Scottish Independence... What are your thoughts?

[tonyreddevil]

Think it will be Hung Parliament.
Nigel and Ed.

Or the Same Colition as Now.

[PetBazaar]

So, how does a scheme to soak the rich (who live mostly in London), to pay for the Scottish NHS fit with a country which says it wants to be independent of England/Westminster?

Good one isn't it.

It was, however, never a goal of the independence movement.

Unfortunately, it fits in exactly with the pre-referendum unionist arguments though. Remember "Better Together", remember "Best Of Both Worlds", remember "Pooling and Sharing Resources". This is exactly the outcome they encouraged us to vote for. The wealthy parts of the UK helping out the not so well off.

Either the Scottish Labour Party is incredibly cynical, and utterly contemptuous of the Scots because they think they will fall for this, and vote Labour

Welcome to the magical world of Scottish politics.

Or the Scots will see this for what it is, and show Mr Murphy what they think of cheap electoral tricks in May.

I certainly hope so but you need to remember that Scottish politics is ridiculously tribal, I suspect much more so than in the rest of the UK. Labour's narrative for the next 4 months can be condensed into "SNP Bad".

Their target will be those that don't really think about politics or the story behind the headline, so it's safe to say that this isn't any realistic policy decision. It's such blatant politicking, in fact, that even the BBC have picked up on it...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30700834

[astral276]

So, how does a scheme to soak the rich (who live mostly in London), to pay for the Scottish NHS fit with a country which says it wants to be independent of England/Westminster?

I thought that was a Scottish Labour idea rather than the SNP. An attempt to buy some Scottish votes so that they don't become a total irrelevance in Scotland.

I think the SNP just wants to take all the land from Scots landowners and give it to the peasants.

[squern]

Definitely a Labour idea - the politics of envy.

Are there a lot of peasants in Scotland?

[MPS16]

....Are there a lot of peasants in Scotland?

I belive there are actually more grouse.

[tonyreddevil]

I belive there are actually more grouse.

Might even be more Red Deer.

[squern]

Wonder what Mr Salmond thinks about the falling oil price?

Good job Scotland didn't go independent - they would be in dire straights now, and wouldn't be able to call on their English oppressors for help.

[PetBazaar]

Wonder what Mr Salmond thinks about the falling oil price?

Good job Scotland didn't go independent - they would be in dire straights now, and wouldn't be able to call on their English oppressors for help.

Oh no, not you too.

I wish I had a pound for every time I heard this.

If we'd voted Yes, independence wouldn't have happened until at least 2016. And, if the unionist parties were to be believed, sometime after that (as this timescale was too optimistic, apparently).

With most forecasters expecting prices to rise again by the end of this year, the price of oil today is a completely moot point.

[westlondoncarparts]

The SNP do not say that they are oppressed by the English. They say that the overwhelming bias of the number of English MPs in the Westminster Parliament means that it is difficult for the Scottish voice to be heard and taken into account. A significant number of Scottish people really hate what one of the main English political parties represents because it is so in discordance with Scottish cultural values of social responsibility and sense of community and sense of fairness. That causes a big problem for Scotland when that party is in power at Westminster, and especially when UK Government by that party is in part bankrolled from taxation on Scottish oil. This is not the same thing as being oppressed. The only people who come out with the notion of oppression are the English who dismiss the SNP and calls for independence in Scotland as trivia and do not put in the effort to listen to and to engage with the debate going on north of the Border. For as long as the English perpetuate this notion of oppression and the Scottish chip on the shoulder and the Scottish victim mentality, there will never be a truly United Kingdom because the English will not be listening to and working in partnership with the Scots.

[westlondoncarparts]

Regarding the oil price and Scotland, this is a reasonably good article but does not go all the way on why the oil price has been so volatile:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentis...d-oil-revenues

The current movement in the oil price cannot be explained simply as increased supply and reduced demand coming back into balance. China’s annual economic growth continues to be in excess of 7% a year. Economic recovery in the USA is now starting to gain meaningful traction. Indian economic growth is currently around 5% a year, although most of that growth is in services and not in manufacturing. Although economic growth in the European Union is broadly flat (zero growth), it is not going down. Economic growth in Japan is currently broadly flat. There is no significant reduction in demand in oil from these main geographical areas of population size and global economic activity to explain the oil price movement. There are other factors at stake in the oil price.

