Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Scotland starts renewed case for independence

gov.scot

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 745 posts

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#411

Post by londons_explore »

vladharbuz wrote: post #398
londons_explore wrote: post #338

With any country splitting, who is it who should be voting to split the country? Just those in the smaller part that is 'leaving'? Or the whole country? If just the smaller part, does that mean any tiny town can 'vote to be independent'?

The former. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-determination A tiny town is unlikely to be able to maintain itself as an independent state. A province can definitely vote to be independent, which has often happened, and has often been blocked by the parent country, peacefully or otherwise.

Has anyone tested this in the courts? If I invoke the right of self-determination, and vote for my house to be independent, can I then set my own laws and pay my own taxes to me?

If this was a workable thing, every town would want to do it - your taxes are far lower if you don't need to pay for the debts of a big nation state war from 100 years ago with compound interest!

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#412

Post by Emma_Goldman »

iso1631 wrote: post #378
Emma_Goldman wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The formal criteria are that a country is a stable market democracy, other than that accession is really a political matter (see Ukraine and Turkey). Clearly there would be a groundswell of support for incorporating a Scotland fleeing from Brexitland. It would be a coup for the EU.

Spain won't like a "breakaway province" joining the EU - they hate self determination for places like Catalonia and Gibraltar.

Sure, but that is politics. Given the overwhelming view of the EU will be to admit Scotland, there would likely be a quid pro quo. Spain would drive its bargaining position to extract concessions from the rest of the union in exchange for its consent.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#413

Post by Ekaros »

ChildOfChaos wrote: post #217

Scotland is assuming the EU would want them, the only reason they where in Europe previously is because they where part of the UK and came as a package deal, without the rest of the UK, what does Scotland have? it's silly of them and it's all lead by the SNP who only care about independence at all costs, they ignore literally everything else and try and twist it into an independence issue. SNP is causing Scotland far…

Being apparent western democracy near European continent, with developed economy and somewhat still close legal and regulatory alignment? I see no reason to stop them from joining, as long as Scotland accepts the same basic requirements as any other new member.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#414

Post by capableweb »

niyaven wrote: post #288
dgb23 wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Decentralization is a key to robustness. I can't speak for this particular case. But generally I think it is desirable to have. Real sustainable progress often happens in the small and builds bottom up. People in different regions have different needs and ways of doing things. Distributed power leads to less exploitation.

You obviously haven't been to Belgium, which has 6 governments (and prime ministers) for a country that has the size of 1/10th of Italy. Decentralization has benefits, yes, but as for everything there are limits to it.

So what's the negatives Belgium is suffering from, because of their 6 governments? Comparing them to the rest of the EU, Belgium seems quite successful at whatever they are doing.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#415

Post by smcl »

brigandish wrote: post #336
smcl wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whenever there's a seismic enough event like, I dunno, leaving the European Union. That was a fairly effective scare-tactic used by the No campaign - you'll kicked out of the EU, you won't actually meet the criteria! These were pretty huge points that spooked a lot of people into not voting or voting No.

It's not really seismic though, is it? Both options in each referendum were reasonable, there's plenty of countries in the EU and plenty out that do well, plenty have left the Britain and done well, those in the UK are doing fine. I didn't like the scare tactics in either campaign on either side (though the status quo sides' in each were notably more on the scare side). I see it as an excuse from those who would take…

Yes it really is seismic, it is a huge stretch to claim it was anything less than that (otherwise it wouldn't have been such a big issue to threaten the Yes vote with). And furthermore as a Scot living in the EU, believe me it is not simply an "excuse".

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#416

Post by physicsguy »

sideshowb wrote: post #107
physicsguy wrote: post #46

With hard headed view, I struggle to see that an independent Scotland will be economically able to deal with large cuts to public sector spending that would almost certainly be required. Per capita spending is already higher in Scotland than in the rest of the UK. Scottish companies have debts denominated in pounds. There would almost certainly be capital flight to rUK. Large businesses may relocate. There is no plan…

Doesn't the fact that Scotland owns the oil fields answer the economic problem, at least while everyone still wants oil? (not rhetorical, I haven't seen the numbers & I presume that's what TFA and its sequels aim to address, among other things).

At a time when North Sea gas revenue is declining, and we're trying to move away from fossil fuels? That's not a strong place to base an economy around.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#417

Post by petesergeant »

dubeye wrote: post #401
petesergeant wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They need to be answered at some point, but not necessarily before the referendum It would be well within Westminster's powers to say "sure, draw up a costed budget first and answer the big questions, get OBR sign-off, and we're good to go!"

It's also with westminsters powers to just ignore SNP requests for a ref. But at some point, if UK wants to maintain it's pretence of being a defender of sovreignty and democracy, then it will need to allow scotland to hold a second referendum on terms of it's own devising. Not westminsters.

I think the UK can easily maintain this by saying "once every 25 years seems reasonable", and nobody internationally will bat an eyelid.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#418

Post by [deleted] »

temp8964 wrote: post #270
SilverBirch wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Excuse me, but literally today is the first day that the government starting flying asylum seekers to Rwanda[1], and yesterday they published legislation with the intention of breaking international law[2]. They've also recently curtailed rights to legal protest[3]. The Prime Minister has a history of law breaking including illegally shutting down our parliament[4]. This government only got their majority when UKIP c…

What’s your reasonable definition of far-right?

[deleted]

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#419

Post by kmlx »

noughts wrote: post #368
kmlx wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> sinking ship of the UK. what "sinking ship" and why this opinion?

You can read more in this HN thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31708519

thanks. i do business in multiple countries, and everywhere it’s the same. even in the US.

Re: Scotland starts renewed case for independence

#420

Post by temp8964 »

barneygale wrote: post #358
temp8964 wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s your reasonable definition of far-right?

Immigration enforcement raids against mostly black/brown people. Putting them on flights to countries they left as infants. Sending asylum seekers to Rwanda for "processing". Sending British citizens to the Carribean because we were too disorganised to issue them passports in the 50s. The Tory party has absorbed the UKIP/EDL/etc vote. It rules by populism alone at this stage.

LoL. This is not a definition.
Post reply on HN