• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Why it doesn't make sense for Scotland to separate

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
2,210
Points
1,060
Sounds good in theory, but the costs make one 'teary' :)

Lawrie McFarlane: Why it doesn't make sense for Scotland to separate​

So it appears Scotland could be headed for a second referendum on leaving the U.K. The “leave” parties gained a supermajority in last weekend’s national elections, meaning they have the numbers to request a referendum if they choose.

Still, on the broader question, does separation make sense? I have to say no, much as the emotional side of me says yes.

Scotland’s economy is nowhere near as diversified as England’s. Take away Scotch whisky and North Sea oil, and what do you have left? Fish, textiles and timber. Those do not a thriving economy make.

Then there is the debt issue. On separation, Westminster would certainly demand that Scotland shoulder her share.

The national debt stands at $3.1 trillion. On a straight population basis, Scotland’s share would be around $350 billion. How would the bond rating companies react to that?

Then you have the reality of an aging population which will put health care and well being above any matter of national pride. Old folks vote with their pension books.

However, the real problem with banging the nationalist drum is that it provides Scotland’s politicians with a convenient means of ducking far more urgent issues.

Alcohol consumption is 20 per cent higher than in England. Obesity is out of control. Heart attack death rates are the second highest in Europe. Life expectancy lags two to three years behind England’s.

 

Weinie

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
769
Points
1,010
Sounds good in theory, but the costs make one 'teary' :)

Lawrie McFarlane: Why it doesn't make sense for Scotland to separate​



Alcohol consumption is 20 per cent higher than in England. Obesity is out of control. Heart attack death rates are the second highest in Europe. Life expectancy lags two to three years behind England’s.

So now I have a genetic reason to explain my alcohol consumption. Wooooooooohooooooooo.
 

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
350
Points
880
Sounds good in theory, but the costs make one 'teary' :)

Lawrie McFarlane: Why it doesn't make sense for Scotland to separate​

So it appears Scotland could be headed for a second referendum on leaving the U.K. The “leave” parties gained a supermajority in last weekend’s national elections, meaning they have the numbers to request a referendum if they choose.

Still, on the broader question, does separation make sense? I have to say no, much as the emotional side of me says yes.

Scotland’s economy is nowhere near as diversified as England’s. Take away Scotch whisky and North Sea oil, and what do you have left? Fish, textiles and timber. Those do not a thriving economy make.

Then there is the debt issue. On separation, Westminster would certainly demand that Scotland shoulder her share.

The national debt stands at $3.1 trillion. On a straight population basis, Scotland’s share would be around $350 billion. How would the bond rating companies react to that?

Then you have the reality of an aging population which will put health care and well being above any matter of national pride. Old folks vote with their pension books.

However, the real problem with banging the nationalist drum is that it provides Scotland’s politicians with a convenient means of ducking far more urgent issues.

Alcohol consumption is 20 per cent higher than in England. Obesity is out of control. Heart attack death rates are the second highest in Europe. Life expectancy lags two to three years behind England’s.

There are always the economic reasons for not doing something, and then the emotional appeal.

But for the UK, they had this same issue and they chose to leave the EU on what was largely a emotional appeal of they were better off alone. While it has been muddled by the pandemic, there is evidence that there have been significant border issues regarding trade and duties, which leads credence to the case that it would have been better economically for the UK to stay in the EU.

So in terms of whether a country should leave or not should not be based on economic reasons solely, beyond the point of can they survive if they went it alone. If they do well enough then it should be a decision of whether they want self determination or not. The rest will sort itself out.

And yes, this applies to Quebec.
 

Eaglelord17

Sr. Member
Reaction score
79
Points
330
For the UK leaving the EU it wasn't about economics, it was about freedom and the right to decide your future. If it had just remained a economic union as it was originally supposed to be, the UK would have had no issues with it.

Scotland is a country that has been in decline for decades, as a first generation Canadian whose family migrated from there in the 70s-80s, I want nothing to do with it. They are not the same people they once were, and as much as they may like the idea of being independent they couldn't handle the implications of it. Just one big welfare state is what the net result would be.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
2,210
Points
1,060
For the UK leaving the EU it wasn't about economics, it was about freedom and the right to decide your future. If it had just remained a economic union as it was originally supposed to be, the UK would have had no issues with it.

