Print Story So, Scottish Independence is in the news again...
By codemonkey uk (Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 09:02:07 AM EST) (all tags)

"However, both men will know that there can only be one winner."

So, given the two outcomes, who are the winners and losers?

Economically/financially, I think England comes out richer without Scotland, and Scotland becomes poorer. But I don't claim any expertise on that.

Politically, I'd say Conservatives "win" in England if Scotland votes for independent, but if Scotland stay in the United Kingdom, that would weaken (destroy!) the SNP, and my impression is that ex-SNP voters would mostly move to Labour. But then, post independence, do the SNP come out on top, as the deliverers of freedom from the English overloards, or do they evaporate with their single issue done and dusted?


Update [2012-10-15 14:23:52 by codemonkey uk]: I almost forgot the most important question: What happens to the Union Jack if Scotland leaves the Union‽

< Taking Stock | LHuSi drinks >
So, Scottish Independence is in the news again... | 12 comments (12 topical, 0 hidden)
Finances by Herring (4.00 / 3) #1 Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 09:18:10 AM EST
Tricky one. Who owns the oil? How do you split up assets like the military? Does Scotland get to keep the nukes? What about the Krankies?

In the unlikely event that the Scots did vote for independence, the negotiations could take decades.

You can't inspire people with facts
- Small Gods

Answers... by codemonkey uk (2.00 / 0) #2 Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 09:29:07 AM EST
> Who owns the oil?

I think most of it is sitting on costal teratory that's linked to Shetland, isn't it? So the question then becomes, who gets them? Do they get their own vote, to be English or Scottish?

> How do you split up assets like the military?

It seems obvious to me that England keeps them. Probably with some kind of agreement that in exchange for keeping the bases on Scottish soil England continues to provide defensive support of Scotland from attacking, whoever it is that would attack Scotland without hitting England first. Somewhat absurd.

> Does Scotland get to keep the nukes?

Yeah, right. That'll happen. Jeez. :P

--- Thad ---
Almost as Smart As you.

[ Parent ]
Logicially by Herring (4.00 / 3) #4 Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 10:36:31 AM EST
it makes sense for one country to have both nuclear weapons and the Krankies. It provides an extra level of deterrent to any would-be aggressor.

You can't inspire people with facts
- Small Gods

[ Parent ]
Just mention by jump the ladder (4.00 / 3) #3 Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 09:34:18 AM EST
That the Scots get to keep Royal Bank Of Scotland and HBOS as they are indigenous companies if they get to keep the oil...

Would an independent Scotland by Herring (4.00 / 2) #5 Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 10:50:28 AM EST
have its own professional football team?

You can't inspire people with facts
- Small Gods

[ Parent ]
Yes by jump the ladder (2.00 / 0) #6 Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 11:26:18 AM EST
The Scots would have to cheer on England in the World Cup.

[ Parent ]
While you're there by Breaker (4.00 / 0) #13 Wed Oct 17, 2012 at 03:48:08 AM EST
They can keep Gordon "Texture Like Debt" Brown, too.

[ Parent ]
In regards to the Union Jack by Captain Tenille (4.00 / 1) #7 Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 12:41:13 PM EST
There might be a way to keep St. Andrew's Cross on the Union Jack via Berwick-upon-Tweed. It used to be part of Scotland, after all, and seems to enjoy a sort of weird status still (although not as weird as it used to). 


/* You are not expected to understand this. */

My uncles Tom & John by johnny (4.00 / 1) #8 Mon Oct 15, 2012 at 11:10:11 PM EST
were they still on this earth would be cheering on the Scottish independents. Uncle Tom married an Irish girl & although he became a US citizen, his Scottish accent became ever thicker with each passing year & he used to make family get-togethers a tedious thing indeed with going on about how horrible John Bull was and how the Scots more than anything needed to break free. This was in the 60's and 70's.

Uncle John, on the other hand, although he considered himself a Scots patriot (lived 40+ years in the USA on a green card; never became a U.S. citizen) was more interested in U.S. politics than British, and furthermore was more concerned with golf, bowling, country music & opera than politics (although he was a union steward and interested in union politics). I'm sure he would have voted for Scottish independence on the theory of "why not! let's see what happens!"

My mother married a Yank and became a U.S. citizen when I was 7 years old.  She's pretty far gone into Alzheimer's these days, but I'll ask her what she thinks of Scottish independence. I expect it's something along the lines of "och, pack of damn fools. They've no got aught better to do? Put on the radio, John. Find us some Mendlesohn."

Her mother, my grandmother, Sarah McFall nee Connor, would have dismissed the whole concept out of hand. She was a royalist, quite proud of her jubilee commemorative plates. She was a highlander, but a Catholic. Which is a good part of the reason that the whole lot of 'em -- first my mother, Margaret, then her brothers & sisters Tom, John, Ellen and Rita left Scotland for the greener pastures of New Jersey during the first few years after what Basil Fawlty would call "the whahr". 

Sarah followed them at last in 1956, when I was four years old. Going to meet her on the Queen Mary as she sailed into New York Harbor is one of my earliest memories.

Scotland is to me such a mystical place. As a Scottish American of course I'm fascinated by it. But I've never been there. My mother has only been back once, after 25 years & 7 kids in the States; her quaint home town had become a slum, but several of her old friends recognized her as she walked down the street. My brother Pete was in Scotland last month on a golfing excursion. He made a little detour to visit the street where my mother grew up. It was full of junkies.

I myself think the idea of Scottish independence is silly. Don't we have better things to do? I mean, I have three children who are as much Cherokee, DNA-wise, as many a Scot is Scottish. And you can believe that the Cherokee were as fucked-over by the Americans (many of whom were Scottish, actually) as the Scottish were  fucked over by the English. But you don't see the Cherokee agitating for independence. Why? because it's stupid. Sure they're a "sovereign nation", whatever that means, but everybody accepts that as a fig leaf.

Oh well, we'll see.

She has effectively checked out. She's an un-person of her own making. So it falls to me.--ad hoc (in the hole)

One of my friends is a Scot by jimgon (2.00 / 0) #9 Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 06:31:35 AM EST
He went back for a visit  last year and summed it up as depressing.  He's also now a US Citizen.  His parents have been here for something like twenty years, but never become citizens.

Technician - "We can't even get decent physical health care. Mental health is like witchcraft here."
[ Parent ]
It's just a game by jimgon (4.00 / 1) #10 Tue Oct 16, 2012 at 06:33:02 AM EST
The Scots don't actually want independence.  They really do get more than they give in the current arrangement.  They aren't stupid, but just playing politics.

Technician - "We can't even get decent physical health care. Mental health is like witchcraft here."
If the Scots vote to stay in the Union by Breaker (4.00 / 1) #12 Wed Oct 17, 2012 at 03:46:47 AM EST
Can the English have a referendum to kick them out? 

While we're there in the voting booths, might as well chuck in a referendum on EU membership.  In these straightened times, buy a referendum, get one free.  Every little helps.

So, Scottish Independence is in the news again... | 12 comments (12 topical, 0 hidden)