Scotland independence and golf

[Wayne_Kozun]

... Longer term (1-15 years from now, assuming that the EU gets its act together....) Scotland (and rUk) will join the Euro.  It is inevitable.  As for football, however, never!

If Scotland leaves then it is pretty likely that they may join the Euro.  But that will not happen for a long time, if ever, for rUK.  I used to think it was inevitable but after the last 5 years it has become clear that it is exceedingly unlikely to happen.

[Mark Bourgeois]

Here's what I genuinely don't understand as an American looking from afar: why would these peoples (all current constituent "kingdoms" / "nations" in the UK) prefer to split up and lose in international sporting events (excepting those not truly global) rather than combine and, if not win, at least be competitive? Many Americans have a state or two they detest but wouldn't think of shallowing the talent pool.

For the record, I have no opinion on Scottish independence, and of course the sporting issue (decision) predates (presages?) it.

Mark

Ask your Canadian and Mexican friends if they would rather run under the Stars and Stripes than their own flag in the Olympics.

Rich

The shared histories, to the extent there were any, of those three countries lasted a few decades and ended centuries ago. The opposite of the situation it seems in the UK. But never mind facts, if that's how the Scots feel then that's how they feel. (And the English and the Welsh.) Principles are only principles if they cost something. International sporting relevance, for example.

Annexation mit Deutschland however...that would be a tough decision. Global sporting relevance but nailed to a modern economic cross of gold.

[Marty Bonnar]

Ignorance is no way to go through life, Tommy...

Check out The Darien Scheme...

Fareweel to a' our Scottish fame,
Fareweel our ancient glory;
Fareweel ev'n to the Scottish name,
Sae fam'd in martial story.
Now Sark rins over Solway sands,
An' Tweed rins to the ocean,
To mark where England's province stands-
Such a parcel of rogues in a nation!

What force or guile could not subdue,
Thro' many warlike ages,
Is wrought now by a coward few,
For hireling traitor's wages.
The English steel we could disdain,
Secure in valour's station;
But English gold has been our bane -
Such a parcel of rogues in a nation!

O would, ere I had seen the day
That Treason thus could sell us,
My auld grey head had lien in clay,
Wi' Bruce and loyal Wallace!
But pith and power, till my last hour,
I'll mak this declaration;
We're bought and sold for English gold-
Such a parcel of rogues in a nation!

We're not the same...

F.

[Rich Goodale]

Ed its fair to say England performed badly at the World Cup we did turn up though!

Rich - if the massacre of 8000 men and boys at Srebrenica was part of a successful nation split then theres no hope.

Scotland wishes to get rid of nuclear weapons, Ukraine gave up theirs in 1994 as part of an agreement signed by amongst others Russia. Would Russia be attacking the Ukraine today of they still held the ultimate deterrent?

Mark

The blood of the 8000+ in Srebenica is wholly on the hands of the European Union, including both Scotland and rUK, who dithered and postured whilst all those poor people weer dying in their backyard.  You should be ashamed.  The number of dead would have been much greater if the USA had not (yet again....) stepped in to stop the Europeans from killing each other.  As Bob Dylan said, "When will you ever learn?"

Rich

[Rich Goodale]

... Longer term (1-15 years from now, assuming that the EU gets its act together....) Scotland (and rUk) will join the Euro.  It is inevitable.  As for football, however, never!

If Scotland leaves then it is pretty likely that they may join the Euro.  But that will not happen for a long time, if ever, for rUK.  I used to think it was inevitable but after the last 5 years it has become clear that it is exceedingly unlikely to happen.

Wayne

I respect your opinion, but in the long term the pound is as dead as a dodo, even though it's death is not imminent.  It is supported today only by nostalgia and money laundering, rather than intrinsic economic strength.  When it goes, we will all be saying good riddance.

Rich

[Keith Phillips]

Some bizarre commentary throughout this thread...now the 'Pound is dead', being supported only by nostalgia and money-laundering...HELLO??!??  I assume the Swiss, the Swedes, the Danes are knocking down the door to help support their southern European brethren?  And the Aussies, Kiwis and Canucks clearly need to find more formidable currencies...can't possibly make do with their silly versions of 'dollars'...

I am indifferent on Scottish independence - I totally get the 'pride of nation' issue but fear the sales pitch is mostly based on expanding government support programs, a losing proposition...someone earlier mentioned Texas, and indeed Texas, Alberta and similar would be very formidable free-market bastions which I'd love to join!

