My Hope is that Scotland will vote for Independence

[PyramidHead]

As soon as they are given the option of home rule, and the ability to fund their welfare, education, water project, and land use as they see fit - just as the Scots demand. But then, the Blue masters will not allow such freedom, correct?

They have those options now, what's stopping them?

I find it interesting that when it's Scotland, the relationship is between a moocher and someone who does all the work. When it's red states, the relationship is between a slave and a cruel master.

 

[maxparrish]

They have those options now, what's stopping them?

I find it interesting that when it's Scotland, the relationship is between a moocher and someone who does all the work. When it's red states, the relationship is between a slave and a cruel master.

First a bit of house-keeping. KSEN seems unaware of the fact that the federal government (combined with the federal courts) are "stopping them". The federal government "owns" more than half of the western US, and even greater proportions of those 'red' western states. Water resource allocation and land use development is largely a hand-maiden of the Army Corp of Engineers, BLM, and the various federal agencies. States do not have a choice regarding who is qualified for their welfare system (prior residency requirements were banished by the Warren Court and propositions to limit educational welfare for illegals overturned by the feds) and their education systems are saturated with federal mandates, ranging from special education, to balancing of races, to children lunch programs - to say nothing of its mandates on college on education loans and grants. Free'ed of the master's alphabet soup of federal agencies and their nomenklatura, I am sure they would chart a different, and more fiscally prudent, course in keeping with their political leanings.

Second, one must remember a key difference between many red states and Scotland; the red states, under mandates and a tax system they cannot change, are more that willing to take excess federal dollars for the many programs they would never consider funding on their own. The seemingly empty freeways of Oklahoma, or mind boggling expenditures for turning the Missouri river into a series of recreational lakes (under the failed mission of making it a major shipping tributary) are ONLY possible in the dreams of bloated Washington civil masters and pork seeking politicians. Unlike the Scots, such "mooching" is merely a windfall of the less (or not) desired. The Scots, however, seem to look upon such welfare state mooching as their right ALONG with home rule.

Finally while the Scots are not huge moochers in the terms of the UK, in the terms of the US (where domestic government expenditures per person are significantly less) they are substantial freeloaders. Whereas most of the government jobs in the US are funded by State and local governments, most of the government jobs in the UK are funded by the national government. In Scotland, where 24 percent of the jobs are provided mostly by national government employment, subsidies to this base are going to be substantial mooching in US terms.

But I am objective. I am all for home rule, as are most of the red states with or without the federal gold to stuff in their mouths. And the Scots ought to be free to do the same, on their own dime. How the Scots can pay for their greater welfare state aspirations would be an interesting challenge - but I am all for letting locals to pay for their own freedom.

 

[ksen]

Maybe they can sell off some of their brand new nuclear arsenal if they win independence.

 

[Canard DuJour]

Finally while the Scots are not huge moochers in the terms of the UK, in the terms of the US (where domestic government expenditures per person are significantly less) they are substantial freeloaders. Whereas most of the government jobs in the US are funded by State and local governments, most of the government jobs in the UK are funded by the national government. In Scotland, where 24 percent of the jobs are provided mostly by national government employment, subsidies to this base are going to be substantial mooching in US terms.

honestly.. WTF?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Maybe they can sell off some of their brand new nuclear arsenal if they win independence.

Hmm ...

fears of potentially rogue nuclear arsenal - check
lots of oil - check

I think somebody's in line to get some freedom exported over to them in exchange for roses thrown at the feet of soldiers.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

Eh, go Scotland.

I support secession movements on general principle unless there is a very clear case why a particular movement should not be supported.

 

[Perspicuo]

I just saw(r) in the news, no is now leading by 4%.*

I was concerned about James Bond's parachute and Austin Powers' underpants being much less flashy if they had to switch back to red-plus-sign-on-white-whiteys!



_______________
* On the other hand, this.

The independence movement would not be happening in the first place if they had followed their old colonies (Can, Us, Aus) and become a federation.

 

[dystopian]

Finally while the Scots are not huge moochers in the terms of the UK, in the terms of the US (where domestic government expenditures per person are significantly less) they are substantial freeloaders. Whereas most of the government jobs in the US are funded by State and local governments, most of the government jobs in the UK are funded by the national government. In Scotland, where 24 percent of the jobs are provided mostly by national government employment, subsidies to this base are going to be substantial mooching in US terms.

honestly.. WTF?

Here, let me translate it for you:

"They're not really BASTARDSFUCKSHITCOCKSUCKINGMOOCHINGBASTARDS who steal a lot of taxpayer money, unless you compare them to my country where not only do we kick people like that to the gutter like they deserve, but where we can also pretend that we ourselves aren't BASTARDSFUCKSHITCOCKSUCKINGMOOCHINGBASTARDS because OUR government jobs are paid for by LOCAL government, which doesn't actually mean anything but makes us able to pretend like we're only stealing local taxpayer's money instead of taxpayer money from all over. Neat huh?"

 

[maxparrish]

For those who find certain posters pro-Scottish welfare state 'translations' to be less than coherent, you might find more nuanced views of diverging opinion (pro and con) here: http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2014/09/12/the-scottish-vote-is-neck-and-neck/

 

[maxparrish]

Finally while the Scots are not huge moochers in the terms of the UK, in the terms of the US (where domestic government expenditures per person are significantly less) they are substantial freeloaders. Whereas most of the government jobs in the US are funded by State and local governments, most of the government jobs in the UK are funded by the national government. In Scotland, where 24 percent of the jobs are provided mostly by national government employment, subsidies to this base are going to be substantial mooching in US terms.

honestly.. WTF?

