FREEDOM!!!!!?????

I thought this thread was about Richie Havens

 

In theory they could, but unless they agreed to abide by the Bank of England's strictures on budgeting, etc., they would lose access to the Bank of England as lender of last resort to the banks. Given that the two largest banks in Scotland alone, RBS and Lloyds, have total assets somewhere north of 12 times Scottish GDP, they would up sticks tomorrow and move their headquarters to London. That's where they're functionally based anyway, mind, but to say the least, the financial services industry would be completed gutted nearly overnight.

Absent that agreement, they'd also be using a currency whose movements they'd have no ability to control and be subject to monetary policy decisions over which they'd have no influence. Ask Greece what that's like.

Beyond that, if Scotland wants to join the EU, it won't be able to do so using the pound in that way as it would seem likely that the EU wouldn't admit them as a member if they didn't declare an intention to eventually adopt the euro. They'd struggle anyway, given that Spain has vowed to veto accession so as to avoid setting a precedent w/r/t Catalonia (and possibly the Basque country).

The Yes campaign seems absolutely convinced that England would give up its opposition out of ... friendliness? Convenience? Just because? ... but having been told to fuck off, why on earth would England turn around and cooperate on anything? Scotland has gone so far as to say they should be allowed to use the pound but simultaneously be allowed to decide whether to pay their share of the national debt. Um ... no?

There's been evidence of late that people in England especially are starting to wake up to just how unfair the current arrangements w/r/t Scotland in particular, but also Northern Ireland and Wales, are, and promises by the U.K.'s major political parties to devolve yet more powers to Scotland in the event of a no vote aren't going over all that well. I predict increasing pressure for only English MPs to be allowed to vote on matters solely affecting England -- unlike the current situation where the devolved parliaments decide on spending, etc., in their own countries but their MPs can vote at Westminster for matters affecting solely England.

 

No matter what Salmond does, if they lose, don't blame "money and the ethnic vote." Didn't go so hot for Quebec.

 

England doesn't need its own little assembly because it pretty much runs the show. Besides, all Wales has is a talking shop. Northern Ireland has a petting zoo where the Catholics and Protestants can show they can sit together for 15 minutes and not kill each other. And Scotland? Who cares? It's outside London. Enough said.

Anyway, even if the result is Yes tonight, the sticker shock of how much it's going to cost will bring the Scots back to their senses within weeks, if not months.

 

If the Brits, starting with HRH, were a bit less patronizing and condescending and more inclusive in a democratic government, Scotland would have a moral reason to remain in the UK

 

Heavy turnout. 52% is usually enough to win an election, but it might not carry the day in Scotland:

 

Look at Scotland, giving 110 percent!

 

Can someone more geopolitical savvy explain this to me? I thought Scotland was already independent of England and England and Scotland were two separate parts of Britain and United Kingdom.

 

It's that New Math from Common Core.

 

Exiting polling and, more importantly the betting markets, shows No is a lock to win.

 

Four of 32 polling precincts in and all are saying No.

William Wallace haz a sad.

 

Between that and the wrong Cardinals logo, another great day for CNN.