Once again, the stated aim of the EU project has always been the same, right from the start. Repeating the above just makes you look ignorant. Go read up on it in Wikipedia.
General / Off-Topic The SNP is wrong. There has been no material change in circumstances.
- Thread starter Genar-Hofoen
- Start date
Once again, the stated aim of the EU project has always been the same, right from the start. Repeating the above just makes you look ignorant. Go read up on it in Wikipedia.
Javert
Volunteer Moderator
I actually agree with Fuzzy on this. Obviously Brexit was not only about Boris Johnson, but it was his decision to support leave that arguably made the difference, given the very small margin. Do I believe Boris Johnson's decision was related to personal politics and his ambitions more than his principles and integrity. Yes I strongly suspect this. Without him, I doubt leave would have won. I see Boris Johnson really as a "rent a charisma" type person who basically pedals out his undoubted charm and charisma to support whatever will gain him power and popularity.
You can widen it out though and say that it was tory party internal politics that led to Brexit.
On the Scottish referendum, if the Brexit vote had been to remain, and she was calling a referendum now, I would be arguing that the referendum is invalid because it's too soon after the previous one. The difference here is that at the time of the last referendum, few people expected Brexit to be a leave vote, and this creates a massive change in circumstances.
This is the same and consistent with I have been arguing with the Brexit also - you can't just decide to have a second referendum because you didn't like the first. However, if it then becomes clear that the circumstances have changed significantly in a dramatic way a second referendum would be justified. For example, if it becomes clear that the UK will exit the EU without a deal, and fall back on WTO rules with no streamlining of customs, a hard border with ROI, all EU nationals will be expelled and all UK nationals will be forced back home here, this would arguably be a situation requiring a second referendum as this was not remotely close to what the leave campaign said would happen.
(Of course, by then it might be too late since A50 may not be reversible anyway.)
The idea is probably to try and scare people with uncertainty. "It will be haard", and so forth. It won't work either, as May's UK is already taking the mother of all gambles, and has no stability and certainty to offer.
It is Whiskey and VR night for me so I'm gonna try and keep away from the forums after this
The majority was so small it could be blamed on virtually anything. It was a combination of everything that lead to the result, not Boris or Cameron. You could blame Germany just as much due to the migrant crisis or the remain campaign for focusing on trying to scare people instead of making positive arguments. You could blame young people for being to lazy to vote... the list goes on.The biggest problem of all was that nobody knew what they hell would happen if we voted to leave other than we would leave the EU. It was a leap of faith that we could do ok, but we didn't really know what we were voting for, so we should have another one... you know the deal.
Now people that have been banging on for months that was a stupid idea and it should be reversed are suddenly all for the idea of Scotland doing the same thing. It is utterly ridiculous for people to be promoting this idea when Scotland and the rest of the UK are effectively the same country. If the UK got a terrible deal with the EU and Scotland left the UK and joined the EU on the exact same day it would be catastrophic for Scotland's economy. England and Scotland could have a hard boarder and Scotland have tariffs with her biggest trading partner but tariff free access the single market.
I'm not saying that Scotland can't live without the UK. They will find a way like the UK will find a way outside of EU with or without Scotland (I'd prefer with). But it makes no sense to do this now, nobody knows what the circumstances are. What I can't for the life of me work out is why people are so unwilling to accept what is happening with Brexit that they seem to want it all to go terribly wrong. I get SNP voters (or more accurately those that want independence) wanting it to go wrong and EU fanatics that see the UK leaving the EU as a threat to the EU (people like Sunleader), but all the defeatism and willing of failure like Fuzzy does I don't understand. (that isn't an attack on Fuzzy btw, I just don't understand it).
I don't get why there isn't a bigger push for a referendum on the outcome of the negotiations... A50 is reversible, the EU doesn't want the UK it leave.
Like people have been doing with Brexit? May's UK is doing what the majority of the UK voted for in a referendum. How is scaring people with single market access going for the EU?
Last edited:
Difference of Situation again.