Part of the volatility in the oil price is due to the way in which the traders speculate on the price of oil, especially with futures trading. They can make money when prices are moving, both going up and going down, but cannot make so much money when prices are broadly static. Having ensured that oil prices overshot on the way up, they are also ensuring now that prices have undershot on the way back down.

The role of the British Government needs to be understood as well. Having spent UK taxpayers’ money on funding opposition groups in Syria as part of yet another foreign policy regime change initiative, David Cameron and William Hague helped to open up Pandora’s Box in the Middle East. British and American attempts to destabilise the sovereign nation of Syria has sucked in other players who also wish to influence regime change in Syria. The numerous threads that make up the spaghetti tangle of Middle Eastern politics are very complicated to understand as they go back in time a very long way. But the post World War 1 creation of new nation states in the region and the split between Sunnis and Shiites are key influences on the regional politics there. Saudi Arabia and its Sunni allies have their own agenda for Shiite dominated Syria and if there is going to be regime change there, they will do their best to ensure it goes their way. The Syria situation is exacerbated by the fact that Russia has broadly followed a neutral role in Syria and maintained its previous relationship with President Assad and has tried to prevent regime change. Russia also has good relations with Shiite dominated Iran which has good relationships with Syria, Saudi Arabia having a somewhat cold relationship with Iran.

Iran and Syria are very close allies. Both the USA and Saudi Arabia both know that there is a real possibility at some time in the future of Iran joining President Putin’s new Eurasian Economic Community. There is also an outside chance of Syria also eventually joining the Community. Neither the USA nor Saudi Arabia want Iran or Syria to be in the Community and would do whatever they can to prevent that from happening.

On another front, the new Cold War which is now taking place between Russia and the Western Powers because the intended regime change in Ukraine did not go as well as expected has economic sanctions and manipulation of the oil price as a weapon against Russia. Commentators in the USA talk publicly about the West causing enough economic pain for Russia such that they hope it will foster an uprising against President Putin’s Government. David Cameron has been a key player in attacking President Putin.

Saudi Arabia, USA and Russia account for approximately 40% of global oil production. Russia is the world’s largest oil producer. The best way to hurt Russia economically and politically is with a falling oil price. The USA will not cry any tears for Russia as it seeks to weaken Russia economically with a falling oil price so that Ukraine can be brought into the West and into NATO and so that progress on the Eurasian Economic Community can be stalled. Saudi Arabia will not cry any tears for the impact upon Russia of falling oil prices as it seeks to counteract Russian influence in Syria and Iran. Saudi Arabia does not like the USA support for Israel and will not cry any tears for the economic harm caused to the USA fracking sector by a low oil price.

The Saudis have previous track record of hurting the Soviet Union with falling oil prices. They have been here before. They know how it works.

Why go to such length to write this? Well the people who trivialise the Scottish debate have an opportunity to rub their hands in glee now to say that Alex Salmond was wrong when he was talking about the economic boost that oil would give Scotland in the years ahead. However, there is a counter argument. The imperialistic neo-colonial foreign policy of interfering in the affairs of other nations and of not recognising their territorial sovereignty that the UK Foreign Office seems to follow is always going to have repercussions. This interference will always come back in due course to bite the UK in one way or another. That part of the fall in the oil price which is a consequence of the British Government’s and political allies’ interference in Ukraine and the Middle East is one of the ways in which British interference is currently coming back to bite us. Alex Salmond would have conducted a much different kind of foreign policy in an independent Scotland and would not expose Scotland to the consequences that the Westminster Parliament’s foreign policy exposes us to. There is a valid argument, therefore, that the element of the fall in oil price which is due to Western geo-political interference vindicates Alex Salmond’s criticism of British foreign policy and his call for a different kind of foreign policy from Scotland. So the people who do joined up thinking do realise that he does have something meaningful to say on foreign policy and on the problems with the Westminster Government.

Does Scotland say thank you to Westminster for UK foreign policy being part of the reason why the oil price has fallen so much?