What would have been so complicated about having two questions on the ballot?

I figure DC opposed devo max on the ballot because he thought it would put the SNP in a tougher position of only being able to offer to the most radical of choices.

Cameroon seems to have been thoroughly outmaneuvered on this. He gave up 2013. He gave up the wording. He gave up on 16-17 year olds. SNP might actually pull this off.

@ Octavious:

Your first statement trivialises democracy. And the idea that people can more or less deserve democracy seems elitist and absurd. Democracy isn't given it is won.

"Democracy isn't given it is won."

But if they don't tolerate being the minority from time to time then how are they being good democratic citizens?

@ Kofi

"Your first statement trivialises democracy"

No it doesn't. What makes you think it does?

"Democracy isn't given it is won."

When was the last time you won democracy? It was given to me, and most of the people I know. Our forefathers may have won democracy, but we have largely had it served up on a plate.

The Scots can stay very well connected with England and still have their official independence. As long as both sides are fair about dividing things up and not nasty about it, I don't see a problem. Kind of like a divorce with kids and joint assets....

Scotland is getting a divorce without a checking account (currency).

Also it seems that feelings are already becoming embittered, at least within Scotland itself. JK Rowling is being roughed up by the Yes side.

Non-nasty divorces do exist, but in the same way that tenured philosophy professorships exist. They're real, but extremely rare.

Scotland will depend entirely on the goodwill of the rUK to prevent economic calamity. And why would Super England be feeling generous after it was just told to bugger off?

The yes side has always contained an unpleasant element, but it is rather small and shouldn't be allowed to detract from the serious issues

Certainly England has been economically integrated with Scotland these past 300 years that a Scottish collapse would not be in England's interests, especially if the sole motivation for letting that happen is spite.

I imagine it'd be a lot like Montenegro or Slovakia. A lot of teeth gnashing at first but soon forgotten.

Well, the Bank of England has been clear it will not be a lender of last resort, and all the major parties support that policy.

If there is to a be a reversal on that, then it'll have to come with major concessions by the Scots. Keeping Trident would be a given. Who knows what else? The concessions necessary to keep Scotland from tanking economically could end up being almost indistinguishable from devo-max.


It's because Scottish independence looks so monumentally stupid that I can't in the end believe they're actually gonna do it. The problems are plain as day. The problem with sterling. The problem with EU re-application. The list goes on. How so immature a political organization as the SNP got to be the player it is is astounding.

@ Invictus, if you can name one thing that is stupid about indy instead of saying there are many stupid things I'll concede my position.

@Octavious, you said "When was the last time you won democracy? It was given to me, and most of the people I know. Our forefathers may have won democracy, but we have largely had it served up on a plate."

Possibly you underestimate your own role in society, or perhaps you are easily led? It may be served up on a plate but to those who think so it is likely they are free-riding on political people's good will. For example, people who see the world in terms of markets and societies in terms of consumptions patterns rationalise the world differently. For them it's all fair game and the idea of a natural competition lets them off the hook in terms of their own personal morality. They believe good=natural and 'free markets' are natural. What they don't understand is that being political is also natural, this comes when you self-determine, and people who self determine will agree with each other and agree to regulate market forces (the combined self-interests of capitalists). Our societies are built on the back of political people - they are the ones creating democracy everyday by disagreeing with the interests of the elites

Our democracy is founded upon the belief that opinion can be simply led, and largely it is. Not at the moment in Scotland though:
"So the choice is not necessarily about independence, per se. It’s between being an active citizen and a passive one. It’s between having an opinion that will be heeded and having one that’s been taken for granted all along. It’s between casting a vote that matters and a vote that may as well never have been cast. The “silent majority” that politicians love so much, could turn out, in Scotland, to have dwindled away."
My favourite thing so far in the indy ref, "it has stopped being about nationalism and has started being about democracy"
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/05/independence-referendum-debate-intoxicated-scotland

You guys are behind the times, the discussion is about democracy. And as we all know democracy comes before economics in terms of the most important issues. if it didn't we wouldn't be having this discussion.

The three parties could easily be bluffing. For the life of me I don't see why an independent Scotland couldn't keep the pound and work just fine. That seems like a scare tactic to get people to vote no. This is not the 1960s the fetishization of the sterling by the No campaign makes no economic sense.

I frankly don't see EU reapplication to be a bad thing. Perhaps all the UKIPers will flock to Scotland, though.

There are times when you realise that you are so far removed from someone else's views that there is really no point in taking the discussion further. This is one of them.

That's a remarkable collection of ideas you have there.

@ Putin

No one has said Scotland can't use the pound. Just that control would be solely with the UK (much like those nations around the world that use the dollar). It could be that Scotland can get on fine with such system, but it seems a poorer plan than what they currently have.

There is no reason Scotland can't develope an entirely independent currency. Expensive, but doable

I thought they were suggesting that Scotland wouldn't have control over taxing and spending if they had a currency union with the pound.

There's no problem with them keeping the pound in the literal sense. No one can stop them calling it the "pound" and pegging it to sterling.

The problem is that the Bank of England will not be the lender of last resort to Scottish banks. Banks don't like that kind of uncertainty. They will leave. London's not that far. Banking is a huge part of Scotland's economy, and even if it weren't so big that sort of capital flight is disastrous. And then there's the whole issue of Salmond repudiating debt and the problems that could cause Scotland in the bond market, which would force Scotland to more or less immediately balance its budget through slashing social programs and/or raising taxes to the extent that Scotland is entirely uncompetitive with England.

