Comments on: No Union, please, we’re English Wed, 13 Apr 2016 01:13:45 +0000 hourly 1 By: James_L Thu, 05 Jan 2012 16:58:12 +0000 ‘Scots, a sober, rational and highly educated people’

In all your comedic rant, Frankly2014 , this was truly the most ridiculous. Sober and rational? Have you ever actually been to Scotland?

Scotland went bankrupt in 2008 after RBS posted vast losses after its acquisition of Dutch bank ABN AMRO. This acquisition was due to an incompetent Scot by the name of Fred Goodwin wanted to compete with the City in London.
Scotland was then bailed out (again) by the 90% English taxpayer. The situation was ironically similar to the situation 300 years earlier when England bailed out bankrupt Scotland in 1707 in exchange for the Act of Union.

Scotland, is, and was, propped up by England. Over 40% of jobs are in or sub-contracted to the public sector (on behalf of all the UK). Independence would land Scotland with a foreign owned financial system (it now belongs to England after the bailouts), massive unemployment as the English government repatriated its public sector, and either London controlled sterling or a failing Euro. Either way, disaster would be guaranteed and England would need to come to the rescue, for the 3rd time in 3 centuries.

You and all the other hate obsessed Scots need to grow up and stop deluding yourselves with this childish, anglophobic nationalism.

By: matthewslyman Wed, 04 Jan 2012 23:13:52 +0000 In support of @MadJockMcMad, in his/her statements about Westminster’s favouritism toward London:
BBC: Transport spending ‘skewed towards London’ 35349
The perennial justification for this preferential treatment? “London generates more revenue per capita than …” Blah blah blah. Like the average Londoner is 550× more productive than the average person in the North East of England: yeah right!!! They should try spending on the rest of the UK, what we’re worth; and then see how we perform. London is overpopulated yet people are still moving their to take advantage of effective government subsidies. The real reason for this injustice is because our politicians don’t like sitting in traffic jams on their way to work along with the rest of us…

@bassbhoy: “If I may contribute to this debate while living in Canada…Scotland could be a dynamic and vibrant part of the UK economy if it had more control over its own resources.”

Perhaps you missed the point by living in Canada, but Scotland has its own parliament now which controls much of Scottish finances and law. There are already significant and noteworthy differences between Scottish and English spending policy. We are already working within a federal model, and as you suggest, it’s working. Local people really do know best, what they need to succeed…

My point is only that the members of a federation prosper most when they work in harmony and coordination with each other.

Westminster Conservatives should start consulting their partners more seriously in matters of foreign policy – otherwise they will face waves of discontent in the coming years, from the English as well as the Scots.

By: MadJockMcMad Wed, 04 Jan 2012 19:02:15 +0000 The problem with this tale is it is one of a Scotland which is too poor, too wee, too stupid. It claims economic advantage that has never accrued according to historic research into Scotland’s economy, in fact the Scottish economy has always under performed in the 300 years of Union so far.

The core issue is one our American cousins should understand – excessive taxation combined with poor representation. The yield from taxation per Scot according to economists like Professor Hughes-Hallet of Washington State or Neil Acheson is in the region of £1,000 more than we get back in pocket money. There is no subsidy ‘given to Scotland’ by Westminster we pay our own way and then some.

For every £100 Scotland receives from Westminster the Greater London Conurbation receives £175 (like for like populations).

According to the OECD assessment an independent Scotland will end up with a GDP per capita just behind that of Norway (6th in the World: UK is 16th on the same scale). There are numerous other geo-political models that suggest an independendent Scotland is now inevitable.

It is important to understand the growth in support for Scottish Independence is not about economics, it is about how we modern Scots view ourselves and the Realm of Scotland which has more in common with the Social Democracies of Scandinavia than the out of control Neo-liberal, right wing, authoritarianism of Westminster.

The growing division is political in its nature, a response to an insular, self seeking and self congratulatory Westminster Parliament and its incestuous and corrupt relationship with the City of London at the expense of the rest of the UK.

Have a search for ‘Newsnet Scotland’ you could learn much to your advantage.

By: Rob_InTheCity Tue, 03 Jan 2012 13:59:32 +0000 Good analysis, as far as it goes. It makes no mention of Europe though, and outside of the context of European government, no assessment of national identity amongst the British is complete. The essential point of the union is that it was forged as a union of Kingdoms. In a constitutional monarchy the union can only be maintained by the active consent of its peoples. The English do not desire disunion; they want the Scottish people to be in or out, not both. Scottish independence requires Welsh independence; fobbing the Welsh off with an Assembly as Labour did, is insult enough.The ancient kingdom of Ulster comprises more than Northern Ireland. The Irish question, simply understand by most ordinary Britons is, “Are you still here? I thought you were going!” If the Scots want to forgo the Parliament of Westminster for an Ecosse region in Europe, you can be certain that the English we will not abide by the diminution of their nationality into a set of Eurocratic regions.