UK Leaving EU is almost Guaranteed a Catastrophe for Britain.
So the EU Warning of that is simply honest.
But Scotlands choice is different.
Leaving UK might be hard. But it will likely not be as Hard as staying with Britain after Brexit.
So the UK using that argument especially after Brexit is set to come. Is a Joke lol
We could turn this around.
Better Together *gg*
Slogan of two Campaigns for those who remember ^^
it's nothing like the same thing. Gaining independence from the UK and rejoining the EU is the polar opposite of the Brexit. He arguments for why it's bad for the UK to Brexit actually support Scotland rejoining as it's own entity.
- - - Updated - - -
I recommend you pick this up tomorrow, rather than continue tonight.
I have lived in the UK since I was born 40 years ago.... I know what is happening to my country. It isn't polar opposite, you lot are just too stupid to see what is happening.
Fair enough maybe i'm wrong though
- - - Updated - - -
I love the way you think you actually understand this x
Being independent from the UK and rejoining the EU is better than staying in the UK? In what terms? I get the desire for self-governance, but what cost is associated with the fulfillment of that?
The economics as things stand simply don't add up;
Scottish exports to the rest of the UK is £49.8bn
Scottish exports to the EU is £11.3bn - including £2.3bn to the Netherlands some of which may actually be destined for extra-EU customers
Scottish exports to the rest of the world is £16.4bn
Here's the kicker: EU exports haven't grown in any significant way since 2002. In the same period, non-EU international exports have grown by 50% and UK exports by 100%. The EU is Scotland's LEAST IMPORTANT trade zone in terms of volume and growth.. Exactly where is the growth potential in the EU market?
Having better access to a massive market (compared to the smaller one available in the UK) is only of value if you can serve and compete in that bigger market. Can you think of any country (or more specifically businesses) in the EU going to stop buying from somewhere else in order to buy Scottish? Who is going to be displaced in a very mature market? Which other European country is going to stop supplying businesses in France or Germany? Trade simply doesn't work in the way being portrayed in this argument.
So I'm struggling to see any benefit beyond the ideological unless someone manages to conjure up something pretty extraordinary. Don't get me wrong, that doesn't mean that we shouldn't have the vote. But I find "Westminster doesn't show us the right respect" to be a seriously crap argument when the future of my family is at stake.
Bearing in mind my comments about the economics - what practical benefit are the people of Scotland going to see from independence?
Last edited:
Yep. I know that SNP has been trying to me off into saying things that would set the UK on a crash course. Not just me but everyone. I love Scotland, screw you SNP
A fair point. But I think you'll find it is Theresa Mays incompetence that is putting Scotland at risk of independence.
Let's get this out of the way first - I disagree with you about Brexit, but frankly you're a swell guy. You can disagree with me about that and about foreigners and about economics until we're blue in the face and going around in circles. There isn't a need to go over that. What I'm about to argue is not an argument on the basis of the consequences of Brexit nor is it about the rights and wrongs of Brexit, it is purely an objective and detacted argument about how Theresa May is doing things.
None of this is my emotional state speaking, although I'll freely admit that comes bubbling up when I talk about Brexit, this won't be one of those times.
But it is important to remember three facts going forward:
1. Scotland pretty emphatically voted to stay in Europe.
2. Scotland voted by 55% to remain a part of the UK.
3. Politically, the situation in Westminister is that the current vision of Brexit (out of absolutely everything, which was not part of the leave campaign) is one that is being pushed by the far-right wing of the Tory party.
With that in mind Scottish independence was always going to be a risk.
But let's look at why, in my trying-to-be objective opinion, it's not just a risk but now highly probable.
The Theresa May government is typified arrogant distain and by unforced errors. Consider her fighting the case to give Parliament a vote on Brexit when it was clear that Parliament would let it through anyway, or inviting Trump to a state visit before it clear what sort of a president he was going to be, or breaking a key manifesto pledge and then throwing Hammond under a bus last week. This is the Prime Minister who appointed Boris Johnson as foreign secretary. This is the Prime Minister who sent a memo about leaks only to have it leaked. This is the person who said to Sir Ivan Rogers, when he pointed out it might take 10 years to get a deal because of the complexities involved, responded with "I don't recognize that timetable".
