Scottish Independence: Quebec Edition

[viper37]

East Germany.

Did they ever vote on the issue in the first place?

Scotland, I don't know.  The monarchy decided of the union, the people followed. Don't know enough about Scottish and British history beyond that for that time period.

Now I don't think that an independent Quebec, or an independent Scotland, would ever "crash and burn".  They'd still be developed first world nations with well-educated workforces.  But I do have concerns that economically they would lag behind the countries they are leaving behind - that standards of living in either country would be lower than if they'd stayed with the greater political entity.

It really depends on the choice the people make afterwards.
In Quebec, most sovereignists expect to bonify the inneficient leftist state by controlling 100% of our revenues.  The simple fact is, this Federation is what allows us to be über generous with other people's money.
I've long tought seperation would be a kick in the butt and force Quebecers to wake up on economical issues, but I've lost hope of that. 

It's not something I have a desire to see happening now, and I don't think the current seperatists are realists enough to admit they need to change a lot of things, from their economic approach to the way they want to sell and realize independance.

[derspiess]

Slovaks are definitely worse off.

Worse off than the Czechs, or worse off than they were under communism? 

[Valmy]

It seems weird to claim that the Czechs are better off than they were in 1914 or whatever.  So much changed since then it is impossible to know if the region would have been better off staying as part of a united Danubian Monarchy/Confederation whatever.  Well ok they would have been just take my word for it.

If we are talking about better of than as the richer part of Czechoslovakia than sure, they got to dump their smaller and poorer partners.  But that would be more like claiming Canada would be better off without Quebec not the other way around.

[viper37]

But whatever - knock yourselves out. I wish one of them would succeed, if for no other reason than watching it crash and burn might make the other STFU already with their constant whining.

Czechs don't seem worst than they were.  Slovakia had a rough patch getting out of communism but seems better of today than they were before.
I'm not sure about Kosovo, but I doubt it can be worst than in Yugoslavia.  Or Serbian domination.

Incidentally, can you name one failed country, following democratically attained independance, who chose to rejoin the motherland?

Slovaks are definitely worse off.

The economy of Slovakia is a high income economy.[9] With the highest sustained GDP growth in the European Union, reporting 10.4% in 2007 and the highest rating from V4 countries,[10] the Slovak economy has been considered a tiger economy known as the Tatra Tiger. Slovakia has been an EU member state since 2004 and adopted the euro currency at the beginning of 2009. Its capital, Bratislava, is the largest financial centre in Slovakia. Unemployment has fallen considerably, although long-term unemployment remains high. GDP per capita at purchasing power parity was €18,100 in 2010, which was 74% of the EU average [1].
GDP per capita     16,892.55 USD ‎(2012)  (no PPP)
   

Of the countries in central and eastern Europe, the Czech Republic has one of the most developed industrialized economies. It is one of the most stable and prosperous of the post-Communist states of Central and Eastern Europe. GDP per capita at purchasing power parity was $27,100 in 2011, which is 85% of the EU average.
Czech Republic: 18,861.43 USD (no PPP)


Does not seem so bad.  Better than Hungary, better than many east european countries including Poland. 
The Czech took the lead, but the Slovaks are coming back.  Peter Stasny will fix everything.  There's nothing he can't fix.

Maybe Poland should have remained split between Germany and Russia.  Seems you were better off that way, since it's always better to be part of a larger culture, as IDE said. There are more Germans and Russians than Poles, so they got to be superior, numbers always speak.  Maybe, once Russia is done with Ukraine, you could ask them to help you reach the civilized world of economic prosperity?  I'm pretty sur Russia's GDP is superior to Poland.  And you're both slavic people, adaptation should not be that hard.  You're like cousins or something like that.  You spent a great deal of your existence partly under russian domination, so it's like returning to your natural state.  But if you fear the russians, maybe the Belarusians could annex you.  Many of them speak russian, so the transition might be easier, until Mother Russia envelops you all with its loving arms of cultural supremacy

[Valmy]

Maybe Poland should have remained split between Germany and Russia.  Seems you were better off that way, since it's always better to be part of a larger culture, as IDE said. There are more Germans and Russians than Poles, so they got to be superior, numbers always speak.  Maybe, once Russia is done with Ukraine, you could ask them to help you reach the civilized world of economic prosperity?  I'm pretty sur Russia's GDP is superior to Poland.  And you're both slavic people, adaptation should not be that hard.  You're like cousins or something like that.  You spent a great deal of your existence partly under russian domination, so it's like returning to your natural state.  But if you fear the russians, maybe the Belarusians could annex you.  Many of them speak russian, so the transition might be easier, until Mother Russia envelops you all with its loving arms of cultural supremacy

Well clearly we must be 100% an insane Lettowist or desire to divide the world between three super states.