Scotland is a country that has been in decline for decades, as a first generation Canadian whose family migrated from there in the 70s-80s, I want nothing to do with it. They are not the same people they once were, and as much as they may like the idea of being independent they couldn't handle the implications of it. Just one big welfare state is what the net result would be.

I love Scotland... lived there for a total of three years while in the British Army and have been back there to visit friends a few times.

Most Scottish people know they'd be economically doomed on their own. As ever, the politicians have ideas that transcend reality driven mainly by ego.

If nothing else, the threat of succession makes sure that Westminster pays attention which, at times (e.g., Northern Ireland), can wane with adverse effect.
 

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
350
Points
880
For the UK leaving the EU it wasn't about economics, it was about freedom and the right to decide your future. If it had just remained a economic union as it was originally supposed to be, the UK would have had no issues with it.

Scotland is a country that has been in decline for decades, as a first generation Canadian whose family migrated from there in the 70s-80s, I want nothing to do with it. They are not the same people they once were, and as much as they may like the idea of being independent they couldn't handle the implications of it. Just one big welfare state is what the net result would be.
I have no doubt that they would be a economic basket case, however, if the Scots decide that is the price they pay for, as you so kindly put it, the freedom and right to decide their own future, then power to them.
 

Navy_Pete

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
339
Points
910
I have no doubt that they would be a economic basket case, however, if the Scots decide that is the price they pay for, as you so kindly put it, the freedom and right to decide their own future, then power to them.
I guess the flipside is where is the UK heading post brexit? They've managed to piss off the EU while getting zero guarantees for any of their financial sector, which makes up a massive portion of their GDP, while simultaneously errecting significant trade barriers they made zero preparations for (like do basic things like hire customs inspectors). Oh, and they have zero trade agreements, don't have any in active negotiation, and also managed to piss of the US by mucking up the GFA. Canada even signalled we were happy to extend the EU trade arrangement to the UK while we negotiated new terms but got crickets back.

Not really sure the UK isn't also going to spiral off into absolute shambles, so there is always the arguement to cut losses now and try and get back into the EU ASAP. That would give them a much bigger market to access for their exports than the rest of the UK, and BoJo & co. are an incredibly London centric 'National' government, so only really reinforcing the concept.
 

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
350
Points
880
I guess the flipside is where is the UK heading post brexit? They've managed to piss off the EU while getting zero guarantees for any of their financial sector, which makes up a massive portion of their GDP, while simultaneously errecting significant trade barriers they made zero preparations for (like do basic things like hire customs inspectors). Oh, and they have zero trade agreements, don't have any in active negotiation, and also managed to piss of the US by mucking up the GFA. Canada even signalled we were happy to extend the EU trade arrangement to the UK while we negotiated new terms but got crickets back.

Not really sure the UK isn't also going to spiral off into absolute shambles, so there is always the arguement to cut losses now and try and get back into the EU ASAP. That would give them a much bigger market to access for their exports than the rest of the UK, and BoJo & co. are an incredibly London centric 'National' government, so only really reinforcing the concept.
The UK has a interesting future ahead of them,where they can either soar outside the EU , crash outside of it, or muddle along.

While they are going to struggle with the new regulations, customs, tariffs and the like outside the EU, they have also proven to be gangbusters with their vaccine rollout, something they couldn't do inside the EU as they are distributing vaccines as a bloc.

So that sums up the UK in a nutshell to me. Economically they will take their blows, but they have the ability to be nimble and flexible as opposed to locked into whatever the EU is doing.

Scotland, if they leave the UK, I imagine would be in a similar boat, taking a hit economically, but able to chart their own course outside of the UK, in this case, probably rejoining the EU.
 

Kilted

Full Member
Reaction score
155
Points
560
The concept of Scottish Nationalism is largely based on a romanic view of a past period that largely predated nationalism. A common misconception is that Scotland was captured by England, which is of course ludicrous, as the King of Scotland inherited the English throne. I wonder how many Scottish people are now part English, and vice versa.
 

