Scottish Vote Scares London As Scots eye independence, rest of UK gets nervous

Scottish Vote Scares London

We have been warning that the Scottish separation was something to take seriously since the Berlin Conference in 2012

http://hw.infowars.com/wp-content/up...otland-yes.jpg

by Martin Armstrong | September 9, 2014

We have been warning that the Scottish separation was something to take seriously since the Berlin Conference in 2012. Now suddenly the polls are showing Scotland just may vote YES and leave the UK because if the rising chaos in the EU and the totally insane policies in France. The British financial markets tumbled on Monday after an opinion poll showed for the first time this year that Scots may vote for independence in a referendum next week on the 18th, breaking up the United Kingdom that was first joined in 1707.

The latest poll has sent a shock-wave that is bordering on the verge of a panic among Britain’s ruling elite. The chart pattern of the pound looks like a Waterfall Event. Prime Minister David Cameron’s Conservative-led government is now suddenly promising proposals this week to grant Scotland greater autonomy if it stays. All the pundits had said we were wrong and there was no support in Scotland for such a separation.
http://i0.wp.com/armstrongeconomics....size=584%2C340

This is the chart we showed at the Berlin Conference illustrating the rising separatist movements. This is part of the Cycle or War model. Sorry, but this is the civil unrest rising as we have warned that such trends are driven by economics. Turn down the economy and this is what you get.
Cameron’s job as Prime Minister is now on the line if Scots vote on Sept. 18 to secede. Cameron is clueless as he still tries to dance with the EU. Now with just eight months before a national election planned for May 2015, which will be yet another surprise, Cameron said that the government was not making contingency plans for the possibility of Scottish independence in a vain attempt to say it will not happen. Yet the masses are stirring and politicians fail to grasp that the world economy is imploding and the forms of insane governments with perpetual borrowing that has no intent of paying anything back just cannot continue forever.
Sterling fell more than 1% scoring its biggest one-day drop in 13 months, This should be expected for the markets are reacting more to uncertainty than reality. When the pound would not join the euro, the pundits sold the pound and claimed it would fall out of bed and the euro would be king. We got called in to get major companies out of short positions on the pound when it rallied.
Once again the analysts are writing off Scotland warning it will be a huge short if it leaves Britain and the UK. But frankly, once again we see the opposite. The Scots are conservative and this is where economics was born. Virtually every bank has been warning investors outlining the risks to the U.K. economy and European unity of Scottish independence. But nobody addresses the risks to remaining in the UK and the collapse of the EU. They do not even contemplate such a scenario.
Sorry, the Unionists claim it’s ’Better Together’ campaign but cannot articulate the risks of remaining with the EU. Nevertheless, after months of polls showing nationalists/separatists heading for a certain defeat, the survey by the YouGov pollster raised the real prospect that secessionists could achieve their goal of breaking the 307-year-old union with England that would actually complete a 309.6 year cycle.
The current polls indicate Scots have been bothered by a perceived scare campaign launched by unionists that effectively tell the Scots they are second-rate people incapable of self-rule. The pro-independence Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond appeared much stronger than Darling in a television debate on August 25. Britain is going to have to choose between a failed EU or the UK. The Scots are forcing this upon the whole of Britain.

http://www.infowars.com/scottish-vote-scares-london/

As Scots eye independence, rest of UK gets nervous

Article at the page link:

http://money.msn.com/business-news/a...09&id=17915516

The Black Swan Of Scotland

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau.../picture-5.jpg Submitted by Tyler Durden on 09/10/2014 18:00 -0400

It appears The UK government's approach to Scotland has shifted dramatically from threats (we can't guarantee your saefty against terrorists) to hugs and kisses.. as David Cameron begs Scots not to tear apart Britain's "family of nations."

"I would be heartbroken if this family of nations ... was torn apart," Cameron, speaking in the atrium of the Scottish Widows building in central Edinburgh.

