True oil wealth hidden to stop independence

[Lazarus]

just saw this article when the paper boy delivered the wrong paper.

Made some interesting reading - looks like the English government suppressed information regarding Scotland's potential wealth from oil back in the seventies.

 

[Summo]

Stop reading dissident newspapers, get back to work and make us money, Scots Man.

I'll lash you! So help me God, I'll lash you!

 

[Lazarus]

do I bring the vaseline again?

 

[Summo]

God Damn! Don't Look Me In The Eye!

 

[Furr]

one word

twoddle

make of it what you will

 

[DaGaffer]

one word

twoddle

make of it what you will

Absolutely.

a. Norway, arguably in the same situation as an 'idependent Scotland' didn't become a 'Switzerland of the North', and although wealthy, has an incredibly high cost of living.

b. About half of the North Sea fields were only opened up because of new drilling techniques which weren't developed in 1974, so the estimates of capacity were based on known or exploitable fields.

c. There are rather large assumptions by the Scots about what constitutes 'Scottish waters'; assumptions that wouldn't necessarily hold true for an independent Scotland, especially one that couldn't actually defend those waters.

d. An independent Scotland would have had to separately apply for EEC membership and wouldn't have automatically have had access to EEC markets. In the seventies, it was actually quite difficult to join the EU, and Scotland would have been behind Spain and Greece in the queue, and probably wouldn't have got in until the mid-eighties anyway.

Oh, and it wasn't 'The English Government' as you Scots always like to put it when you feel you're getting shafted; it was 'The British Government', in fact, a Labour government, which has traditionally always had an over-representation of Scots in it.

 

[Draylor]

Just the same old tired SNP propaganda pish.

Are there some sort of local elections coming up, or are they just desperate to get their names in the paper?

 

[yaruar]

If there is so much potential wealth in scotland then why is the country heavily subsidised by my taxes (and the rest of londoners )

Basing an economy around oil is a dangerous thing though as you are too tied into to international oil prices.

 

[Bodhi]

Subsidised my arse. Last time I checked Scotland sent about £26 billion a year down to your coffers, and it would appear most of this is going on employing a shite manager for your national team.

 

[Ch3tan]

Well seeing as he only earns £4m a year, I think not.

 

[Turamber]

Not to mention that the FA pays his wages, not the UK government. Typical McBodhi logic.

 

[yaruar]

Subsidised my arse. Last time I checked Scotland sent about £26 billion a year down to your coffers, and it would appear most of this is going on employing a shite manager for your national team.

Well london pays nearly 17bn to the rest of the uk in net terms (that's after all the expenditure on london) One would assume that costs in scotland would run into the 10's of billions.....

 

[DaGaffer]

Subsidised my arse. Last time I checked Scotland sent about £26 billion a year down to your coffers, and it would appear most of this is going on employing a shite manager for your national team.

Where did you get the £26 billion figure? I can find a public spending figure of £25.5 billion, but I can't find a Scottish revenue figure. Anyway, if the £26bn figure is true, then Scotland is being subsidised by the rest of the UK, because the money they send to Westminster is for national stuff like defence and the EU budget, and £500m is a drop in the ocean.

 

[Bodhi]

Not to mention that the FA pays his wages, not the UK government. Typical McBodhi logic.

Woah! Spot the retard who keeps taking me seriously! that's like mistake #1 on these here boards. Would have thought you'd have learnt that by now.

Anyway DaGaffer I got that figure off a documentary on BBC2 Scotland when I was at uni, can't remember the name of it now. Just remember the figure and the arguments it caused in our flat, which was 50:50 Scots/Sassenachs. Plus remember when I said we were sending that money down to you I didn't necessarily mean you weren't sending any back up.

 

[Turamber]

And, as usual, you scramble around for a half-witted response to try and cover the paucity of your earlier argumentation.

 

[Tom]

TBH I'd quite like the Scots to become independant. Perhaps it would stop the fuckers whinging about it so much.

 

[Bodhi]

And, as usual, you scramble around for a half-witted response to try and cover the paucity of your earlier argumentation.

Pfft, don't use big words to try and trick us all into thinking you don't lick windows of an evening, you still can't tell when someone's on a windup. You also smell of poo.

 

[Mofo8]

d. An independent Scotland would have had to separately apply for EEC membership and wouldn't have automatically have had access to EEC markets. In the seventies, it was actually quite difficult to join the EU, and Scotland would have been behind Spain and Greece in the queue, and probably wouldn't have got in until the mid-eighties anyway.

The great thing is though, that WHEN Scotland regains it's independence, and has to apply to join the European Community..... so will England (and Wales and Northen Ireland).... as there will be no entity called the UK anymore.

Please bear in mind that the article linked to was from The Herald, which is considered a well written and balanced newspaper by many, and the information it mentioned came from a "leading government economist".