By: KyuuAL Tue, 03 Jan 2012 08:01:36 +0000 All this division talk probably stems from their separate soccer teams. Silly Brits.

By: matthewslyman Tue, 03 Jan 2012 07:13:59 +0000 @MarkRB: “If it were so then Westminster would not obsessively prevent us from getting our freedom, our Independence.” Nonsense. The reason we don’t want independence is because Britain has always been better, stronger, more prosperous and a greater force for good in the world than the mere sum of its parts. It’s a fact that Scotland and Northern Ireland receive way more than their “fair share” of British revenue (I’ve been told as much by people that I trust who come from these countries). Care to do any research before challenging Mr. Lloyd on this? Where are your figures?

@AlexZ83: Perhaps it’s a similar sentiment (based on a lop-sided view of history) that has caused Mel Gibson to embark on his propaganda campaign besmirching Britain’s reputation in the world. First, “Braveheart”, and we have the opinions of other persons on that film here: Historical_accuracy

Mel Gibson then brought us “The Patriot” – a film redefining patriotism, particularly the American sort; to mean [and this is the obvious sentimental conclusion], believing that British soldiers generally spent most of their time in the War of Independence burning churches down [complete with Americans they had locked inside] and otherwise hunting down and killing innocent American families, several hundred years ago; and therefore doing everything we can within the real world now to fight against that obvious injustice [largely a fiction, when its only basis in fact is that the British were deliberately forced by George Washington’s initially inferior forces into a campaign of modest pillage and “living off the land” by Washington’s planned retreat into the rural hinterlands – the results were as Washington intended, in that the people turned against the British for taking their food to avoid starvation], and to continue the fight nowadays to achieve secession and redress these wrongs against the modern inhabitants of Britain by paring all vestiges of the British Empire from England – even those who live happily as neighbours and kinsmen with them.

While I am a committed Christian, I tend to view “The Passion of the Christ” as being another episode from the same series. The general theme? Certain figures from history that we identify with, were persecuted, tortured and killed in the most horrifying fashion; and even if we shouldn’t be passionately ANGRY about it, we should at least do everything in our power to fight against the forces that caused those bad things to happen.

Can there be any more eloquent demonstration than Mel Gibson’s fictional works (which purport to be historical); of the general principle that wrath and vengeance against perceived injustices most often tend to create further injustices still?

The facts about the British Empire? It was brutal. It ruled over a commercial empire with an iron fist. But the alternatives were far worse. But for the British in the 1600s/ 1700s; the Americas (North, South and Central) might still be ruled in the most arbitrary and unconstitutional fashion by the absolute monarchs of Spain and France.

What about fighting for the good? Living a decent life? Fighting daily, to do the right thing, and to live as brothers with our distant cousins, including Scots who have forgotten their tartans and lost the art of the bagpipes, and who now call themselves Englishmen? Acting on what we know, rather than on the propaganda of one or another political party, or of some wealthy film-maker with an axe to grind?

By: AlexZ83 Tue, 03 Jan 2012 05:46:05 +0000 England literally destroyed millions of peoples from many nations and continents around the globe for the past 5 centuries. Now the chickens will come home to roost for England. I wish Scotland all the best in their quest for freedom from the English occupation. It is long overdue.

By: ValenF Tue, 03 Jan 2012 03:08:10 +0000 Let them have it, and the Welsh, and then put a barbed wire fence between us.

By: TerriCalhoun Mon, 02 Jan 2012 18:35:08 +0000 Bwahahahaha … ok… well, I guess I will be the voice of the Native Texan pounding her chest shouting “Secede!” Not that my voice matters (or the average British, Scottish or English voice, depending upon your self identification). It is about all we can muster anymore. One quick shout in between the Tsunami waves of bureaucratic BS and propagandist journalism trying to drown us with dis information. This is what I can say for a fact, and I learned it from my Dad: “When you are up to your eyeballs in alligators, it is hard to remember your initial objective was to drain the swamp.” If you can not get rid of the alligators, it is probably time to get out of the swamp. Just sayin…. :)

By: MarkRB Mon, 02 Jan 2012 16:09:18 +0000 I would like to note I doubt strongly one of your statements. You note “The English, aware that Scotland receives a higher proportion of public spending than do the regions of England”; this is mentioned again & again, yet where is the evidence? If it were so then Westminster would not obsessively prevent us from getting our freedom, our Independence. This did not even happen under Margaret Thatcher, reknowned as a non-sentimental politician. If we had been costing England money, we would have been ditched.
The Union was basically bought by agreeing to pay of the debts of the aristocrats who lost money on the Darien scheme. Now all we want is, finally, after hundreds of years of economic bondage, is a say in our own future. This we will achieve courtesy of the competence of our current government and the incompetence of the Westminster elitist coalition.
Freedom approaches