It appears - as we explain below - there is good reason to panic...
Submitted by Raul Ilargi Meijer via The Automatic Earth blog,
Got a mail from a friend in Scotland late last night that got me thinking. “Unfortunately, using Ireland as a model of fracture, we may start blowing up each other.” I’ve been reading a lot lately, in between all the other things, about Scotland, as should be obvious from my essay (Jim Kunstler tells me I can use that word) yesterday, Please Scotland, Blow Up The EU, and sometime today a thought crept up on me that has me wondering how ugly this thing is going to get. I think it can get very bad.
What I get from it all is that if anything is going to win this for the independence side, it must be the arrogance the London government has exhibited. That alone could seal the deal. But now of course London has belatedly woken up. Even David Cameron is scheduled to – finally – visit Scotland in the course of the contest. And if push comes to shove, they’ll throw in a royal baby. Or a Queen. Mark my words.
Cameron’s visit is funny in that he never thought it necessary until now because he thought he would win no matter what until a few days ago, and also funny because he must easily be the least popular person in all of Scotland, so a visit is a substantial risk. He had his bellboy Alistair King do a TV debate recently, and King flunked that thing so badly he may have single-handedly propelled the Yes side into the lead.
The knifes are being sharpened and soon they will be drawn – there’s only 9 days left. Question is, who will end up hurt? Bank of England Governor Mark Carney picked today of all days, 9 days before the referendum, to at last get more specific about his rate hike plan: it’s going to be early 2015. Because the UK economy is doing so great…
Only, wages will have to rise, and that will have to happen through British workers ‘earning’ pay hikes by ‘boosting their productivity and skills’. These workers have about 6 months to do that. You’re pulling my leg here, right, Mark? In any case, it seems obvious that Canadian Carney will be used as a tool against the Scottish independence movement. That’s just more arrogance.
Carney also spoke out directly on Scotland, saying there can’t be a currency union between the Scots and the Brits. Oh yeah, that should scare ‘em!
The pound sterling is falling, but that doesn’t mean much. What does is that the entire financial world, of which the City is a large part, was caught on the wrong foot as much as the UK government. And both will now, until September 18, pull all the stops to cover their – potential – losses. With all means at their disposition. Some of which will be brutal, or at least appear to be.
Billions of dollars have already been lost in just a few days, since everybody realized the UK may actually split up. Many more billions will be lost in the coming week, as measures of volatility go through the roof. Neither the Yes side nor the No side have gone into this thing terribly prepared; there are a zillion questions surrounding the independence issue that won’t be solved before the vote takes place. Passports, currencies, central banks, monetary unions, there’s too much even to mention.
Somewhere, emanating from the old crypts and burrows in which Britain was founded, I fear a hideous force may emerge to crush the Scottish people’s desire for self-determination, if only because that desire is a major threat to some very rich and powerful entities who found themselves as unprepared as Downing Street 10.
I don’t know if, as my friend fears (though he’s much closer to the action than I am, so who am I to speak), it will lead to people blowing up each other, but then also, who am I to rule that out? The UN charter on self-determination looks good on paper and in theory, but when reality comes knocking, there’s mostly not much left of the lofty ideals and intentions, or is that just me, Catalunya?
Still, there’s an added dimension in Scotland: the fact that the City of London is the number 1,2 or 3 (take your pick) most important finance center on the planet. If and when anybody rattles that kind of cage, other forces come into play. It’s no longer about politics, but about money (and no, I’m not too think to see how the two are linked).
So I hold my breath and my prayers for both my Scottish and my British friends – and I happen to have lots of them – and I hope this is not going to get completely out of hand. The reasons I think it may get out of hand regardless is that 1) there is not one side that was ever prepared for the situation in which they find themselves today and 2) there is an enormous supra-national interest that resides in the UK financial world which is in a semi panic mode about how much money can be lost not just because of a UK break-up, but because of the uncertainty surrounding that potential break-up.
And there’s something in all of that which is definitely scary. London, and the Queen, will do all they can not to lose part of their ‘empire’. The City of London will do even more not to lose a substantial part of their wealth. And this time around I don’t think they properly hedged their bets: the surge of the Yes side is as close to a black swan as we, and the City of London, have seen.


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-0...-swan-scotland

The Black Swan Of Scotland

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau.../picture-5.jpg Submitted by Tyler Durden on 09/10/2014 21:00 -0400

It appears The UK government's approach to Scotland has shifted dramatically from threats (we can't guarantee your saefty against terrorists) to hugs and kisses.. as David Cameron begs Scots not to tear apart Britain's "family of nations."

"I would be heartbroken if this family of nations ... was torn apart," Cameron, speaking in the atrium of the Scottish Widows building in central Edinburgh.