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
350
Points
880
The concept of Scottish Nationalism is largely based on a romanic view of a past period that largely predated nationalism. A common misconception is that Scotland was captured by England, which is of course ludicrous, as the King of Scotland inherited the English throne. I wonder how many Scottish people are now part English, and vice versa.
It most certainly is.

And if a majority of Scots decide the vote to leave the UK for a romantic view of a last period that predated nationalism then I don't really see a problem with it.

It does make me happy with how Canada has dealt with nationalism in Quebec however. Sending generous amounts of money and largely leaving the national assembly in Quebec City to do whatever they want. And not opening the constitution to poke the bear.

The UK voted to leave the EU and most Scots voted to stay.

England poked the bear and now the bear is angry. We will see what the results of any referendum is, but I wouldn't be surprised if the Scots decided that leaving the EU was the last straw, economy be damned.
 

Eaglelord17

Sr. Member
Reaction score
79
Points
330
The other point is could they even rejoin the EU as just Scotland? I am not sure they would be able to maintain the standards to join on their own without the UK to assist. Could result in this small broke country with nowhere to go.
 

RyanWalker09

Guest
Reaction score
0
Points
10
Scotland has the choice of spending the rest of its life with England or Europe! Not difficult to predict what it prefers now!
 

Navy_Pete

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
339
Points
910
The UK has a interesting future ahead of them,where they can either soar outside the EU , crash outside of it, or muddle along.

While they are going to struggle with the new regulations, customs, tariffs and the like outside the EU, they have also proven to be gangbusters with their vaccine rollout, something they couldn't do inside the EU as they are distributing vaccines as a bloc.

So that sums up the UK in a nutshell to me. Economically they will take their blows, but they have the ability to be nimble and flexible as opposed to locked into whatever the EU is doing.

Scotland, if they leave the UK, I imagine would be in a similar boat, taking a hit economically, but able to chart their own course outside of the UK, in this case, probably rejoining the EU.
On the flipside the current UK govt advice is for UK companies to set up an EU wing, but a lot of the food exports are being held up and spoiling. It's causing a lot of immediate and on going pain.

The UK may be flexible on some things, but they haven't done major things like negotiate free trade agreements for decades, and so far they have demonstrated the opposite for competence with the Brexit negotiations. Trying to pass a law to break an international trade agreement shortly after passing it doesn't really inspire confidence.
 

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
350
Points
880
The other point is could they even rejoin the EU as just Scotland? I am not sure they would be able to maintain the standards to join on their own without the UK to assist. Could result in this small broke country with nowhere to go.
The EU let Greece join.
 

Altair

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
350
Points
880
On the flipside the current UK govt advice is for UK companies to set up an EU wing, but a lot of the food exports are being held up and spoiling. It's causing a lot of immediate and on going pain.

The UK may be flexible on some things, but they haven't done major things like negotiate free trade agreements for decades, and so far they have demonstrated the opposite for competence with the Brexit negotiations. Trying to pass a law to break an international trade agreement shortly after passing it doesn't really inspire confidence.
Yes, like I said, they are going to have a interesting future. They have controls over immigration, refugees, domestic production and distribution of things like vaccines, their own free trade deals, and the like, but are going to take a hit economically due to border complications.

Now it may be worth it for them to suffer a bit of economic disruption for their freedom, but that same metric applies to Scotland.
 

Colin Parkinson

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
839
Points
910
The UK is still to big of a market to ignore and with some good trade deals with other countries outside of the EU they can carve a niche out, that is beneficial to them. While the EU bureaucrats and politicians will want to punish the UK for a bit, the economic hit within the EU by not trading with the UK, will force them to negotiate sooner than later.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
469
Points
880
Scotland has much more power in the UK than it would have in the EU. The EU is basically run by Germany and France. If Scots prefer that, they can have it.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
231
Points
710
I wait to see what happens when the Shetlands separate. Greenland-Iceland-Faeroes-Shetlands? How about Man and the Channel Islands?

Popcorn anyone?
 
Top