[Wayne_Kozun]

The pound sure seems stronger than the Euro where there are lots of countries that are not willing to make the hard decisions necessary to bring spending in line with their revenue.  The Germans and Dutch are going to get really tired of working until they are 80 so that the French, Italians and Greeks can retire at 57 years of age, have short work weeks, get paid for 13 months of the year and not make environmental compromises like fracking for gas.  The UK did make some hard fiscal decisions and their banks did a realistic reappraisal of the value of the assets.  That has still yet to be done in many European countries as they are still kicking the can down the road waiting for a deus ex machina to save the day.

At least the UK, especially London, has created an environment that attracts people from all around the world as a desirable place to live.

Canadians are glad that we have our own country, but that doesn't mean that we support any faction that wants independence as most of us feel that Quebec leaving would be a very bad thing.

[Keith Phillips]

Wayne, I concur on the Euro and most of your post...as a fellow Canadian (albeit now expat living south of the border), I was staunchly against Quebec independence when it was being seriously pursued...in hindsight I do agree with a previous poster that smaller government is better, and applaud sensible independence propositions...Quebec would be fine as an independent nation, and the rest of Canada would do okay on their own...if Alberta splintered that would really call into question the regional imbalances etc.  Sure you'd lose some of the 'efficiencies' of the larger organization, but I far prefer the character of the smaller independent cities, towns and villages in the New York area to 'the GTA', 'Greater Hamilton' etc...'small is beautiful'!!

[Wayne_Kozun]

Now we are getting way OT but I disagree that smaller is always better. One of the things that I think works better in Canada is the pooling of resources in areas like education.  In Ontario the quality of the schools is pretty similar from town to town, especially since we now have mega cities as you mentioned.  Inner city Hamilton is the same school board as wealthy suburban Ancaster.

My understanding of many US states is that the quality of schools can be hugely different between rich suburbs and poor inner cities since education is funded much more locally rather than being pooled over larger areas.  I don't think that is a good thing for social mobility, or for society in general.   Other things like pensions for govt employees, where I have some expertise, are FAR more efficient being managed provincially rather than city by city or county by county.

[Keith Phillips]

agreed OT but (a) I never said smaller is always better; (b) having grown up in the Hamilton area and now living in the NYC suburbs, I can tell you that the demographics are dramatically different...'inner-city Hamilton' bears NO resemblance to the distressed inner cities of the US...(b) the fact that the 'school board' is the same doesn't mean the students, teachers and outcomes are the same; (c) I'd hesitate to credit 'scale' for the 'efficiency' of the government pension schemes in Canada...I spend 100 days a year in Toronto and Vancouver on business...Canadians don't even jay-walk!!!  The cultural / behavioral differences between the two countries are far greater than most imagine; Canada is dramatically more homogeneous (though that is changing) and Canadians 'follow rules' in ways that make common management attainable up north...could never happen in the US. And finally (d) if there is so much synergy in government, why does it take two weeks for a letter from my mother in Canada to arrive in New Jersey?  why does it take 90 minutes sitting in line at the DMV to get my license renewed...

[Wayne_Kozun]

I didn't say there is a ton of synergy in govt - I am in favour of smaller govt as well, but scale matters in some instances and perhaps part of the Canadian (and even more so European) point of view is that there are times when individuals should make more sacrifices for the good of aggregate society.  In general governments are woefully inefficient but they are required to perform some services - the fewer the better.  Arguably one of the reasons that inner cities in Canada are not so bad is the pooling of resources and tax dollars which truncates the tails on either side of the income distribution.

p.s I jaywalk all the time and Toronto isn't that homogeneous.  I see lots of burkas every day and cricket is a more popular pickup game than hockey in Scarborough where I live.  I also was born in Hamilton but grew up in Ancaster where being of Eastern European descent made you very extic.  In Ontario you can renew your license plate or driver's license online unless you need a new photo.

[Rich Goodale]

This Canada place sounds great!  Maybe Scotland ought to join Canada after it splits from rUK?  Given the facts that a significant part of [hysical Scotland (everything to the west of the Great Glen/Loch Ness area) was actually part of Canada before the tectonic plates crashed together many, many years ago, and also that a significant proportion of Canada's human population has Scottish roots, largely due to the fact that the English landowners (e.g. The Duke of Sutherland nee Marquis of Stafford) brutally "cleared" the Highlands of its peasantry, sent them on ships across the Atlantic and then replaced them with sheep, this would be a marriage of equals, rather than one of convenience, as the current UK marriage was and still is.