It appears - as we explain below - there is good reason to panic...
Submitted by Raul Ilargi Meijer via The Automatic Earth blog,
Got a mail from a friend in Scotland late last night that got me thinking. “Unfortunately, using Ireland as a model of fracture, we may start blowing up each other.” I’ve been reading a lot lately, in between all the other things, about Scotland, as should be obvious from my essay (Jim Kunstler tells me I can use that word) yesterday, Please Scotland, Blow Up The EU, and sometime today a thought crept up on me that has me wondering how ugly this thing is going to get. I think it can get very bad.
What I get from it all is that if anything is going to win this for the independence side, it must be the arrogance the London government has exhibited. That alone could seal the deal. But now of course London has belatedly woken up. Even David Cameron is scheduled to – finally – visit Scotland in the course of the contest. And if push comes to shove, they’ll throw in a royal baby. Or a Queen. Mark my words.
Cameron’s visit is funny in that he never thought it necessary until now because he thought he would win no matter what until a few days ago, and also funny because he must easily be the least popular person in all of Scotland, so a visit is a substantial risk. He had his bellboy Alistair King do a TV debate recently, and King flunked that thing so badly he may have single-handedly propelled the Yes side into the lead.
The knifes are being sharpened and soon they will be drawn – there’s only 9 days left. Question is, who will end up hurt? Bank of England Governor Mark Carney picked today of all days, 9 days before the referendum, to at last get more specific about his rate hike plan: it’s going to be early 2015. Because the UK economy is doing so great…
Only, wages will have to rise, and that will have to happen through British workers ‘earning’ pay hikes by ‘boosting their productivity and skills’. These workers have about 6 months to do that. You’re pulling my leg here, right, Mark? In any case, it seems obvious that Canadian Carney will be used as a tool against the Scottish independence movement. That’s just more arrogance.
Carney also spoke out directly on Scotland, saying there can’t be a currency union between the Scots and the Brits. Oh yeah, that should scare ‘em!
The pound sterling is falling, but that doesn’t mean much. What does is that the entire financial world, of which the City is a large part, was caught on the wrong foot as much as the UK government. And both will now, until September 18, pull all the stops to cover their – potential – losses. With all means at their disposition. Some of which will be brutal, or at least appear to be.
Billions of dollars have already been lost in just a few days, since everybody realized the UK may actually split up. Many more billions will be lost in the coming week, as measures of volatility go through the roof. Neither the Yes side nor the No side have gone into this thing terribly prepared; there are a zillion questions surrounding the independence issue that won’t be solved before the vote takes place. Passports, currencies, central banks, monetary unions, there’s too much even to mention.
Somewhere, emanating from the old crypts and burrows in which Britain was founded, I fear a hideous force may emerge to crush the Scottish people’s desire for self-determination, if only because that desire is a major threat to some very rich and powerful entities who found themselves as unprepared as Downing Street 10.
I don’t know if, as my friend fears (though he’s much closer to the action than I am, so who am I to speak), it will lead to people blowing up each other, but then also, who am I to rule that out? The UN charter on self-determination looks good on paper and in theory, but when reality comes knocking, there’s mostly not much left of the lofty ideals and intentions, or is that just me, Catalunya?
Still, there’s an added dimension in Scotland: the fact that the City of London is the number 1,2 or 3 (take your pick) most important finance center on the planet. If and when anybody rattles that kind of cage, other forces come into play. It’s no longer about politics, but about money (and no, I’m not too think to see how the two are linked).
So I hold my breath and my prayers for both my Scottish and my British friends – and I happen to have lots of them – and I hope this is not going to get completely out of hand. The reasons I think it may get out of hand regardless is that 1) there is not one side that was ever prepared for the situation in which they find themselves today and 2) there is an enormous supra-national interest that resides in the UK financial world which is in a semi panic mode about how much money can be lost not just because of a UK break-up, but because of the uncertainty surrounding that potential break-up.
And there’s something in all of that which is definitely scary. London, and the Queen, will do all they can not to lose part of their ‘empire’. The City of London will do even more not to lose a substantial part of their wealth. And this time around I don’t think they properly hedged their bets: the surge of the Yes side is as close to a black swan as we, and the City of London, have seen.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-0...-swan-scotland

