair way based on population percentage, for example.

 

Your argument that debt accrued by Westminster on behalf of Scotland isn't Scotland's responsibility.  I don't recall the SNP objecting to the chancellor's furlough money, which comes from government borrowing.  Why isn't it fair that Scotland takes its share of debt like this?  Are you saying the furlough scheme have excluded Scotland and put a considerable number of people and businesses out of work and in serious financial difficulty?

Again, negotiations. If Scotland agrees to take debt it's a different story, I don't think it helps to keep repeating the bloody obvious with that one.

 

The SNP and the cause for independence are two different things though, just like you being into the union doesn't make you a Tory. Why would I be explaining something I don't agree with from a party I often disagree with?

[Unknown user]

Just now, Jeffros Furios said:

If Independent and  we needed to borrow money from the Bank of England would Westminster not advise them not to unless we took our share of the national debt ?

I don't know myself and would that leave us the EU as our only source of funds ?

 

That's not how it works, the UK doesn't owe it's debt to the bank of England.

[Jeffros Furios]

7 minutes ago, Smithee said:

That's not how it works, the UK doesn't owe it's debt to the bank of England.

Yeah I know but my point was  could Westminster pressurise BoE into being less than helpful due to debt ?

I don't know myself its just something that plays on my mind .

I'm probably best described as a sort Independance type. 

[Roxy Hearts]

17 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

Clearly.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, Sevco are the most bigoted. Celtic are extremely bigoted as we know but in my lifetime I've found Rangers/Sevco to be by far the worst. They should both move to Ireland, Scotland would be better off without them. Both happened under the union as my original post was intended to convey.

[Jeffros Furios]

3 minutes ago, Roxy Hearts said:

Yes, Sevco are the most bigoted. Celtic are extremely bigoted as we know but in my lifetime I've found Rangers/Sevco to be by far the worst. They should both move to Ireland, Scotland would be better off without them. Both happened under the union as my original post was intended to convey.

I know of Celtic fans having various fundraisers in  North Lanarkshire towns  for the IRA and political prisoners , I've spoken to a few who justify 

The IRA bombing campaign and were quite happy to continue fundraising for it .

No doubt Rangers supporters  also raised money for Loyalists .

[Governor Tarkin]

5 minutes ago, Jeffros Furios said:

I know of Celtic fans having various fundraisers in  North Lanarkshire towns  for the IRA and political prisoners , I've spoken to a few who justify 

The IRA bombing campaign and were quite happy to continue fundraising for it .

No doubt Rangers supporters  also raised money for Loyalists .

 

This. 

 

Conversely, I know plenty fans of both who are disgusted by the whole carry on. 

[Roxy Hearts]

5 minutes ago, Jeffros Furios said:

I know of Celtic fans having various fundraisers in  North Lanarkshire towns  for the IRA and political prisoners , I've spoken to a few who justify 

The IRA bombing campaign and were quite happy to continue fundraising for it .

No doubt Rangers supporters  also raised money for Loyalists .

They're as bad as each other but I was making the point in an earlier post that a lot of this has happened in the union and is partly caused by it. 

 

The unionists voted against the OBFA which was my point in another post. The Labour, Tories and Libs can't blame it all on the SNP and Labour had years of control to sort it out and done nothing.

[Roxy Hearts]

2 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

This. 

 

Conversely, I know plenty fans of both who are disgusted by the whole carry on. 

I've friends and family of both and loathe the association with this. I also have workmates etc who are extreme in their views!

[ri Alban]

5 hours ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

 

@coconut dougmade an excellent and emotive post maybe a couple of months ago with a compelling set of benefits that he could see for Scotland and our children upon withdrawal from the union (none of which were economic). I agreed unreservedly with every single last one of them, but nobody has accused me of being a seperatist.

 

Just because I question things that you, as a nationalist, hold as self evident and universal truths, doesn't make me a unionist either. 

 

I suspect that most level headed and pragmatic folk are swithering somewhere around the centre ground, which is borne out by the narrow margins on most indy polls. 

 

The question of national debt should not come down to legal obligation or technicality, it should be about fairness. Something that nationalists are keen to enunciate as a key tenet in the drive for Scottish independence.

If the seperatist position is that it is unjust to saddle a newly independent nation with a burden of debt that it didn't build itself, it is equally unjust to saddle the remaining nations of the union with the withdrwing nation's share of the debt. The division of assets likewise. 

 

It shouldn't need to be a zero sum game. 

It would be scandalous if Scotland didn't take the 8.5% of the debt. And it would be just as scandalous if the UK didn't give Scotland its share of the assets and a realignment in the border, where it has be robbing us of oil revenue. 

[Governor Tarkin]

1 minute ago, ri Alban said:

It would be scandalous if Scotland didn't take the 8.5% of the debt. And it would be just as scandalous if the UK didn't give Scotland its share of the assets and a realignment in the border, where it has be robbing us of oil revenue. 

 

Completely agree.

[ri Alban]

7 hours ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

They could start by abolishing faith based schools. Children are a blank canvas. Difference is learned. 

 

 

Sectarianism is the fault of the union.

I suppose cancer and Aids are too. 

 

 

Spot on, Ausseh. These are the sort of discussions we should be having about a vision for a progressive, independent Scotland. 

 

 

I'm fairly neutral in all this, Schmitt, but can't get my head around folk thinking that Scotland has no moral obligation to accept a proportional share of the UK debt on independence. 

As you say, the union didn't cause Sectarianism in Scotland, it washappening in Scotland before Scotland was Scotland. And then the ante was upped in the 16 the century, big time.(Still pre Union) but being part of the union, certainly is part of the reason Scotland has struggled to pull together on the independence debate. It's mental we can't do this as one. 

[Konrad von Carstein]

Nice civil exchange between @Smithee
and @Governor Tarkin
well done guys.

 

 

 

 

Pair of saps!

[Governor Tarkin]

56 minutes ago, Konrad von Carstein said:

Nice civil exchange between @Smithee
and @Governor Tarkin
well done guys.

 

 

 

 

Pair of saps!

 

Ootside, the pair o yies.

[Konrad von Carstein]

9 hours ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

Clearly.

 

 

 

 

 

 

This shite is EXACTLY what the OBAF could have started to clamp down on, but for MSPs with agendas...The clue was "Offensive Behaviour " being  in the title.

[Unknown user]

2 hours ago, Konrad von Carstein said:

Nice civil exchange between @Smithee
and @Governor Tarkin
well done guys.

 

 

 

 

Pair of saps!

[Konrad von Carstein]

1 minute ago, Smithee said:

 

Genuine

[The Wrinkly Ninja]

7 hours ago, Zlatanable said:

your answer is so stupid, ridiculous, po-faced and obvious.

A verbose and irrelevant conclusion.