[Jon Wiggett]

Rich,

if the union is broken up the Bank of England with associated assets and debts will also be effectively ended. The rUK would take its share continue to use the pound stirling which is the currency of the UK and we in Scotland would be able to set up our own currency and lender of last resort. Expecting a foreign country to underwrite our economy is ridiculous.

Interesting how RoI is suddenly not worth defending as your chosen model of how an independent Scotland could work

Jon

[Sean_A]

Jon

I think there is some confusion.  I hear Rihc saying that Scotland can use Sterling as its currency, not that Scotland will be able to control that currency once and if there is a split.  It seems obvious the long term goal is for Scotland to join the Euro (if it survives!) as launching its own currency would be a very risky move...not that joining the Euro doesn't have its own risks.  In the short term though, I think it is very wise for Scotland to hang onto the Pound and Westminster should support this (if a split is on the cards) if only to make the separation go smoother.  Remember, there are a lot of Scots in England who have family in the frigid north and Scotland is a keen trading partner.  It doesn't benefit anybody to play hardball. 

Ciao

[Rich Goodale]

Rich,

if the union is broken up the Bank of England with associated assets and debts will also be effectively ended. The rUK would take its share continue to use the pound stirling which is the currency of the UK and we in Scotland would be able to set up our own currency and lender of last resort. Expecting a foreign country to underwrite our economy is ridiculous.

Interesting how RoI is suddenly not worth defending as your chosen model of how an independent Scotland could work

Jon

Jon

If you have read what I have written carefully, you will know that I have never said that rUK will or should "underwrite" Scotland.  All I have said is that if and when separation occurs, it will be in the best interests of both parties to come to an amicable agreement regarding all currently joint assets, including the currency.

As for Ireland, if you can find any credible source that the country has not increased its per capita GDP/GNP greater than the UK since 1922, please inform me of that source.  I have spent a lot of time in Ireland over the past 35 years, and find it to be a place with less poverty, equal intelligence and more happiness than the great majority of the many places I have lived in and visited in the UK.

Slainte

Rich

[Rich Goodale]

Some bizarre commentary throughout this thread...now the 'Pound is dead', being supported only by nostalgia and money-laundering...HELLO??!??  I assume the Swiss, the Swedes, the Danes are knocking down the door to help support their southern European brethren?  And the Aussies, Kiwis and Canucks clearly need to find more formidable currencies...can't possibly make do with their silly versions of 'dollars'...

I am indifferent on Scottish independence - I totally get the 'pride of nation' issue but fear the sales pitch is mostly based on expanding government support programs, a losing proposition...someone earlier mentioned Texas, and indeed Texas, Alberta and similar would be very formidable free-market bastions which I'd love to join!

Keith

I said the pound is dead "in the long term."  Don't convert your savings into rubles, yet.......

[Rich Goodale]

Jon

I think there is some confusion.  I hear Rihc saying that Scotland can use Sterling as its currency, not that Scotland will be able to control that currency once and if there is a split.  It seems obvious the long term goal is for Scotland to join the Euro (if it survives!) as launching its own currency would be a very risky move...not that joining the Euro doesn't have its own risks.  In the short term though, I think it is very wise for Scotland to hang onto the Pound and Westminster should support this (if a split is on the cards) if only to make the separation go smoother.  Remember, there are a lot of Scots in England who have family in the frigid north and Scotland is a keen trading partner.  It doesn't benefit anybody to play hardball. 

Ciao

Thanks for listening carefully, Sean.  It is refreshing.

Rich

[Ulrich Mayring]

The only reason why you would want to have your own currency (i. e. one that you control - although it is questionable how much political control can really be exerted upon a national bank) is that it gives you the ability to make your products cheaper or more expensive in foreign currencies (i. e. foreign countries).

I don't know where the majority of Scottish exports are going to, but if it is the UK, then keeping the pound as the Scottish currency won't change a thing. But I don't know if that is technically even possible. For sure the Bank of England wouldn't print money for Scotland or allow them to print it, that would mean relinquishing control over parts of their currency. So the only way for Scotland to get their hands on pounds would be to buy them on the market like everyone else (lots of countries keep the pound as a reserve currency). The question I, being totally naive in financial matters, have about that plan is: how is Scotland going to pay for the massive amounts of pounds they need to buy? Do they have US Dollars or Euros stashed away?

