How many tourists for any year?

Scotland averages in about £4,000,000,000 each year from tourism. The UK is predicted to hit an all-time high in 2015, with tourists spending £22,000,000,000. Therefore, a little under 1/5 of tourist finances enter Scotland, despite Scotland making up over 1/12 of the UK's population.

So relative to the population, Scotland earn twice as much than England,
But what happens with oil, and I'm guessing you also need to redevelop the Commerce

What I have been trying to say, is that the international community would heavily dicourage England declaring war on Scotland. Is that not self-evident? Are we in the middle ages? Russia will give guns to Scotland? What are you on about? And you seem to completely understand, and concede my point that Scotland are giving a lot more money to pay off England's debts, than vice versa. I don't know what you mean by England is bigger in gambling than Scotland is... What are we doing, comparing Las Vegas to New York?

No, it wouldn't. Scotland isn't America's ally, Great England is America's ally. If America allows it, the best thing going to Scotland is Russian weaponry, which still probably wouldn't help unless it's nukes or something (unlikely). Are we in the middle ages?



Are we? And yes, I agree that Scotland is giving more money to pay England's debts than in reverse, but here's why: Scotland is a little, unimportant country. Britain is a big country, in my opinion, it is the 9th strongest country in the world. Without Scotland, 10th. Scotland will be just about as powerful as Singapore. No, Singapore is actually growing at a fast rate, Singapore is too powerful, Scotland will be a bit more powerful than Bulgaria. Scotland will not follow Bulgaria's outsourcing path, though, since it is actually a decent country to live in with a relatively high GDP by head, even by mode, compared to the poorer EU regions. It has no future in the EU other than to give money , which is why England wants to leave and why Scotland (if it becomes independent) will, too.

Sorry if I got off-topic a bit, but I want to show you how weak Scotland will be as an independent country.

You also concede my point about the transport being undeniably stronger in Scotland, than England. Are you implying that people who want independence must be dumb and savage? That is highly offensive and ignorant. Nicola Sturgeon (the witch goddess) is arguably the most intelligent, and best debater of all the UK political party leaders, and she is not backed by a bunch of idiot drones who have no idea what they're talking about. Wouldn't you agree that Scotland has a higher tourism-to-population ratio than England does, because more population means more cities, more cities means more attractions, and more attractions means more tourism. Also, you're trying to say that Wales has more tourism than Scotland does? You make me laugh.

Well, I don't know much about English or Scottish transportation, to be quite honest, but I do know about transportation in general: It's only a small bit of the big clock. Scotland could have the Novosibirsk world record for good rails and roads, and it still won't solve every problem. I'm not implying it, I'm saying it: Folk who want independence are 90% of the time, dumb, proud and willing to fight (savage). The other 5% of the time are misled folk, probably you, misled by your dumb, proud and savage ancestor clans that got passed down from clan to clan to your family. The other 5% is when independence is needed (rare, and in that case, they're regular folk). Scotland does not need independence. England is not shooting down Scots like Iceland was shooting down Basques, there is no serious ethnic violence, it's just dumb and proud, really.

I've seen Sturgeon, in fact, I agree with most of her policies, but I'm afraid noone barrages the Farage when it comes to arguments. Stop.

Every major political party is backed by idiot drones. SNP is not excluded from this. Stop.

Yes, Scotland does have a wonderful population-tourism ratio. You know what else has an ever better population-tourism ratio? The Vatican Hill. More folk won't make more population, Scotland's relying on it's nature, the Vatican's relying on Catholicism and Mr Franciscus. Folk don't come to Scotland for the towns, really, they come for the beautiful landscapes, like you said yourself. Sure, towns make up a bit of it, but for Scotland, not much. If you want towns and boroughs, England is a better teacup.

No, I'm not saying Wales will have successful independence. I'm also saying Scotland won't have successful independence, either. Though England and Wales will be hurt a bit from Scotland's independence, it's a tenth of what Scotland will feel. Independence is a bad idea for Scotland, although it's an even worse idea for Wales.

No, I'm not saying that every single constituency that does not vote for the majority should become independent, I'm saying that Scotland are being included in several laws and policies, that are reserved matters, that are greatly hindering the country from economical development and growth, and this is not the case for other constituencies. An overwhelming majority of Scottish citizens want to be ruled by left-winged policies, and they continue to have half of their laws made up by a far-right government in London, instead of a Centre-Left government in Edinburgh. You seem to not understand, after the countless examples of Scotland's flourishing, prosperous industry I have shown you, and you say it would be pointless for Scotland to be independent.

So why is Scotland special? Let's let Cardiff and South Wales have independence, as they voted for Labour, surrounded by Middle Welsh Conservatives and West English Conservatives. Let's let the country be torn up into several : One for the conservatives, one for the Scottish conservatives, another for Labour, one for Scottish Labour, one for Scotland (SNP), one for the Liberal Democrats, another for the Scottish Liberal Democrats, another for Wales (Plaid Cymru) and several for the Smorgasborg we call Northern Ireland. Let's stop being ruled by the oppressive far-right London! Oh, wait, even London doesn't even like being ruled by oppressive far-right London. You haven't shown me industry, you've showed me lack of it. I've never seen or heard of any Scottish traditional food in my life other than Scotch.

At the height of the SSP, they had 6 Scottish seats, which is good for a party of their size, especially for a socialist one. They were going to continue to get better, before their leader corrupted.

Even you yourself say "especially for a socialist one". No, they weren't going to get better until they're going to get worse, maybe 10 seats would be their peak.