[Grallon]

...

Overall, though, there is a radical difference bettween Quebec's culture and Canadian culture.

Viper, Viper, Viper...


How many times must I repeat this to you!?  The cornerstone of Canadian identity, what little of it there is, is the negation of our own national identity and the pretense, since they cannot reasonably deny that Americans do have a collective identity, that theirs is morally superior to that of their cousins.

That is the reason why you can hear them say or write, with a straight face, that Quebec's nationalism is *BAAAAAD* while their own, when compared to the US, is virtuous... 

While individuals will delude themselves for any number of reasons, collectives can do so as well.  Canada is a 'shining' example of that.


G.

[viper37]

Well clearly we must be 100% an insane Lettowist or desire to divide the world between three super states.

And every single nationalist wants the world to be filled with micro-states, only for the fun of it.

[garbon]

Well clearly we must be 100% an insane Lettowist or desire to divide the world between three super states.

And every single nationalist wants the world to be filled with micro-states, only for the fun of it.

Nah, mostly just sounds like personal insecurity.

[viper37]

Scotland did vote, The scottish parliament and the english parliament negotiated the union agreement. There was a dynastic union, but the united kingdom is a union of two parliaments.

Allright, so after fighting for their independance, they united some 300 years later and wish to seperate some 300 years later.  And Scotland will likely vote to rejoin UK in some 300 years from now.

[viper37]

One of the curious aspects of the Yes position is the apparent assumption that if Scotland is de jure independent, somehow it won't matter who is running things just next door across the invisible line we call a political boundary.

That's the kind of things that Scotland could develop in time.  It's certainly better for them to start by using the GBP, and eventually, either develop their own currency or adopt the Euro.  Changing currency by next week would create some havoc in the economy.  Heck, the referendum, no matter the result, might create havoc in Scotland's economy. 

If the Canadian example serves, the British will try to punish the Scots any way they can for daring to be different.  If Scotland remains part of UK, a financial drain, as UK corporations based in Scotland move back to England is to be expected.  If they are independant, these same UK businesses will be tempted to leave the place too, but eventually, Scotland can attract other foreign investements and develop it's own financial institutions.  It'll take time, but they'll eventually succeed.  Or fail miserably and forever depend on Euro subsidies.

They are in for a rough ride anyway, no matter the result.

[viper37]

Nah, mostly just sounds like personal insecurity.

Tell me again why your country seceded from Great Britain?  Did Americans of this time feel insecure?

[Martinus]

Nah, mostly just sounds like personal insecurity.

Tell me again why your country seceded from Great Britain?  Did Americans of this time feel insecure?

I didn't realise Scots have no political representation in the UK.

[garbon]

Nah, mostly just sounds like personal insecurity.

Tell me again why your country seceded from Great Britain?  Did Americans of this time feel insecure?

Don't ask me. I wasn't alive then and I have never held that the US had great reasons for leaving.

[derspiess]

Nah, mostly just sounds like personal insecurity.

Tell me again why your country seceded from Great Britain?  Did Americans of this time feel insecure?

They were infringing on our rights not to spell "color" with a u

[viper37]

Why would that happen? I would think that UK corporations based in Scotland (such as certain banks and pension funds) know better than to do something purely out of spite. I was under an impression that the UK is not Russia, so their corporations do not necessary follow the government's bidding.

I'm basing myself on the Canadian situation.  Many financial institutions decided to abandon Quebec. Eventually, they came back, but they're struggling to get past those who stayed.  SunLife comes to mind.  Laura Secord is another, they were eventually bought by a Quebec based company.  It was hard for Quebec at first.

One could argue that the move from Montreal (Quebec) to Toronto (Ontario) had already begun with the construction of the St-Laurent seaway, but the rise of Quebec's nationalism accelerated this.  Many English Quebecers felt uneasy at leaving in a province dominated by francophones and chose to leave the country.

After the 1995 referendum, Quebec was crushed by the government.  Money transfer from the Feds were drastically reduced (those that represent our share of taxes we send to the federal gov) as well as equalization payments (the wellfare of Canada), only to be re-established by the current governement a few years ago.  Pro-Ontarian policies were adopted, i.e. subsidizing Ontario's industries while cutting those for Quebec.  Later on, it was more a pro-oil shift that was mostly beneficial to the West.  But I don't consider a high valued currency to be a real problem, we need to adapt, simply, so it's not really the worst policies of all.  Environmental policies however, subsidizing the oil industry instead of leveling the playing field for all, that is detrimental to Quebec.