So when "Brexit means Brexit" as announced, she really had listen the people she doesn't like to, the critics and not the sycophants. She really had to do more to involve Scotland, or at least appear to involve Scotland. Even if she was just going to have a sham involvement of Scotlands devolved government. Instead she said they'd involve them, then didn't do anything but pursue a Brexit that looks like it is being engineered by the Euro-hating wing of the Tory party, whilst refusing to reveal to anyone what she was doing.
Already it looks quite bad, but you also have Jeremy Corbyn to consider. The man is a walking political catastrophe for the Labour movement, and is polling as the worst opposition leader in UK history. With him promising to not step down in spite of recent disasters like Copeland, Sturgeon and the SNP can even quite credibly sell the notion of a perpetual Tory government to the people of Scotland. A perpetual Tory government without European Court of Human Rights oversight.
Watch this exchange at PMQs this week (anyone who doesn't like May, watch this, Mays face is priceless).
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/theresa-not-stop-second-independence-10035588
It plays into the SNP narrative perfectly - Scotland has no independence, Scotland can't decide for itself, Scotland is part of another, larger country which is ruled from London. She's not like Cameron, she has no smarmy salesman warmth, only "finger wagging". Theresa May, much like Brexit, Corbyn, and the current crop of far-right Tories, is part of a perfect storm that have created an absolutely wonderful politically climate for Scottish independence.
Also, the tie the Speaker is wearing is just completely wrong.
Last edited:
You know some of the people in this thread bemoaning Brexit are not even in this country or even British, and some positively despise the UK anyway.
So if Brexit is going to be the big doom of Britain as they say, shouldn't they be happy?
Surly the UK's demise is something that brightens their day?
So if Brexit is going to be the big doom of Britain as they say, shouldn't they be happy?
Surly the UK's demise is something that brightens their day?
What a dumb argument.
If the Brexit would only hurt the UK, I couldn't care less about it. But it doesn't.
So if your putting a Bomb Belt around your Waist and Blow yourself up in your Club Room damaging the entire Room and Injuring several others in your Suicide you expect the other Club Members to be Happy about ?
No Offense Mate.
But see this is the thing.
You are an 60 Million Market.
One of the Four Big Members of the EU
Sure.
Your Losses are Insane compared to what the EU Loses.
Cause the EU loses 10% of its Market Power. You lose 90% of it.
But are you Happy when you lose stuff just because the other guy loses more ???
Your Suicide might not be Lethal to us like the Brexiteers liked to claim during the Campaign.
But its still hurting us.
Sure its hurting you much more. But is that really a consolation ????
As for Anti British.
Well Mate.
If you didnt know. The Opposite of Love aint Hatred. Its Indifference.
One of our Allies is intent on committing suicide and damaging the stuff we build up together.
Take a guess why people are not exactly a fan of the UK right now.
Javert
Volunteer Moderator
There is a push for this - the Lib Dems are pushing for it.
I agree with this, but many others won't listen because they think the Lib Dems are not to be taken seriously. If you actually go and watch some recent Lib Dem interviews, they appear to be the only ones offering any credible opposition (at least from England anyway).
Javert
Volunteer Moderator
I haven't figured out the economics of this. UK government is saying that Scotland leaving the UK would be an economic disaster for Scotland, but of course they are open to accusations of "they would say that wouldn't they". I've seen some reports claiming that the way the UK measures Scotland's economy (including probably your numbers that you quoted) is deeply flawed and biased against Scotland. Being honest, I haven't looked into it deep enough to know either way.
The point I made previously though is that in this case, the sovereignty argument is valid. If someone says "I would rather Scotland is an independent sovereign nation even if we are poorer", they actually have a valid argument. You or I may not agree with it, but it's a valid point.
