4 ms·

Perhaps. If they did, so be it. But the arguments at the time of the referendum didn't get stronger. The EU would require Scotland to join the Euro, join Schen

Perhaps. If they did, so be it. But the arguments at the time of the referendum didn't get stronger. The EU would require Scotland to join the Euro, join Schengen (means a border wall), and the primary argument for an independent Scotland was "we'll take all the oil money for ourselves". But now oil is cheap thanks to US fracking and the North Sea oil industry is going bust. I think the future probably has more devolution in it. Which is fine.

ricksplat 10y ago
>means a border wall Hadrian's wall and miles of rural waste should already be sufficient for these purposes.
- prodmerc 10y ago
  What, against immigrants? Seems like it'd be easier to get illegally directly to England, than go through Scotland...
  - ricksplat 10y ago
    Exactly my point!
ck425 10y ago
One of the key arguments against independence was uncertainty over if/how soon we would join the EU. At the time that vs just staying in. Now it's vs definitely leaving. So while the argument hasn't changed the alternative has. We've also had almost 2 years of Westminster failing to deliver any of the promised devolution. We get these things are slow to happen but there's been pitiful progress towards them so far. Lots of people voted No on the basis of more devolution. So while the arguments haven't changed the alternative to independence has for the worse. I'm honestly struggling to see a future without an independent Scotland tbh.
- sievebrain 10y ago
  The delay on devolution was caused by the SNP insisting that it still receive the same or bigger subsidies from the rest of the UK, even though that struck many as unfair (part of independence is paying your own way). It's not like Parliament refused to hand over powers.
  - ck425 10y ago
    IIRC part of this argument was that Scotland contributed more than the uk average as well, they most per person outside London/South-East England. Additionally parliament haven't been particularly forthcoming over tax rights, easiest way around that argument was to split income tax into a federal and regional income tax and let us set the later.

ricksplat 10y ago

>means a border wall Hadrian's wall and miles of rural waste should already be sufficient for these purposes.

prodmerc 10y ago
What, against immigrants? Seems like it'd be easier to get illegally directly to England, than go through Scotland...
- ricksplat 10y ago
  Exactly my point!

ck425 10y ago

One of the key arguments against independence was uncertainty over if/how soon we would join the EU. At the time that vs just staying in. Now it's vs definitely leaving. So while the argument hasn't changed the alternative has. We've also had almost 2 years of Westminster failing to deliver any of the promised devolution. We get these things are slow to happen but there's been pitiful progress towards them so far. Lots of people voted No on the basis of more devolution. So while the arguments haven't changed the alternative to independence has for the worse. I'm honestly struggling to see a future without an independent Scotland tbh.

sievebrain 10y ago
The delay on devolution was caused by the SNP insisting that it still receive the same or bigger subsidies from the rest of the UK, even though that struck many as unfair (part of independence is paying your own way). It's not like Parliament refused to hand over powers.
- ck425 10y ago
  IIRC part of this argument was that Scotland contributed more than the uk average as well, they most per person outside London/South-East England. Additionally parliament haven't been particularly forthcoming over tax rights, easiest way around that argument was to split income tax into a federal and regional income tax and let us set the later.