Scottish Independence May Be Coming Soon

[bryant.coleman]

15 days to go. The gap has narrowed so much that now everything will depend upon the turnout. If women, pensioners, urban voters.etc turn out in large numbers, then Scotland will remain a part of the United Kingdom. On the other hand, if large number of youngsters, men, highlanders.etc vote in the referendum, then the Union will lose.

[1714005945]

1714005945

[1714005945]

1714005945

[1714005945]

1714005945

[countryfree]

There will be a political solution, but the choice between the pound or the euro is a tough one. Who to trust, Westminster or Brussels (actually, Frankfurt)?

there's probably a few folk in Ireland and Greece that could give you an opinion on that  

It's not that easy, because we should expect Brussels to be quite neutral towards Scotland. It would be just another country joining the European Union. On the other hand, history has taught us that the Brits haven't always been nice with Scots. Westminster may try to do something nasty just to get Scotland in trouble. Like they say in the army, you hope for the best but you get ready for the worst.

[practicaldreamer]

the choice between the pound or the euro is a tough one. Who to trust, Westminster or Brussels (actually, Frankfurt)?

It won't matter - either option will mean that Scotland is not, in fact, independant.

How about the Scottish Pound, issued by the Central Bank of Scotland, and the cost/price of which is set via interest rates dictated by the very same bank. If the strength of the Scottish economy is all that the Yes campaign would have us believe, and the oil reserves forecasts are all correct etc, then Scotlands credit rating will be AAA and all will be well and good.

OK, there will be transaction fees when transacting between currencies (maybe the blockchain might be able to help out here - the technology is there Alex) - but it must be a price worth paying to achieve REAL independance surely ?

[johny08]

United Kingdom deserve to fall apart, because of their destructive and contraproductive influence on the EU.

Poor British people 

[Bonam]

I predict that Scotland remains effectively a part of the UK, regardless of the outcome of this vote.

[elite3000]

if scottish people want more power at the local level, thats fine but i think
 them leaving would leave both countries poorer

[bryant.coleman]

United Kingdom deserve to fall apart, because of their destructive and contraproductive influence on the EU.

An independent Scotland will be a part of the European Union. So any break-up will have minimal impact on the EU. But if they adopt Euro as the currency instead of the Pound Sterling, then it can significantly weaken the UKP. Also, the British Armed Forces will lose almost one-third of its regiments, including some of the elite forces.

[Balthazar]

They don't need unbacked Europonzi toilet paper, it's better to create own currency... They have enough natural resources to ensure that this currency will be stable.

[murraypaul]

United Kingdom deserve to fall apart, because of their destructive and contraproductive influence on the EU.

An independent Scotland will be a part of the European Union.

Really? You have a statement from the EU to that effect?
The Yes Scotland group say that they will negotiate their entry into the EU between the vote and actual independence, and that they expect to be accepted. They might be wrong.
They would also have to join on 'standard' terms, without the various opt-outs that the UK has.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/scottish-independence-eu-bid-extremely-difficult-says-jose-manuel-barroso-9131925.html

It would be "extremely difficult, if not impossible" for an independent Scotland to get the necessary approval from the member states for it to join the European Union (EU), the president of the European Commission has said.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11071043/Independent-Scotland-could-not-keep-pound-and-join-EU.html

Scotland must choose between independence and keeping the pound if it wants to be part of the European Union, one of the bloc's top officials has warned.
In a blow to the Yes campaign, Olli Rehn, vice president of the European Parliament and former commissioner for economic and monetary affairs, said keeping the pound without consent from Westminster "would simply not be possible" because EU membership requires countries to have access to an independent central bank.
[...]
"As to the question whether 'sterlingisation' were compatible with EU membership, the answer is that this would simply not be possible since that would obviously imply a situation where the candidate country concerned would not have a monetary authority of its own and thus no necessary instruments of the EMU," he wrote.

[cryptofan5]

So they will vote No, I guess.

[countryfree]

United Kingdom deserve to fall apart, because of their destructive and contraproductive influence on the EU.

An independent Scotland will be a part of the European Union.

Really? You have a statement from the EU to that effect?
The Yes Scotland group say that they will negotiate their entry into the EU between the vote and actual independence, and that they expect to be accepted. They might be wrong.
They would also have to join on 'standard' terms, without the various opt-outs that the UK has.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/scottish-independence-eu-bid-extremely-difficult-says-jose-manuel-barroso-9131925.html

It would be "extremely difficult, if not impossible" for an independent Scotland to get the necessary approval from the member states for it to join the European Union (EU), the president of the European Commission has said.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11071043/Independent-Scotland-could-not-keep-pound-and-join-EU.html

Scotland must choose between independence and keeping the pound if it wants to be part of the European Union, one of the bloc's top officials has warned.
In a blow to the Yes campaign, Olli Rehn, vice president of the European Parliament and former commissioner for economic and monetary affairs, said keeping the pound without consent from Westminster "would simply not be possible" because EU membership requires countries to have access to an independent central bank.
[...]
"As to the question whether 'sterlingisation' were compatible with EU membership, the answer is that this would simply not be possible since that would obviously imply a situation where the candidate country concerned would not have a monetary authority of its own and thus no necessary instruments of the EMU," he wrote.