What don't you get?

a) The Scots have a much larger proportional share of their GDP come from the national government's public employment and expenditures and than the typical US State.
b) Mooching with a 10 or 12 percent subsidy of a larger base of tax expenditures is going to be a proportionally larger subsidy compared to a typical US State.
c) So yes, in terms of US benchmarks, they are substantive moochers.

Unless the Scots can find a means to make their private economy more robust, almost certainly the promise of a substantially increased welfare state is not going to happen.

 

[maxparrish]

http://www.steynonline.com/6564/och-aye-the-now

Kinda like the Romans becoming Italians, what the hell happened?

Patently not since more fortunate regions had the same welfare system and government.

So what happened to the Scots? Same as happened to the north of England, much of Wales, Norfolk, Northern Ireland... Neo-liberalism with its attendant financialisation and de-industrialisation at the same time as few hundred million near-slaves in the far east joined the labour market.

The Scots made the mistake of being makers rather than takers.

That's okay, I did a little research and found out what happened. In a set of findings it has already been shown that as late as the nineteenth century Scotland had a greater proportional output of people of intellectual distinction than did England. However, in waves concentrated particularly in the 1850s, 1870s, early 1900s and then in the interwar period upto WWII, over two million migrants left Scotland, more than half to the USA with Canada, Australia, and New Zealand being other important destinations. Following the Second World War and lasting up to the 1990s, Scotland was a country that suffered from brain drain, the 1960s in particular witnessing a net, negative annual migration balance of -40,000.

Today there are many more people living abroad claiming Scotch ancestry than living in Scotland proper.

However, studies of Scottish emigrants show they had/have an IQ of 8 points higher than those now living in Scotland - which is not unusual as emigrants tend to be those with higher IQs. Hence, Scotland is now three to four IQ points lower in IQ than in England, even after correction for urban/rural differences.

In short, the reduced mean intelligence in Scotland lies in the selective emigration of the more intelligent, leaving a depleted gene pool. Hence, the remaining Scots in Scotland are "what happened".

 

[ksen]

You guys are the gifts that keep on giving. Never stop posting.

 

[bilby]

Scottish emigration to the US was, of course, a win-win, as it increased the IQ of both countries.

 

[Canard DuJour]

Yep, I think we've reached the happy-to-leave-that-argument-standing-on-its-merits stage

 

[ksen]

Welp, the mooching scots wanted to stay on the tit of westminster.

 

[Duke Leto]

Well, it is always nice to see maxparrish's hopes crushed.

 

[dystopian]

It would've been interesting to see a 'new' country emerge on the map; and the subsequent boost to other independence movements. I just recently learned that there's apparently a strong movement to create a new Venetian Republic out of Italy's north-east.

Still, probably for the best.

 

[lpetrich]

I hope Scotland does secede, but with a new border formed by the M25.

I had to look it up, and it's a highway that surrounds Greater London. It's much like the Beltway, a highway that surrounds Washington, DC.

 

[arkirk]

Patently not since more fortunate regions had the same welfare system and government.

So what happened to the Scots? Same as happened to the north of England, much of Wales, Norfolk, Northern Ireland... Neo-liberalism with its attendant financialisation and de-industrialisation at the same time as few hundred million near-slaves in the far east joined the labour market.

The Scots made the mistake of being makers rather than takers.

That's okay, I did a little research and found out what happened. In a set of findings it has already been shown that as late as the nineteenth century Scotland had a greater proportional output of people of intellectual distinction than did England. However, in waves concentrated particularly in the 1850s, 1870s, early 1900s and then in the interwar period upto WWII, over two million migrants left Scotland, more than half to the USA with Canada, Australia, and New Zealand being other important destinations. Following the Second World War and lasting up to the 1990s, Scotland was a country that suffered from brain drain, the 1960s in particular witnessing a net, negative annual migration balance of -40,000.

Today there are many more people living abroad claiming Scotch ancestry than living in Scotland proper.

However, studies of Scottish emigrants show they had/have an IQ of 8 points higher than those now living in Scotland - which is not unusual as emigrants tend to be those with higher IQs. Hence, Scotland is now three to four IQ points lower in IQ than in England, even after correction for urban/rural differences.

In short, the reduced mean intelligence in Scotland lies in the selective emigration of the more intelligent, leaving a depleted gene pool. Hence, the remaining Scots in Scotland are "what happened".

Being of Scottish decent, I was wondering why they chose to keep their bloody queen. Now it has been explained to me. Because the definition of intellect is still an open debate, I think we cannot take any information regarding how intelligent a population is too seriously. Perhaps a good measure just happened in Scotland...a referendum on keeping or disposing of royalty and all its lackeys. That is truly an intellectual challenge. Maybe the good Scotts no longer live there. It was a fairly close vote. Let's get real. There was fear mongering about having to establish their own monitary system and being locked out of certain markets. Another referendum a little later will eventually set them free.

 

[Hickdive]

[Perhaps a good measure just happened in Scotland...a referendum on keeping or disposing of royalty and all its lackeys. That is truly an intellectual challenge. Maybe the good Scotts no longer live there. It was a fairly close vote. Let's get real. There was fear mongering about having to establish their own monitary system and being locked out of certain markets. Another referendum a little later will eventually set them free.

The independence proposal included retaining the monarchy.

Almost all Scottish exports are to the EU, around 30% to the continent and 70% to the rest of the UK (still an EU market) Exporting to that market when not an EU member is difficult and expensive and requires negotiation with the EU, not the UK.

To gain entry to the EU requires your own monetary system and central bank. Neither of the currency plans in the independence proposal complied with that requirement.

It seems democracy is a great thing right up until you find yourself in the minority.