2006-11-26 05:53:00 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
If Scotland were independent the United Kingdom would cease to exist. However I think the country could survive if certain conditions were in place but there is no hurry, there will be a time when it is right and it is not now, Europe would have to be more united!
I do like the pathetic way English people try to wind us up, if you are not bothered by us why do you keep going on and on about us! We are only a small wee country next to your big oh so powerful one. The reality is you know nothing about us but we know everything about you. And if you haven't noticed we have already invaded you and are taking over! Fools
2006-11-26 08:32:02 · answer #1 · answered by WeirdNA 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The question is irrelevant to England but very important to Scotland.
Scotland is a small country with less than 5million population and decreasing in a union with England a country of in excess of 50 million.
For too long Scotland has been tolerated and been given too big a voice in the affairs and a share of the subsidies of the UK, it is the English who should complain.
The oil industry is owned by multinationals, the whiskey industry is owned by the Japs etc.
Scottish Power will soon be owned by the French.
The Bank of Scotland owned by the Germans.
The economy is very small.
The union of England, Wales and N. Ireland will survive and prosper without Scotland.
I am a Scot but have lived and worked in England all my life with an Irish wife we both appreciate the UK in all of its culture and opportunity.
2006-11-26 22:01:26 · answer #2 · answered by ian d 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Scotland should have had Independence a long time ago, when the north sea oil was discovered, all the revenue from it was sent to the so called central government for distribution and use for all U K , only 1% was sent back to Scotland. But people forget that this oil was found inside Scottish and International waters, so why did we get so little? because we did not have a Parliament to argue the point for us / do you think I could be bitter on some issues.....Yes.... but only in Politics, I'm a good guy at hart,I just don't like to see people being treated unfairly.
2006-11-26 06:24:04 · answer #3 · answered by El Lobo 4 · 1⤊ 3⤋
particularly, no. They acquire a great style of healthcare investment from England/different bits of the united kingdom. And why might it have its defence payed by making use of the united kingdom? It does no longer. the united kingdom might in basic terms guard Wales, N.eire and England. it does no longer be defended. additionally, it does no longer be important and consequently does no longer deal as lots or be taken as heavily in the financial markets, being rather small without history of financial potential. and additionally- North Sea Oils are particularly worldwide waters, and are not controlled entirely by making use of Scotland. i'm guessing Salmond is accustomed to this? It potential that the oil could no longer assist you. i'm asserting this with relatives in Scotland, dwelling in England, and having lived in each u . s . a . in the united kingdom different than for N.eire, besides as my husband working in the Scottish-English Independence for the united kingdom government (he has to stay in London lots for that regrettably). So i think of i'm no longer too biased, and that i'm quite constructive my information are at once.
2016-12-13 14:36:07 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Scotland IS independent from England, but remains part of the UK.
2006-11-26 06:00:44 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Scotlands just a name of an english county.
If you had independence , who would pay the welfare benefits of most of your population.
Right now, english taxpayers keep you afloat,the only industry you have is skanking gullible japs and americans into buying lochness monster gift wrapped toffee.
Be serious,scottish independence is something the otherwise unemployed of the SNP spout to justify their jobs
och aye!
2006-11-26 06:48:42 · answer #6 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It would be Great ..but . could you imagine - People like Tommy Sheridan running one of the richest countries in the World... maybe we would have free sunbed sessions though ..as we have so much rain here.. Scottish Parliament is a total waste of tax payers money.first of all it cost half a Bi££ion to build a nice fancy building to house all ego mad M.S.P.'s then they start .making down right stupid laws - latest being - you have to be over 18 to buy cigarettes..what next ? will you have to be over 21 to buy Irn Bru ? Scotland needs to be kept in check by London - as it is in danger of going totally power crazy..
2006-11-26 11:17:07 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't see a problem with how things are now, but I'm not a Scot. The problem is with Scotland, is that there are too few tax payers. On the other hand, they do have the oil...but how long will that last for??
2006-11-26 06:22:38 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
England has a Scottish prime minister (he might have a silly accent, but he's from Edinburgh), our next prime minister is a Scot. The leader of the opposition is a Cameron. The head of the Liberal party is a Scot. Even the loonies have got George Galloway.
Please go, and take them all with you.
(PS The oil belongs to Shetland - don't assume they want to be part of Scotland!)
2006-11-26 05:59:11 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
aren't they already independent i mean they have their own Parliament and make decisions for Scotland so personally i would say i think that Scotland and wales should be independent although it will never happen because England would end up broke without all the revenues that they take from both countries
2006-11-26 06:06:35 · answer #10 · answered by leanne 3 · 1⤊ 3⤋