Scottish Independence Vote

One of the reasons that Wales will never cut it as an independent country is because too many Welsh people say Wales will never cut it as an independent country.

Gary Coleman wrote: One of the reasons that Wales will never cut it as an independent country is because too many Welsh people say Wales will never cut it as an independent country.

I'd agree with that if it wasn't for the fact that Wales will never cut it as an independent country.

I would suggest that is the same reason as to why we dont beat the South Africans and New Zealanders. Self belief and confidence two traits of character that us as Welsh people lack.

It's now been pointed out that Scotland would have no financial safety net should they gain independence. As it stands, they plan to keep sterling and fall under UK financial rules. Should a bank collapse, who would underwrite it? In other words, who would be the lender of last resort? With the UK it's the Bank of England, but it would be unacceptable for it to guarantee a foreign country.
Scotland would downgrade from an equal economic partner to a financial satellite with no monetary independence and budget constraints.

This would scare me witless if I were a Scot after seeing how close RBS came to collapse.

Having read this financial fact, and others (it left Salmond struggling to answer on last night's Newsnight), it should show, without doubt, that Wales could never gain independence - we don't even have any semi-national banking system. At least the Scots have the Bank if Scotland or Royal Bank of Scotland, which would have to have massive financial reserves.

How many independent countries would vote to be ruled once more by their erstwhile conqerers / occupiers (that invaded and occupied for one reason alone to exploit their resources for the occupier's benefit)? 

Gate12 wrote: salmidach wrote: omri jones wrote: How many independent countries would vote to be ruled once more by their erstwhile conqerers / occupiers (that invaded and occupied for one reason alone to exploit their resources for the occupier's benefit)?  no offence but in the 1300s, I don't think the English Monarchy knew much about resources and I'm pretty sure there isn't much of these resources in Scotland anyway. they were conquered to bring them under the yoke.     I'm pretty sure that people and land are resources.

No offence taken Sal. But what does under the yoke mean? Why bother to build all these castles at great expense if there was nothing in it for them? I mean suppression doesn't come cheap.