In the case of Brexit, in my view, the argument on sovereignty was not even a valid argument because a) the EU is not, and never has been, a sovereign body and b) When you look into the details, the bodies that are running the EU are, whilst not being perfect, at least as democratic as the UK government.
Last edited:
Actually its not.
The Guy who wrote it. Wanting it to be Reversible has no effect on it being.
Because the ones deciding if it is Reversible or not. Is the guys in Power. Not the guy writing it up.
http://www.businessinsider.de/uk-supreme-court-article-50-notice-cannot-be-withdrawn-2017-1
Even the UKs own Supreme Court actually assumes that Article 50 is not Reversible.
With the UKs Government not taking Checks on Article 50 being Reversible or not. You can assume that they consider Chances of this being the Case very Low.
Otherwise they would long have Verified it. As it would improve their Negotiation Position.
There is a Chance that the EU would agree to the UK Staying in the EU regardless of Article 50 being Reversible.
After all for the EU it would be a Major Victory if the thing was called off.
Its likely that the EU will however make some Demands in exchange for agreeing to it. Depending on how Badly the Negotiations go for the UK.
For example reducing or removing the Rebate.
And if this comes to Pass. And the UK got an Referendum saying they dont want Brexit.
It is very likely that the UKs Government will be completely Crippled. As it has little Option but abide by all EU Demands.
Thats why the UKs Government wont be holding a Second Referendum anyways.
As it would likely result in the Government having to Admit complete Incompetence.
The Scottish economy is perfectly fine. It's almost impossible to accurately calculate the Scottish economy as it currently is, and it's useless to use the currently published figures (while in the union, and much is obfuscated) to try to make claims about the economy of an independent Scotland.
ETA There is no rational case for Scotland staying in the union, the only legitimate card that remains for the vote no lot to play is an appeal to Britishness. They'll use that, plus lies and scaremongering. Hopefully less folk will fall for it this time. I expect many of the same old lies will be regurgitated.
ETA2 This is also relevant.
Last edited:
I have, and it is deeply flawed and biased against Scotland. Just off the top of my head there are quite a few companies registered in England, paying taxes in England, that operate in Scotland. There are also companies working out of London that are owned by mostly Scottish shareholders. And then there is the question of who owns the natural resources in Scotland and in the North Sea. And, of course, there is the fact that Scotland actually has around 90% of the UKs fresh water supply.
The problem is that nobody knows what an independent Scotland looks like or where it would even start. You know how economists have despaired over the fact that the 40 year union and the 20 year single market of Europe has left the UK incredibly entangled? Well Scotland has been within the UK for centuries, politically and economically. Everything from power generation to transport networks to agriculture to even popular culture, from Land's End to John O'Groats, it's completely meshed.
Seperating the two countries wouldn't be a simple matter and it would damage both nations politically, economically, and socially to a degree that can't be fathomed, right at a time when the UK (and England in particular) would be trying to get out of the EU.
The scale of destruction the UK faces is quite profound, hence the reason this topic often sees gloomy doom-ridden posts from me. It need not necessarily happen, and perhaps there is a way to improve on things from this, but everything I've seen so far tells me that this is going to be so bad it's going to hurt us all.
- - - Updated - - -
The Scottish economy will not be fine if it leaves the UK. Given the EU situation I fully support Scottish independence, particularly with the fact you're facing perpetual Tory misrule. But let's be honest, it's going to be extremely difficult for a number of years.
The major differences between Scottish independence and Brexit:
1. Scotland has somewhere nearby to turn to for economic assistance and recovery.
2. Scotland has, in comparison to the UK, a tiny population with good natural resources and decent agriculture. They can manage for quite a few years without too much outside assistance.
That is an amazing video. May has all the human warmth and charm of a rattlesnake. How on earth did she even manage to get elected MP?
She's probably the biggest ally of the SNP right now. I swear I'd put in a lot of hours, campaigning to separate Scotland from her UK if I lived there.