Remember this report was written in the mid-seventies, just 4 or 5 years before the fiddled referendum on independence in 1979. 63.8% of the electorate voted, with 51.6% voting for devolution and 48.4% voting no. The governent claimed that because 40% of the total electorate didn't vote yes, it didn't count. Basically not voting constituted a no vote.... and it was proven that a good number of dead people were still on the elctoral roll.

In the referendum held in 1997, only 60.4% of the electorate voted, but it suited the British government in Westminster to give us a crippled pretend parliament of our own.

What many English people fail to realise about Scottish independence is that it isn't simply a matter of us leaving the United Kingdom - when we leave, there will be no such thing anymore. The Union of the Crowns is a bit like a forced marriage.... and we want a divorce. Sorry if that bothers anyone.... I'm sure you're all nice people, but why the bitterness when we want to go it alone?

 

[DaGaffer]

The great thing is though, that WHEN Scotland regains it's independence, and has to apply to join the European Community..... so will England (and Wales and Northen Ireland).... as there will be no entity called the UK anymore.

Please bear in mind that the article linked to was from The Herald, which is considered a well written and balanced newspaper by many, and the information it mentioned came from a "leading government economist".

Remember this report was written in the mid-seventies, just 4 or 5 years before the fiddled referendum on independence in 1979. 63.8% of the electorate voted, with 51.6% voting for devolution and 48.4% voting no. The governent claimed that because 40% of the total electorate didn't vote yes, it didn't count. Basically not voting constituted a no vote.... and it was proven that a good number of dead people were still on the elctoral roll.

In the referendum held in 1997, only 60.4% of the electorate voted, but it suited the British government in Westminster to give us a crippled pretend parliament of our own.

What many English people fail to realise about Scottish independence is that it isn't simply a matter of us leaving the United Kingdom - when we leave, there will be no such thing anymore. The Union of the Crowns is a bit like a forced marriage.... and we want a divorce. Sorry if that bothers anyone.... I'm sure you're all nice people, but why the bitterness when we want to go it alone?

Like Tom says, we don't care if you fuck off. Just like we don't care if Australia becomes a republic. Bottom line is, the only thing that makes Scottish 'independence' a viable proposition is membership of the EU gravy train, and the swapping of one loss of sovreignity for another. Unfortunately, if you do get independence, you might find that particular ship has sailed.

The biggest irony of all is that the Union was the best thing that ever happened to Scotland, and was a pretty good thing for England, but I guess dreaming of glories that never were is always more attractive than reality.

 

[Turamber]

Where does that process end? London and Londoners aren't too highly appreciated in these parts, should the Midlands split away too? Maybe we should return to the the separate Saxon kingdoms (East Anglia, Mercia, Northumbria, Sussex, Wessex and Essex)? Or maybe go one step further and go the Classical Greece/Late Byzantine route and have separate City States?

If the Scots are so eager to embrace their past perhaps they should all pack up and sail back to Ireland?

Late night ramblings, for which I apologise, but the whole devolution process seems ridiculous to me.

 

[Bodhi]

The thing that gets me is that the Union was our idea in the first place (why do you think we gave you our then-King, James VI?), so surely it should be up to us to decide when we've had enough? I mean you only have to look at the state of Scotland these days to realise it ain't working and we really could do a much better job on our own. Then all we need to do is plant loads of thistles on the border, you pussies will all stub your toes and turn back like you always used to do, and we'll be a happy peace loving nation again. Like the Irish, but without the terrorists and potato farmers......

 

[DaGaffer]

The thing that gets me is that the Union was our idea in the first place (why do you think we gave you our then-King, James VI?), so surely it should be up to us to decide when we've had enough? I mean you only have to look at the state of Scotland these days to realise it ain't working and we really could do a much better job on our own. Then all we need to do is plant loads of thistles on the border, you pussies will all stub your toes and turn back like you always used to do, and we'll be a happy peace loving nation again. Like the Irish, but without the terrorists and potato farmers......

You're talking about the Stuarts, I'm talking about the real Union. The Union of 1707 wasn't really your idea; Scotland was bankrupt and was pissing off the English (again) by flirting with the French like the big skirt-wearing hooers you are, so the English bribed/threatened Scotland with proper Union, and like the big skirt-wearing hooers you are, you took the money. Then you got all Jacobite on us and we had to kick your arses to show you who was boss (and don't give me Preston Pans, Anglo armies are always slow-starters but we get there in the end). But twenty years after Culloden Scotland went from being a shithole where you all ate dung to being the engine of the Empire and Edinburgh was one of the richest cities in the world. England was (and is) good for Scotland, but you'll never buy it because its just the nature of big country/little country rivalry; you're like the little chippy aggressive bloke in the pub; and you're ginger.

