What effect would scottish independence have on the UK tree industry?

[Mull]

It appears to be working. Unemployment is falling.

 

 

Ok, it looked like you were saying cutting jobs helps unemployment to decline!!

But we are dragging this even further off subject I suppose.

[wrsni]

............ that would be selfish as it would ruin millions of lives just for my own satisfaction.

 

Well Salmond is quite happy to try it!

[woody3]

was this no meant to be about the effect on the tree industry? seems to be just a political argument now.

 

the land will still be owned by the crown administered by westminster

[woody3]

 

We have plenty oil to last decades which will enable us to have an oil fund like other countries.

 

yes the uk has plenty of oil, scotland has none:001_rolleyes:

 

and its not an independence vote:confused1:

[ArthurBottlesworth]

Lets remember tory gov't in 80's spent 85% of urban renewal budget in London

Nice for London but

Not much left over for the rest of the country

 

Norway has £90,000 IN THE BANK. For every member of the country because they didn't squander north sea oil

 

Is europe really going to tell scotland to bugger off? Or is Dave and his mates Just bullying ?

 

And rule is you never give in to a bully

[daltontrees]

I hope not Steve as I order a fair bit from the sponsors south of the border as well.

Deans Whiskey thread may be under threat!!!

Think I will sit the rest of this thread out and liberate my imagination.

 

I think the points you made for independence were valid, the only criticism you got that they were pie in the sky, which is not a rational argument only caremongering. But Dean deosn't get to vote anyway and doesn't have to live with the direct consequences, just the indirect ones.

[eggsarascal]

I think the points you made for independence were valid, the only criticism you got that they were pie in the sky, which is not a rational argument only caremongering. But Dean deosn't get to vote anyway and doesn't have to live with the direct consequences, just the indirect ones.

 

We will all live with the consequences. Won't we? We won't be a United Kingdom anymore. WE! Are better off together.

 

United we stand devided we fall!

[Dean Lofthouse]

You only have a population of 5.5 million, you rely heavily on oil for income.

 

The points raised were totally invalid, because you cannot say how much in factual terms, was your proportion of money spent in England or how much of your money was spent on you and your infrastructure, benefit system, health care etc etc.

 

Rather than speculate how much of your wealth we have squandered on us, the royal family, the M25 and not you, give us some figures

 

Income generated by Scotland minus total expenditure on Scotland

[woodrich]

Point is all the SNP forecasts on future spending are based on the current situation, they haven't factored in the extra cost of building a whole state. It will bankrupt the country.

 

I almost want independence just so that I can say "I told you" in 10 years time, but that would be selfish as it would ruin millions of lives just for my own satisfaction.

 

I might have dreamt this.

But isn't Scotland part of the UK because centuries ago one of your Kings wanted an Empire like England so he went after Portugal or something?

Then when he ran out of money we struck a deal.

I'm sure it was a TV program about Britain.

 

Sent from my GT-S5839i using Arbtalk mobile app

[daltontrees]

It eems literally impossible to get an objective set of figures on this. People have been discussing an arguing about it for decades. If you have definitive figures adn a source reference I would be pleased to have a look.

 

But really what I meant was that the points in favour of independence were valid and, whereas there are no doubt many against independence that are just as valid, saying hte guy's points are invalid is not a coherent argument.

 

And more importantly still, if scotland gets independence then no amout of apportioning of curent revenues and assets is going to predicate what happens in the future because scotland will have to reinvent itself as a grown-up, non-complaining country that maximises resources, exploits markets, reins in expenditure and makes the most of everything. It's not governments that do that, it's people. What the SNP says it will do with and for Scotland is virtually irrelevant, we should assume that they can and will all be papped out and we start again. Forgetting the past and taking forward no preconceptions about past ways of doing and looking at things.

 

Taxes will probably be higher, but the quality of life (not to be confused with the standard of living) should be better.

 

As a matter of curiosity (honestly, I can't be bothered with arguments), if it could demonstrated that scotland is putting in much less than it is taking out, would that not be a case for chucking scotland out of the UK? Why keep it if it is a deadweight? Out of sympathy? Out of duty or a sense of history?