EU reapplication would be a bad thing if you lived in Scotland. It could mean Scots losing all the benefits of EU citizenship for years. It certainly means Scotland gets in with a worse deal than it has now as part of the United Kingdom. Countries like Spain with secessionist movements of their own have ever incentive to make re-admittance as difficult as possible for Scotland. It could easily be less bad that I think, but it's certainly not something that can be dismissed the way you do.


I think that should satify Kofi1066.

"And as we all know democracy comes before economics in terms of the most important issues."

If that were true the communists wouldn't still run China.

@ Invictus, do Chinese citizens disagree with their government? No. My point is that where there is no democracy or democracy is in decline then economics is prioritised as the most important issue.

If you were aware of the debate in Scotland and how it has changed from issue to issue you might understand how the elite discussion is different to the public discussion and we are currently functioning publically like a democracy can.

Oh, I see. You're just insane.

@ Invictus

You mention a shared currency will be a problem and Scotland will have problems entering the EU. I'll quickly refute them. Now you won't like the answer but it is what was said to me when I was at a round table discussion at the Edinburgh politics festival where 4 of the UK's leading economists were discussing your points - your exact points. Everything they said they prefaced with politics leads to decisions that are not economically rational, and so what we say here will depend upon political will and political settlement after the vote. I do agree that some of what you raise is valid, but currency union is not Scotlands preferred option, although publically that is the SNP's preferred option. The real 'plan B' is for there to be a Scottish currency. The talk of a shared currency is merely to catch as many voters as possible.

The EU. The UK will have a referendum in 2018 to leave the EU. Independence is Scotlands best chance to stay as a member.

@ Octavious, have you never read Plato or Aristotle?

@ Invictus

"Oh, I see. You're just insane."

Try to deal with the substance of my points. If you're an economist - and you speak like one - you might have trouble with anything that diverges from the norm. But I'll say goodnight. Goodnight.

That's not refuting my points on the currency. That's literally wishful thinking.

As for the EU, it dodges my point. The Commission has said Scotland needs to reapply. So it will be out of the EU for years and in all likelihood get a worse deal than it has now. Also, there will be no referendum if Labour wins, which it almost certainly will.

Shouldn't conservatives support not having a lender of last resort? Wouldn't that force Scotland to not take undue risks? And ultimately can't they go to the market or ask the IMF anyway?

"It could mean Scots losing all the benefits of EU citizenship for years."

I'm sorry this is confusing to me. For years we have been inundated with anti-EU tirades claiming the EU is good for nothing from the very people opposing independence. Now all of a sudden Scotland would lose a litany of 'benefits'?

"Also, there will be no referendum if Labour wins, which it almost certainly will."

Eh? I'm not so confident. The polls are very close and Miliband is awful.

"Shouldn't conservatives support not having a lender of last resort? Wouldn't that force Scotland to not take undue risks? And ultimately can't they go to the market or ask the IMF anyway?"

Whatever the merits of such forced budget discipline, the economic disruption is a serious problem. As for the IMF, that's humiliating and, as you must know, comes with all sorts of conditions states are loathe to take of if they don't absolutely have to.

It doesn't matter what I think, this is what will happen. And the lefty SNP is just lying to people saying it won't. Irony of ironies, voting to escape Tory rule forever will force the Scots to live under the most Thatcherite system imaginable.


"I'm sorry this is confusing to me. For years we have been inundated with anti-EU tirades claiming the EU is good for nothing from the very people opposing independence. Now all of a sudden Scotland would lose a litany of 'benefits'?"

Again, it doesn't matter who's saying it. It's true. If Scotland is leaving the UK to stay in the EU, then they're going something foolish. See the points I made above.

"The polls are very close and Miliband is awful."

Not close enough. But I suppose you're right. It's somewhat silly to make general election predictions before this constitutional crisis is resolved. Or, in the event of Yes, enters a new iteration.

"the economic disruption is a serious problem."

Banks are going to make sure the disruption is minimized. They aren't going to do anything drastic to alarm people and get people to withdraw. There is an 18 month window following any vote for independence in which these financial issues can be sorted out. This isn't like Indian partition or something. Plus, re-domiciling in London would cost the banks a lot of money.

"As for the IMF, that's humiliating and, as you must know, comes with all sorts of conditions states are loathe to take of if they don't absolutely have to. "

No less humiliating or conditional than a liquidity rescue from the Bank of England.

"It doesn't matter what I think, this is what will happen. "

Dude, you are not a seer. Why do you insist you know the future?

"And the lefty SNP is just lying to people saying it won't. Irony of ironies, voting to escape Tory rule forever will force the Scots to live under the most Thatcherite system imaginable."

At most, it would force the Scots live under a brief transition period in which they do have full fiscal flexibility. It will not last forever.

"Again, it doesn't matter who's saying it. It's true. If Scotland is leaving the UK to stay in the EU, then they're going something foolish. See the points I made above."

Spain doesn't have anything to fear from Scotland because the independence was done legally and with consent of the parent state. That's not the case with Catalonia. They didn't raise much of a fuss with Croatia or Slovenia, and that's a much worse precedent from the Spanish POV due to the illegality of the dubious circumstances of their independence.

*do not have full flexibility.

Although when I last joined this discussion the big man Invictus rejected my points and maintained a detached technocratic discussion of the economy - I thought you actually like to tune in a bit more. So I give you this: http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/09/independence-scottish-mind-has-shown-failure-british-nationalism