After looking through the posts it seems the English want independence from us. Give em a few years of So called Scottish politicians ruling em and they get all upset. Us Scots have had 300 years of this crap.
Anyway. Is it so wrong to want to determine things for oneself?
the stock answer is that Scotland wouldn't be able to do it. One post wondered how we'd be able to set up our own currency and Post office etc.
It is all there. It couldn't be easier. every department and service already exists and if Czech and Slovakia can do it then so can we.
Now the Question you put has various answers.
Financially, maybe not in the short term but in the long term probably yes. any change has upheaval but if the Baltic states can survive with no natural resources and lower exports and tourism then so can we.
Personally. What is a citizen without a sovereign nation? For too long decisions have been made by a parliament 400 miles away and mainly by parties with no representation in Scotland.
Independence can change that and pull us out of the rut that the UK is in. Let what is left of the UK go their own way.
2007-01-27 12:45:06
·
answer #1
·
answered by drakshug 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
I don't recall the exact figures, but in a recent poll more English (about 63%) wanted independence for Scotland than Scots did (about 56%). That could give you a clue as to who would be better off.
2007-01-27 12:25:58
·
answer #2
·
answered by Grington 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
i get fed up with hearing how much the Scots hate the English yet we have to subsidise the country. I have nothing against Scotland or the Scottish people but if you want to be independent then you should be allowed
2007-01-27 12:17:48
·
answer #3
·
answered by gina 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
'because of the English approach over the centuries many countries ought to opt to do agency with Scotland as adverse to England ' The Scots are British and were only as to blame because the English for colonisation, imperialism etc. Scots are only as to blame for Britain's movements over the years as the different member of the union. you're of direction very biased about this and to be straightforward you sound like you've been brainwashed through Hollywood. The Scottish are fearless heroes who choose only their freedom even as the English are all nasty, closet homosexuals who oppress all and sundry else, precise? I also strongly disagree with the 'actuality' that many countries ought to quite manage Scotland than England because England only has an undesirable lot more desirable to grant than Scotland. imagine about it, which marketplace ought to you quite promote to - one containing 5 million people or one containing fifty million? ought to you quite commerce with a rustic with a GDP drawing near $3 trillion? Or a rustic with a GDP of $one hundred forty billion? And what does Scotland extremely ought to grant to different countries? Salmond likes to bang on about Scotland's oil, yet genuinely Scotland has a tiny quantity of oil compared to significant manufacturers, genuinely a concepts less than the Norwegians Salmond likes to study the Scottish to. with the exception of, some supplies will inform you that production in Scottish oil fields is down about 18% as of very last 3 hundred and sixty 5 days. also, fairly BP and Westminster ought to both be compensated heavily for extremely identifying to purchase the exploration of Scottish waters? accepted, i extremely do imagine you're deluded once you assert many countries ought to quite commerce with Scotland than England, extraordinarily because it would not also be a contest, there are a tremendous many stuff England can grant different countries that Scotland only can't. Have an outstanding nighttime.
2016-10-16 04:54:25
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you really think so but consider the number of people who live there [population] compared with the total for the UK.
You would need your own currency, post office et c. they might not seem like a big deal but it takes a lot to set those things up.
I think it would be better to say that Scotland is the UK's Quebec.
2007-01-27 12:28:14
·
answer #5
·
answered by enirgo 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
Let the Scots become independant, let them try to stand on their own two feet - they would last as long as a drunk in Glasgow on a saturday night.
Good riddance - whinging lot cost us English a fortune and they keep clowns like Tony Bliar, Greaseball Taxgrabber Brown and that little cretin John Reid in power - Aargh!!!!
2007-01-27 22:24:11
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
I wish John Reid, Gordon Brown and Des Brown would F U C K off back to Scotland so we "England" can run our own country.
In a parliament that doesnt look like a LSD dolls house.
2007-01-27 12:15:37
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
2⤋
Bliar and his cronies don't care about anything but themselves. The day they sold One of our greatest symbols ( The Brittania ) we became divided. They don't want us all too all rally behind our National anthem and have pride. They want us divided and jealous of one another. It ties in with the voting system which keeps them in power. Evil baskets....Great Britain ? Nope England Scotland NI and Wales is what they want
2007-01-27 20:29:42
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
I thought Scotland was an independent free-standing country. Who's in control, England? Guess I don't know much about it :(
2007-01-27 12:31:56
·
answer #9
·
answered by Sick Puppy 7
·
0⤊
3⤋
no, you belong to us, by right of conquest heh heh :)
I think if you'd gained independance in the 1960's or 1970's that would be different, but now, I think it's too late...
Consider the implications, you'd have to take Gordon Brown back and let him tax you...not to mention John Reid!
2007-01-27 12:40:33
·
answer #10
·
answered by Our Man In Bananas 6
·
0⤊
1⤋