I'm trying to say that this thread has been derailed. Does the title say "Scottish Independence Debate"?

Yes, thread derailed, but half the folk here don't even really know or have researched the countries that they're talking about anyway, it looks like it has died anyway before we started arguing.

Scotland is a little, unimportant country. Britain is a big country, in my opinion, it is the 9th strongest country in the world. Without Scotland, 10th. Scotland will be just about as powerful as Singapore. No, Singapore is actually growing at a fast rate, Singapore is too powerful, Scotland will be a bit more powerful than Bulgaria.

Does a country need to be big for being successful? What about Luxembourg, Norway, Denmark, Switzerland, Sweden? Strength is not a proof of success (see Russia), Juq you are here again and again giving your own judgement of the situation which is always biased, never objective.

and seriously, tourism England, especially London much more touristy than Scotland.

Elroi and Juq, Scotland is indeed a great touristic destination attracting 19 million tourists per year. UK as a whole attracts 32 million tourists... So in other words Scotland alone attracts more or less 60% of the tourists visiting the UK!


Before presenting any arguments or claiming anything guys, try to support them with good evidences/sources. That would make much more higher level discussions and make this debate more interesting.

Alright. Think. Are England REALLY going to declare war on Scotland if the succeed in proclaiming their independence? And please tell me that the Taliban reference was a joke.

Who cares if an independent Scotland would not be as important as Britain? Was anyone expecting it to be? Military strength is not important nowadays as it was before, and Scotland are relatively safe when it comes to international affairs, because they will have a strong economy, and their military doesn't really matter, because what you said about Scotland not being important is true. Nobody would want to BOMB Scotland, what would they gain? There is a strong EU movement in Scotland, and the SNP clearly recognise this, as Nicola Sturgeon on behalf of the SNP, will ask for another independence referendum if Britain is to leave the EU. Even if this is rejected, she has a backup plan. For Britain to leave the EU, there must be majority votes in England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland, for each of these places views to be represented correctly.

For a country like Scotland, economy is everything in this day-and-age. Military means nothing when you are so far away from danger.

Transportation is a small aspect here, but it still has some importance. About independence, the Scots want it because recently their voices have been mis-represented, and no, there is not any genocides occuring, there is no ethnic violence, but Scotland are one of the larget ethnic minorities, who, about 90% of the country's views are being misrepresented by a government that they do not want.

Excuse me? At this point it becomes subjective, but I'd say that Sturgeon is a better debater, and more intelligent than Farage.

When I say they are not backed by idiot drones, I mean that a lot of their important people in their party aren't. I'm not saying people who vote for them, and yes, I agree that every party has idiots and SNP are no different, but I think that they generally have more intelligent people in televised debates, and such.

For this, you can blame the Vikings. Scotland used to be the centre of Catholicism, with the missionary St. Columba living on the Isle of Iona, he attracted thousands of other missionaries, and converted thousands of people to Christianity. But then one day, the Vikings invaded, spread their Nordic beliefs, culture and religion. Perhaps in an alternate scenario where the Vikings didn't invade the isle of Iona, it would continue to be the centre of Catholicism, and Scotland would have a much higher tourism than it does not. Moreover, yes I agree to the fact that Scotland's scenery pulls in more tourism than the cities.

Independence is not a bad idea for Scotland, and if you review my previous posts I have given several reasons as to why Scotland's economy will be greatly benefited from the inequality that is spread around due to the far-right wealth distribution that lies in the UK. The UK are the worst Western Country for this, and with a left-winged government ruling the country, it can be toned down.

Scotland is special because they have a long history of being independent, and that they only joined England because they were screwed over by the Europeans nations when trying to colonise the Americas. They have unique languages, culture, cuisine, ethnicity, and the hope to become independent. Just because somebody has a different political view from someone else doesn't mean they should become independent. There are several other factors that amount up to this. I have shown you the various and plentiful types of industry Scotland has, that would keep it economically afloat as a nation.

I'll not try to argue that the SSP will rebuild. They won't. But they definitely could have got better before, if they put effort into it, and if their leader was actually decent.

True. But I'd like to classify this as something a little more sophisticated than arguing.

(If you are finding it hard to find my structure, I am responding to every one of Xypapy's arguments. I am following his structure).

Edited 6/6/2015 21:55:36

^ If England declares war on Scotland (which would be a serious joke), remember you can still count on the Auld Alliance!



Edited 6/6/2015 22:16:04

Don't forget that Norway was sometimes part of that pact too!

yes Norway, with them we would definitely win, a 3 sides invasion (or 4 if we count Ireland)!!!

Let's not forget

^ what's that ugly flag?

So Scotland, France,Norway versus Portugal and England

Maybe we could bring Hungary in it too. Hungary was always an old ally of France. Perhaps we could bring in Norway's Nordic Brothers in as well too.

Also, England and Northern Ireland don't have enough seats in parliament, whereas Wales and Scotland have too many.



Edited 6/7/2015 00:31:03

Hah, maybe France would declare War on Spain for Catalonia. That always happens to me

England spending less its money than Scotland is not a very surprising thing, as I showed you earlier England is the worst developed country in terms of inequalities, and each year the Tories are reducing the social budget and instead favor the financial market of the city. Welcome in England.

Well, it's like that for the rich take the same percentage of customs, and the government will divide it by the number of Population, it does not work according to those who pay more get more

Id like to live in New Zealand

where we bunjee jump then take a white water raft to work

Edited 6/7/2015 11:36:15