George Soros Warns "This Is The Worst Possible Time" For Scottish Independence

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau.../picture-5.jpg Submitted by Tyler Durden on 09/11/2014 13:41 -0400

Authored by George Soros, originally posted Op-Ed at The FT,

This is the worst possible time for Britain to consider leaving the EU – or for Scotland to break with Britain.
The EU is an unfinished project of European states that have sacrificed part of their sovereignty to form an ever-closer union based on shared values and ideals. Those shared values are under attack on multiple fronts. Russia’s undeclared war against Ukraine is perhaps the most immediate example but it is by no means the only one. Resurgent nationalism and illiberal democracy are on the rise within Europe, at its borders and around the globe.
Since world war two the European powers, along with the US, have been the main supporters of the prevailing international order. Yet, in recent years, overwhelmed by the euro crisis, Europe has turned inward, diminishing its ability to play a forceful role in international affairs.
To make matters worse, the US has done the same, if for different reasons. Their preoccupation with domestic matters has created a vacuum that ambitious regional powers have sought to fill.
The resulting breakdown of international governance has given rise to a plethora of unresolved crises around the globe. The breakdown is most acute in the Middle East. The sudden emergence of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant, or Isis, provides the most gruesome example of how far it can go and how much human suffering it can cause.
With the Russian invasion of Ukraine, military conflict has spread to Europe. Two radically different forms of government are competing for ascendancy. The EU stands for principles of liberal democracy, international governance and the rule of law. In Russia, President Vladimir Putin maintains the outward appearance of democracy by exploiting a narrative of ethnic and religious nationalism to generate popular support for his corrupt, authoritarian regime.
As a major power and global financial centre, Britain ought to be centrally involved in crafting a European response to this threat. But like the US and the EU itself, Britain has also been distracted by internal matters. Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron has been persuaded by anti-European zeal – not least within his own party – to put UK membership in the EU to a vote in 2017. A poll on Scottish independence is only days away. Just when Britain should be confronting grave threats to its way of life, it is preoccupied with divorce of one type or another.
Divorce is always messy. A vote for Scottish independence would weaken – in political and economic terms – both a truncated UK and Scotland. An independent Scotland would be financially unstable, especially if threats to renege on debt repayments were carried through.
For Scotland and the rest of the UK to enter into a currency union without a political union, after the euro crisis has demonstrated all the pitfalls, would be a retrograde step that neither side should contemplate. Yet without it, an independent Scotland could not benefit from the low interest rates that a strong pound has brought. These considerations ought to outweigh whatever possible benefits independence might bring.
Yes, there are significant policy differences between Scotland and the rest of the UK. There is a more left-leaning approach to many issues, notably education, north of the border. But Scotland would be better placed to attain its political goals as part of a united Britain that is part of the EU.
The same applies to a British exit from Europe. Policy differences can be mediated. A divorce would weaken the UK. Those who call for separation seem to have forgotten that Britain currently enjoys the best of all possible worlds. Being part of the EU but not part of the euro allows the UK to enjoy the trading benefits without the currency constraints.
Furthermore, Britain has always played a balancing role between hostile blocs. Its absence would greatly diminish the weight of the EU in the world.
The EU has proved to be the best guarantor of peace and human security since the end of the second world war. The importance of preserving the shared values underpinning a whole way of life far outweigh any possible advantages of independence. The difficult times we are facing call for increased unity, not divorce.
Only if Britain fails to resolve its differences with the EU, and if the pro-European Scots (having voted to remain within the UK) thus find themselves unwillingly excluded from Europe in 2017, would there be just cause for Scots to call for a new referendum. If it comes to that, Scotland will be in a different position – one that could legitimise a split.
But to vote for independence from the UK now would be to prematurely surrender Scottish leverage in London, and Britain’s leverage in the world.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-0...h-independence

How The UK Would Look Like Without Scotland

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau.../picture-5.jpg Submitted by Tyler Durden on 09/11/2014 11:30 -0400

One quick look at the map of the UK shows the biggest impact a loss of Scotland would have on the Divided Kingdom (f/k/a UK) of England, Wales and Northern Ireland, should the "Yes" vote in the Scottish referendum garner a majority in one week:

