Scotland should become independent.
Debate Rounds (4)
2)Scottish independence is pointless, they would lose BBC, Security Services and other things and so the only people who want a independent Scotland are Power- hungry politicians who want their own country.
3) Scotland should not be independent as it lacks planning. Others have planned all details out and tax would be raised to cover extra expenses a lot of jobs would also be lost.
(1) You said that Scotland would not earn nearly enough money to cover the welfare system in place. This is absolute codswallop. Scotland have oil, advances in life science, green technology and other future developments. You also said that Scotland has a reputation for losing money. Why do you say that?
(2) You said that Scottish independence is pointless. So what if they lose the BBC? The people who want Scotland to be independent are politicians who want Scotland's future in Scotland's hands, rather than important decisions being made in Westminster, as they are right now.
(3) You said that tax would be raised if Scotland became independent. Actually, it is the complete opposite. If Scotland became independent, it would abolish the 'bedroom tax', and raise the minimum wage.
David Cameron is a manipulative man, who is not telling you that because Scotland may quit the pound, it would cost the rest of the UK "500 million pounds. On the subject of money, the UK has a national debt of a whopping "1 trillion (that's "1,000,000,000,000). If Scotland remains part of the union, it will still have to pay for the UK's national debt, while if they become independent, they will only have to pay a fragment of the national debt.
Alex Salmond has described Scotland as 'a surly lodger in the United Kingdom'. The truth is, that this lodger is the victim of exploitation by a greedy, ruthless landlord who cares only about his tenant's wealth rather than his welfare.
1) Scotland would struggle without support end of.
2)They want the fame and are all power hungry politicians which they failed at.
It wouldn't work they have oil yes but it will run out one day and do the government have money to properly support the country. The country has finance problems already and it would become worse if they are independent as they will be left to fend for themselves. Yes they would be part of the EU but they have to go through a long process of being accepted and have to meet all the requirements.
(2) This is NOT about fame. Do you genuinely think that Alex Salmond wants to be an A-list celebrity?
Even David Cameron and Alistair Darling have admitted that Scotland could succeed on its own as an independent country. You have also pointed out that the oil will run out. So what? Everything runs out some time. Anyway, 60 years worth of oil would develop Scotland enough to become an incredibly successful economy. That would still be worth a lot of money.
They lack planning and so haven't really thought about it they are all getting carried away.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|
Reasons for voting decision: An interesting, albeit short, debate. I wish it had been longer--as it stands, Pro seems to have failed in their BoP. They gave reasons that Scotland could make it on their own, but while that's a necessary component of independence being a good idea, it's not sufficient. WHY should Scotland be independent? Pro didn't really give us, to me, solid reasons FOR independence. A very narrow victory for Con, based largely on the BoP issue.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.