Thread: Scotland

Originally Posted by Bruno

I know. Pixel said that almost all countries who tore away from their motherland are off better. Given that the US is the size of Western Europe and most states the size of a nation, by his logic the states would be better off as independent countries.

I don;t think that is true, and it would also greatly reduce the power and invluence of the US because you'd no longer be a single country with a single forgeir policy and big military, you'd become a lot of small nation states with a fragmented approach to everything.

I agree with this & posts # 9 and 12,,,, our States are not going anywhere in my lifetime.

What Pixel said in post # 11 is also true,,, some States have organizations that want succession & try what little they can to accomplish this,,, rarely do the rest of us hear about it though, as their voice is weak.

Heck,,,, Key West has been trying to leave Florida for longer than I have been born,,, they even have their own flag.
The problem with Key West is , they get wasted by the time the sun goes down,,, then wake up around noon to search for where they planted their flag the night before,,,

My ancestors came from Scotland. The first one to leave her was Captain David Peebles of Fifeshire, Scotland. He landed in Virginia, in the year 1650.

He was later followed by James, William, John & Robert Peebles who left Peebleshire, Scotland in the year 1718. They landed in Massachusetts.

I don't have a feeling either way on the Scotland vote. I just hope the vote was as honest as it could be & the majority did get what they wanted.

I stand corrected

I haven't heard much of the secessionist movement as of late but this just popped on a friends FB feed I guess according to these numbers it is more popular then I thought still

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-0...tate-secede-us

I think you were more to fact in post # 20,,, I don't think you need to correct.

I read the article & like most statements that seem out of the "norm", I look at the source. It's written by some unknown who uses the name "Tyler Durden" , as you know the name of a fictional character in the movie Fight Club.

The site "Zero Hedge" appears to be a dumping ground for articles written by people with too much time on their hands & who don't stand behind their words. If your thoughts are worth writting down & spreading across the net, then put your real name to them.

1 in 4 people,,,,,, can't run with that,,, just my thoughts,,,,

Originally Posted by Hirlau

I think you were more to fact in post # 20,,, I don't think you need to correct.

I read the article & like most statements that seem out of the "norm", I look at the source. It's written by some unknown who uses the name "Tyler Durden" , as you know the name of a fictional character in the movie Fight Club.

The site "Zero Hedge" appears to be a dumping ground for articles written by people with too much time on their hands & who don't stand behind their words. If your thoughts are worth writting down & spreading across the net, then put your real name to them.

1 in 4 people,,,,,, can't run with that,,, just my thoughts,,,,

I also thought I was right, just looking at the platform statements from many of my home state elections, tells me that the State Lands Issue is a hot button right now...
I hadn't heard secessionist talk in a few years..

To be accurate however when there was/is secessionist talk it has never included dissolving from the US per se it is more about State Rights, Laws, and Control, and about less Federal Laws tied to Federal money..
At least this is what I have heard form the Political platforms, I am sure there are outliers and fringe groups that want total secession but I personally haven't seen much of that ..
Doing a bit more searching into the 25% statement when I get some time, I wonder to how it was framed into a poll question even if the number was correct

Originally Posted by gssixgun

I also thought I was right, just looking at the platform statements from many of my home state elections, tells me that the State Lands Issue is a hot button right now...
I hadn't heard secessionist talk in a few years..

To be accurate however when there was/is secessionist talk it has never included dissolving from the US per se it is more about State Rights, Laws, and Control, and about less Federal Laws tied to Federal money..
At least this is what I have heard form the Political platforms, I am sure there are outliers and fringe groups that want total secession but I personally haven't seen much of that ..
Doing a bit more searching into the 25% statement when I get some time, I wonder to how it was framed into a poll question even if the number was correct

That's the thing we've been talking about. I don't disagree that geographically different regions could do with more local rights. Especially in this age where information is more readily accessible at all levels whereas in the olden days it was harder for local regions to get clear access to global data. And it would be silly to try and govern someplace like Alaska the same way you would govern Washinton DC.

Scotland is a prime example of a region where local government should be obvious (as indeed they seem to be getting now). The vote however was for secession from the union. That would have been a bad development because it would have no benefits that could not be gotten with more local governance and cause massive instability in the EU region at a time when we should be focused on far more important issues.

One can argue about the decision of Cameron. On the one hand, he was almost the man who singlehandedly destroyed the UK by insisting that the referendum would allow no middle ground. Otoh, now that there has been a resounding NO, a handover of responsibilities to the local government has a high chance of ending this problem, the same way it ended in Northern Ireland. Cameron gambled the British Empire and the fate of the EU, and won, so in hindsight he wasn't wrong. But this could have really, really ended very badly for the UK and the EU both.

Originally Posted by Bruno

One can argue about the decision of Cameron. On the one hand, he was almost the man who singlehandedly destroyed the UK by insisting that the referendum would allow no middle ground. Otoh, now that there has been a resounding NO, a handover of responsibilities to the local government has a high chance of ending this problem, the same way it ended in Northern Ireland. Cameron gambled the British Empire and the fate of the EU, and won, so in hindsight he wasn't wrong. But this could have really, really ended very badly for the UK and the EU both.

Few years ago there was a term called 'Europe of Regions' (or something like that). It was a movement or long time goal to share more power between EU parliament and provinces. Away from the national parliaments.

I think it was/still is a good goal, if conducted right. Leave the big things to union and let the rest for the more independent provinces to decide. Guess it would fulfill the needs of those areas now willing to have more independence (Catalunya, Südtirol, Åland etc).

The big things would be foreign policy, taxation 'til some level etc. And the provinces were about to decide anything that doesn't violate the
basics of free movement of people, goods, services etc.

Currently union does produce rules that either go too far or do not go far enough.