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau...land%20map.jpg

In case it's not obvious, the answer is territory. For better or worse Scotland is blessed with one of the lowest population densities in the developed world, with its 5.3 million citizens living spread across almost 79,000 square kilometers. This represents some 32% of the U.K.’s current land. As the WSJ compares, with about 165,000 square kilometers of land, the new U.K. would come close to the size of Tunisia—while currently it is bigger than Romania or Belarus.
But how else would a Scottish departure impact the UK? Here are the answers courtesy of the WSJ:

• Fewer people, but not that many fewer. For starters, the new U.K. would lose 8.4% of its population, going from 64.1 million people to 58.7 million people. How would that affect its international standing? Well not much. The country would only go down two levels in the ranking of most populated countries in the world, to 24^th from 22^nd—just behind Italy, according to World Bank statistics.
• More crowded. People would live, on average, closer together: The new U.K. would host 355 people per square kilometer, compared to the current 263—it would become the 29^th most densely populated country in the world, up from the 44^th.
• Fewer mountains. And not as high. Just like popular culture would guess, a big chunk of all this Scottish land is made up of mountains. According to The Database of British and Irish Hills, an online project that classifies all mountains in Britain and Ireland, 63% of all mountains in the U.K. are in Scotland. As the Scots would also keep the tallest ones—the tallest non-Scottish mountain, Snowdon in Wales, ranks 109^th—the new U.K. would lose in height: The average mountain would go from being 377 meters (1,237 ft) tall to 322 (1,057 ft).
• More cars. Surprisingly, having more land to roam and steeper slopes to overcome doesn’t drive the Scots to buy more cars—the number of licensed vehicles person is smaller. Therefore, the new U.K. would have more automobiles per person.
• Longer lives and fewer deaths. Life expectancy without the Scots would rise by a narrow 0.4 years for men and 0.3 years for women, but the mortality rate would be reduced by 1.7%. The reason is that Scotland has a very high mortality rate: 640 deaths per 100,000 people, compared to 539 in the current U.K. as a whole.
• Fewer Jacks and more Olivers. If baby first names in 2013 are to be any indication, the U.K. without Scotland will make the name “Jack” less popular: The name “Oliver,” which currently ranks second to it, would have been the most popular in 2013 had the Scots been taken out of the picture. Top female names would remain the same.
• Good-bye Union Flag? The one “Jack” that could be affected the most is the flag of the U.K.—the Union Jack. Without Scotland, the blue saltire or St. Andrew’s Cross could be removed from the pattern, although authorities have stated that the flag should not be affected even if the Scots were to leave the Union.
• No more curling medals. As Scotland has its own national team in most disciplines, the U.K. would not be severely affected. One notable exception is curling: A Scottish creation, this sport has so far given the U.K. 20 medals. Nineteen of them were awarded to Scottish athletes—including the Bronze medals won by the women curlers this year at Sochi.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-0...thout-scotland

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BxcfFbrCEAAD76i.jpg


UK ON THE BRINK



http://www.drudgereport.com/i/logo9.gif


http://drudgereport.com/

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BxcaAOzIcAAJBsr.jpg


Get Grandma on board: Young Scots push independence...


Thousands march...


Murdoch says Scotland alive with debate...


Investors pull money at fastest pace since financial crisis...


Texas nationalists see hope in possible secession...


http://drudgereport.com/

A Scottish 'Yes' also means exit from EU, NATO

http://newsbcpcol.stb.s-msn.com/amne...rue_lfalse.jpg AP Photo: PA, Andrew Milligan
Scotland's First Minister Alex Salmond, center, leaves a hotel in Edinburgh, Scotland, Sunday Sept. 14, 2014 after his appearance on a BBC current affairs program ahead of the Scottish Referendum vote on Thursday Sept. 18.

http://newsbcpcol.stb.s-msn.com/amne...rue_lfalse.jpg 3 hr ago By JOHN-THOR DAHLBURG of Associated Press

BRUSSELS (AP) — If Scottish voters this week say Yes to independence, not only will they tear up the map of Great Britain, they'll shake the twin pillars of Western Europe's postwar prosperity and security — the European Union and the U.S.-led NATO defense alliance.
In breaking away from the rest of the United Kingdom, Scotland would automatically find itself outside both the EU and NATO, and have to reapply to join both, officials from those Brussels-based organizations have stressed.