Ulrich

[Michael Essig]

But there are also economies of scale and the ability to play a role in the global community.  A country of 5.5 million is rather small - can you afford the required infrastructure for a country including national defense, foreign affairs, etc?  As part of the UK, Scotland can have some influence in the international sphere but that is pretty much impossible as a smaller country.  As a PM of the UK a Scot could be a major player in the global political landscape that isn't really possible for a Scottish PM.  But maybe they don't care about that.

With your philosophy then the US should split up into 50 independent countries - or more in the case of states like Cali and Texas.

Those of us here in Canada are VERY familiar with all of these arguments, including the currency issues as we have been through two of these votes in the last few decades.

Actually, America was structured by our founding fathers 200+ years ago as separate governments (obviously not 50 at the time), with very, very limited powers allocated to the federal government.  Our Constitution allocated 20 enumerated powers to the federal government, and everything else (and I mean EVERYTHING) was left to the states.  Until the 1920s, approximately 80% of what the US federal government now does, was unconstitutional.  What allowed the federal government to expand itself into the powers of the states and to create agencies and its modern bureaucracy is beyond the time or space of this forum on golf architecture.  But the original allocation of power was very unique in history, and the tug of war over "state's rights" continues to this day.

Regarding global influence, the proprietor of the B&B and I joked that Scotland could become another Switzerland and stay out of international disputes.  With only 5.3M people, they wouldn't have any influence over such matters anyhow, so why pretend that they could.  Instead, save some of the money allocated for defense and spend it on education, or better yet, leave it for the people to choose how to spend it or save it.  Although, they already have free college educations, so I don't know how much more the government can do on that front.

[Bob_Huntley]

I don't think it will have a significant effect effect on the Open.
As for independence, Many Scots feel they are very different than the English. So in some sense Scotland is a separate nation. My question is, what country/area that has separated has been significantly worse off after independence?
Some say the Slovakia is not as healthy after splitting from Czech but I don't know that. Some might say Ukraine but it never really left the Russian sphere of influence. The current troubles are largely because Ukraine wants to turn towards Europe and lessen Russian influence. A smart choice economically.
But can anyone name an nation of people who were worse off after gaining independence from a larger nation?

Kerry,
Does Zimbabwe ring a bell?







Does Zimabwe ring a bell?

[Keith Phillips]

Rich, you did say 'long-term', which you then defined as 1-15 years...I'd say the probability of the Brits (or at least the English!) joining the Euro is very close to zero in that time-frame...seems more likely to me that the Euro is de-emphasized...anyway, back to the subject at hand.  Perhaps one impact Scottish independence would have on golf is that the English golf community might more aggressively pursue American golfers/tourists?  I love golf in Scotland, but the fine English courses now make up my bucket list.

[Sean_A]

Keith

England has made some moves in the golf tourism business in recent years.  One can only hope that bus loads found in Scotland and Ireland don't become too popular in England - green fees are high enough as it is.

Ciao   

[Mark Johnson]

My understanding of many US states is that the quality of schools can be hugely different between rich suburbs and poor inner cities since education is funded much more locally rather than being pooled over larger areas.  I don't think that is a good thing for social mobility, or for society in general.   Other things like pensions for govt employees, where I have some expertise, are FAR more efficient being managed provincially rather than city by city or county by county.

In the US, there is a gap in quality of education across district, however, it is not driven by funding.    For the most part, inner-city schools have greater funding per student than suburban schools.   The issues tend to be a lack of parental involvement, teachers union in big cities with way too much power and a flight of middle class students to magnet or parochial schools.

[David_Tepper]

This weekend's edition of the Financial Times has what is likely the most cogent analysis of the currency situation you will come across:

 http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/e635505a-328f-11e4-a5a2-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3CWBGoCYe

But the currency situation is by no means the only major problem and independent Scotland will face.

[Rich Goodale]

Rich, you did say 'long-term', which you then defined as 1-15 years...I'd say the probability of the Brits (or at least the English!) joining the Euro is very close to zero in that time-frame...seems more likely to me that the Euro is de-emphasized...anyway, back to the subject at hand.  Perhaps one impact Scottish independence would have on golf is that the English golf community might more aggressively pursue American golfers/tourists?  I love golf in Scotland, but the fine English courses now make up my bucket list.

I disagree, Keith.  Regardless of its problems, rUK in Europe is "Better Together" than the rump State that it already is and will be more so if a Yes vote occurs. Within the next 15 years, the pound will be kaput, unless rUK decides to completely become an enclave for money laundering a la Switzerland.  And, yes, England and Wales and Northern Ireland have fine golf courses, but in terms of the overall experience, none of them are a match for the best of Scotland's links.  IMHO, of course....