 

[GDW]

I just love it. We Irish have it sussed. What about all your hard earned English cash we are spending on our lovely country....and when we dont like what we have or want something new, its just blown up or burned down to have it replaced with something brand spanking new. Thanks guys keep up your generosity

 

[Bodhi]

You're talking about the Stuarts, I'm talking about the real Union. The Union of 1707 wasn't really your idea; Scotland was bankrupt and was pissing off the English (again) by flirting with the French like the big skirt-wearing hooers you are, so the English bribed/threatened Scotland with proper Union, and like the big skirt-wearing hooers you are, you took the money. Then you got all Jacobite on us and we had to kick your arses to show you who was boss (and don't give me Preston Pans, Anglo armies are always slow-starters but we get there in the end). But twenty years after Culloden Scotland went from being a shithole where you all ate dung to being the engine of the Empire and Edinburgh was one of the richest cities in the world. England was (and is) good for Scotland, but you'll never buy it because its just the nature of big country/little country rivalry; you're like the little chippy aggressive bloke in the pub; and you're ginger.

Culloden, puhlease. that was a Scottish civil war you decided to get involved in, and being the bunch of pussies that you are (scared of thistles indeed), you decided to get involved on the side that looked most likely to win. The last time it was a proper straight fight between us and you, we spanked your asses all the way back to York thanks to Bobby the Bruce. England good for Scotland? Scotland good for England more like. Gives you a place to run to the ground then look down on when you're ashamed of the state of your own sorry nation.

 

[Summo]

You're talking about the Stuarts, I'm talking about the real Union. The Union of 1707 wasn't really your idea; Scotland was bankrupt and was pissing off the English (again) by flirting with the French like the big skirt-wearing hooers you are, so the English bribed/threatened Scotland with proper Union, and like the big skirt-wearing hooers you are, you took the money. Then you got all Jacobite on us and we had to kick your arses to show you who was boss (and don't give me Preston Pans, Anglo armies are always slow-starters but we get there in the end). But twenty years after Culloden Scotland went from being a shithole where you all ate dung to being the engine of the Empire and Edinburgh was one of the richest cities in the world. England was (and is) good for Scotland, but you'll never buy it because its just the nature of big country/little country rivalry; you're like the little chippy aggressive bloke in the pub; and you're ginger.

Heh heh heh. Top quality post.

 

[Lazarus]

you decided to get involved on the side that looked most likely to win.

so.....they're a bunch of Easy Teamers?

 

[DaGaffer]

Culloden, puhlease. that was a Scottish civil war you decided to get involved in, and being the bunch of pussies that you are (scared of thistles indeed), you decided to get involved on the side that looked most likely to win. The last time it was a proper straight fight between us and you, we spanked your asses all the way back to York thanks to Bobby the Bruce. England good for Scotland? Scotland good for England more like. Gives you a place to run to the ground then look down on when you're ashamed of the state of your own sorry nation.

Fuck me, where did you learn history (no, don't answer that)? 'Bonnie Prince' catholic-divine-right-of-kings fuckface didn't give a shit about Scotland, he wanted to overthrow the Hanovers and get the English throne back, and he (nearly) persuaded a bunch of gullible highlanders to back him. The fact that more Scots fought against the Jacobites than for them is neither here nor there; it was a rebellion against the British crown with the aim of securing the English throne, and absolutely not a Scottish civil war (they reached Derby ffs, when was that in Scotland?) Culloden was most emphatically a 'straight fight', and the Highlanders got a royal spanking (see what I did there ) And you're still (metaphorically) all ginger.

 

[Bodhi]

Fuck me, where did you learn history (no, don't answer that)? 'Bonnie Prince' catholic-divine-right-of-kings fuckface didn't give a shit about Scotland, he wanted to overthrow the Hanovers and get the English throne back, and he (nearly) persuaded a bunch of gullible highlanders to back him. The fact that more Scots fought against the Jacobites than for them is neither here nor there; it was a rebellion against the British crown with the aim of securing the English throne, and absolutely not a Scottish civil war (they reached Derby ffs, when was that in Scotland?) Culloden was most emphatically a 'straight fight', and the Highlanders got a royal spanking (see what I did there ) And you're still (metaphorically) all ginger.

Precisely. You wouldn't have won Culloden if you didn't have some Jocks to help you out. They could fight while you lot were in the medical tent having those poor feet you hurt on a weed looked at.

We might be ginger, but you're pussies. Get over it eh?

 

[DaGaffer]

Precisely. You wouldn't have won Culloden if you didn't have some Jocks to help you out. They could fight while you lot were in the medical tent having those poor feet you hurt on a weed looked at.

We might be ginger, but you're pussies. Get over it eh?

Oh, well done, so now Culloden is a Scottish victory? Whatever you say chief;

"The British Army under Cumberland assembled and trained at Aberdeen was well supplied. Twelve battalions of foot, three regiments of horse and a company of artillery were largely English (possibly also including German Hanoverians), three battalions of foot were Lowland Scots, one battalion and a militia had been largely raised from Clan Campbell Highlanders".

. So about 20-25% of the British army were Scots. Now, you can kid yourself that 75% of Cumberland's army were getting their tootsies seen to if you like, but the casualty rate of 52 to 1250 means that's a wee bit doubtful. Face facts, the pussies beat the gingers.

 

[Lazarus]

ffs guys give it a rest.

talk about taking things too far!