Political problems ask for political solutions, and there will be plenty. An independent Scotland could not join the EU right away and that is normal. This is a process which takes time, and it's a well-known fact that to prevent Catalonia from standing up, Spain will do all it can to block Scotland from joining but there are other options.

Look at Norway or Switzerland. Those two are not in the EU, but they enjoy trade agreements with it. That's because besides the EU, there are the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) and the European Economic Area (EEA) which Scotland could join fast.

the choice between the pound or the euro is a tough one. Who to trust, Westminster or Brussels (actually, Frankfurt)?

How about the Scottish Pound, issued by the Central Bank of Scotland, and the cost/price of which is set via interest rates dictated by the very same bank. If the strength of the Scottish economy is all that the Yes campaign would have us believe, and the oil reserves forecasts are all correct etc, then Scotlands credit rating will be AAA and all will be well and good.

I'm not sure the world needs another currency, nor that Scotland would benefit from having its own. The one thing I know for sure is that it would not be easy to create one. And it would years, or more probably decades, before they could get an AAA rating. Like a new company starting business, bankers need time to trust it.

[profitofthegods]

15 days to go. The gap has narrowed so much that now everything will depend upon the turnout. If women, pensioners, urban voters.etc turn out in large numbers, then Scotland will remain a part of the United Kingdom. On the other hand, if large number of youngsters, men, highlanders.etc vote in the referendum, then the Union will lose.

I think this is right - I think Scotland may become independent despite a majority of people not wanting it just because motivating people to get out and vote for the status quo is harder than motivating people to get out and vote for something new and exciting. Having said that, older people are normally more likely to vote, so if they are more in favour of staying in the UK that may cancel out that effect or even have a bigger impact.

[bryant.coleman]

I think this is right - I think Scotland may become independent despite a majority of people not wanting it just because motivating people to get out and vote for the status quo is harder than motivating people to get out and vote for something new and exciting. Having said that, older people are normally more likely to vote, so if they are more in favour of staying in the UK that may cancel out that effect or even have a bigger impact.

The older people are more likely to vote. But at least in this election, the elderly age group lacks enthusiasm are are in general indifferent to the whole process. That said, a lot will depend upon the mobilization efforts. Considering the fact that almost 70% of the elderly are expected to vote NO, I think the Better Together camp will organize special mobilization for them.

[Balthazar]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CIQ8VVn8AJA

Craig Murray, former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan, tells us why he is YES and reveals some horrendous truths about the UK/Westminster establishment.

[Sindelar1938]

Good on the Scots if that's what they really want
The irony is that the Union of 1707 happened because of economic stagnation and uncertainty, not unlike today

[Nemo1024]

It's still 50/50 chances if this will happen or not.
I think that to much emotions is involved here and no so much reasons.
If Scotland will have to apply to join EU and start their own currency, than independence will be no so good choice for them.
It will be really interesting to see what happens

Why would they need to do so?
Norway refused to join EU twice and is using it's own krone. Norway and Scotland have much in common both when it comes to fjords and gas/oil reserves. Neither need EU. EFTA, at most, would suffice.

[bryant.coleman]

Norway refused to join EU twice and is using it's own krone. Norway and Scotland have much in common both when it comes to fjords and gas/oil reserves. Neither need EU. EFTA, at most, would suffice.

In case of the Scots voting for independence, I don't think that the UK will cede control of the North Sea oil and gas fields. Almost all of these fields are currently being operated by British firms and the loss of these can result in complete economic ruin for England. The marine boundary between England and Scotland is not clearly defined. So I believe that in case of an independent Scotland, the UK will use force and seize all the major fields.

[Balthazar]

Norway refused to join EU twice and is using it's own krone. Norway and Scotland have much in common both when it comes to fjords and gas/oil reserves. Neither need EU. EFTA, at most, would suffice.

In case of the Scots voting for independence, I don't think that the UK will cede control of the North Sea oil and gas fields. Almost all of these fields are currently being operated by British firms and the loss of these can result in complete economic ruin for England. The marine boundary between England and Scotland is not clearly defined. So I believe that in case of an independent Scotland, the UK will use force and seize all the major fields.

That would be a problem because a major part of fleet is located in scottish waters.

[countryfree]

Norway refused to join EU twice and is using it's own krone. Norway and Scotland have much in common both when it comes to fjords and gas/oil reserves. Neither need EU. EFTA, at most, would suffice.

In case of the Scots voting for independence, I don't think that the UK will cede control of the North Sea oil and gas fields. Almost all of these fields are currently being operated by British firms and the loss of these can result in complete economic ruin for England. The marine boundary between England and Scotland is not clearly defined. So I believe that in case of an independent Scotland, the UK will use force and seize all the major fields.

It would be political suicide. We're in the XXI° century. The Brits can't use force against the Scots anymore. It's a political issue asking for a political solution, and there's no force needed as the fields, if in Scottish waters, generate an income which goes straight into British pockets. It's the Scots who may have to use force to get that income to fall into their hands, and that will take years.

[bryant.coleman]

It's a political issue asking for a political solution, and there's no force needed as the fields, if in Scottish waters, generate an income which goes straight into British pockets. It's the Scots who may have to use force to get that income to fall into their hands, and that will take years.

IF Scotland becomes an independent country, and IF these fields still fall within the Scottish borders, then the royalty payments will go to Scotland. Any exception to this is not going to happen. Can you imagine a situation in which England asking for royalty payments from fields in Norway, which are being operated by British firms?