British queen makes first public comment on Scotland independence vote

http://img1.catalog.video.msn.com/im...300&h=169&so=4

3 hr ago Duration: 1:42 Views: 58 http://content2.catalog.video.msn.co...9992e4a71f.png

For the EU especially, Scottish re-entry could be a long and arduous process, with other countries dead set against letting the Scots retain the privileges awarded Britain: the so-called opt-outs from being required to use the euro single currency and to join the multination Schengen zone where internal border controls have been scrapped.
For NATO's admirals and generals, the current Scottish government's insistence on a sovereign Scotland becoming free of nuclear weapons would pose enormous strategic and operational headaches, even if a transitional grace period were agreed on. A new home port would have to be found for the Royal Navy's four Trident missile-carrying submarines and their thermonuclear warheads, currently based on the Clyde.
This "risks undermining the collective defense and deterrence of NATO allies," Britain's Ministry of Defense has said. In what might be read as a warning to the Scots, the ministry has said a nuclear-free stance could constitute a "significant" hurdle to Scotland being allowed back into NATO.
Until Scotland rejoined the alliance, to which it's belonged with the rest of Britain for 65 years, new arrangements would also need to be found to patrol vital shipping routes in the North Atlantic and North Sea. If Scotland were to choose not to rejoin, it would pose a conundrum for NATO for which there is no real precedent: what to do following the loss of a developed, democratically governed part of alliance territory that has opted for neutrality, said Daniel Troup, research analyst at the NATO Council of Canada.
Emergence of a new Western European country of 5 million inhabitants with roughly the land area of the Czech Republic or the U.S. state of Maine or would also set in motion political and social forces whose effects are impossible to predict. Because of British voting patterns, the political groups in England, Wales and Northern Ireland that are seeking Britain's exit from the European Union would become proportionately stronger in Parliament.
Meanwhile, on the continent, from Catalonia in Spain to the Dutch-speaking Flemish areas of Belgium, other European peoples that do not have their own states would likely be emboldened to follow the Scots' example.
Loss of Scotland would also weaken the influence of Britain inside the 28-nation European Union. For the moment, the British, along with the Germans and French, constitute the trade bloc's Big Three. Without Scotland's population, Britain would drop to No. 4, behind Italy.
That would mean fewer British members of the European Parliament, as well as a reduced say in population-weighted decision-making in the EU's executive.
"In the European Union, size matters," said Almut Moeller, an EU expert at the German Council on Foreign Relations. "It will be a rump United Kingdom."
This would have major policy implications. A whittled-down Britain would have a weaker hand in pressing for the kind of EU it favors: more of a free market, and less of a political union.
Simultaneously, said Professor Richard G. Whitman, director of the Global Europe Center at the University of Kent, politicians and civil servants in London would be "massively preoccupied" for years in disentangling England from Scotland, following more than three centuries of political and economic unity.
The result would be "a much-reduced bandwidth for defending a more liberalistic agenda" in Europe, Whitman said, including the proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership between the EU and the United States.
Under both NATO and EU rules, any existing member could blackball Scotland's application for admission, and some might find domestic political cause to do so. Spain, for example, might want to discourage independence-minded Catalans. For the English, divvying up the common assets with the Scots might turn as acrimonious as a Hollywood divorce, Whitman said.
If Scotland sought special arrangements while trying to get back into the European Union, that could provide a wedge for other countries to demand renegotiation of their own terms of membership, and calls to revise the treaties that are EU's constitutional basis, Moeller said. Germany, the bloc's richest and most influential nation, would be adamantly against that, she said.
A dissenting prediction comes from a Swedish expert on the EU. The 18-month interlude between Thursday's vote and the start date of actual Scottish independence would be enough to allow the Scots and EU to negotiate a deal so that on the very day it became a country, Scotland could seamlessly become an EU member in its own right, said Niklas Bremberg, a research fellow at the Swedish Institute of International Affairs.
The most fateful consequence of a Scottish vote in favor of independence could be very close to home: in neighboring England. The English have already soured sufficiently on the European Union to the extent that in the March elections for the European Parliament, they cast more votes for the anti-EU UKIP party than any other.
Fabian Zuleeg, chief executive of the European Policy Center, a Brussels-based think tank, predicted the Scots this Thursday could set an example of sorts_for the English.
"The exit of Scotland from the UK would increase the chances of the exit of the UK from the EU," Zuleeg said.
___
Associated Press writer Geir Moulson in Berlin contributed to this report.

http://news.msn.com/world/a-scottish...t-from-eu-nato

https://fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net...a50bd7f287efaf Human Events

People who pour whisky on oatmeal are not shrinking violets.

https://fbexternal-a.akamaihd.net/sa...&cfs=1&upscale


Scotland’s epic vote on independence from the United Kingdom | Human Events
humanevents.com

Scotland’s epic vote on independence from the United Kingdom

http://humanevents.com/uploads/2014/09/455471156.jpg
By: George Will
9/15/2014 09:43 AM

Tucking into a dish of Scottish haggis is not a task for the fainthearted. There are various haggis recipes, but basically it is sheep’s pluck — the heart, lungs, and liver — cooked together, then mixed with suet and oatmeal and boiled in a sheep’s stomach, then served, sometimes drenched with Scotch. People who pour whisky on oatmeal are not shrinking violets. Remember this on Thursday when Scotland votes on independence from the United Kingdom.
There are economic reasons for and (mostly) against Scotland disassociating from the queen’s realm. This issue, however, touches chords of memory more interesting than money.

In “The Long Shadow: The Legacies of the Great War in the Twentieth Century,” Cambridge University historian David Reynolds notes that World War I, a breaker of empires and maker of nations, quickened interest in nationalism and the nature of nationhood, especially the distinction between a civic nation and an ethnic nation: The former is “a community of laws, institutions, and citizenship,” whereas an ethnic nation is “a community of shared descent, rooted in language, ethnicity, and culture.” France embodied civic nationalism, forged by its revolution; Germany, “steeped in Romantic conceptions of the Volk ,” exemplified ethnic nationalism.
The United States is a civic nation because it is a creedal nation — founded, as Jefferson said, on “truths” deemed “self-evident,” and dedicated, as Lincoln said, to a “proposition” (that all are created equal). Scotland is largely an ethnic nation, and whether Scots opt for or against independence, the continued vitality of their national sentiments testifies to the ability of differences to resist homogenization by the commercial and cultural forces of modernity.
Even after its parliament was dissolved in 1707, Reynolds writes, Scotland retained its separate educational and legal systems and an established Presbyterian church. Reynolds says that “to subsume conflicting ethnicities” and foster national unity among Britain’s components — the English (three-quarters of the U.K.’s 1910 population), Welsh, Irish and Scots — an ideology of “Britishness” was cultivated by means such as the cult of Lord Nelson and adoption of “God Save the King” as the national anthem.
But by the end of the 19th century, Reynolds says, there was a “backlash against Britishness.” In Scotland, the poet Robert Burns and the medieval warrior William Wallace became cult figures, and in May 1913 a Scottish home-rule bill was introduced in the House of Commons. Then the war came.
And what Reynolds calls “the crisis of Britishness” receded. Scotland boomed (its coal, steel and shipbuilding) and bled: It had, Reynolds says, the U.K.’s “highest rate of army volunteering” — one in six British soldiers was a Scot — and “the highest death rate among those who enlisted.” The war that followed the war to end war kept Scottish nationalism tamped down. “Only from the late 1960s,” writes Reynolds, “when Germany was no longer a threat, did the English Other become a bogey again and Scottish and Welsh nationalism start to revive as serious political movements.”
The 19th was a century of national consolidations — in the United States, Italy (the Risorgimento under Cavour), Germany (Bismarck hammered together numerous principalities and other entities) and Belgium, which was invented from various odds and ends. The 20th century, however, brought the breakup of empires — the British, Austro-Hungarian, Ottoman, Russian and then Soviet empires. The disintegrative impulse continues in, among other places, Spain, where Catalonians are asserting their particularities as Basques have long done.
Were Scotland now to become a sovereign nation, as it was until 1603, it would have a GDP ranking 16th among what would then be the 29 nations of the European Union (just behind Ireland and ahead of the Czech Republic) and would be the 20th-most populous. And the United Kingdom would have to redesign its flag, the Union Jack.
It is a composite of three crosses of the nations united under one sovereign — Scotland, Ireland (since 1921, Northern Ireland) and the united kingdoms of England and Wales. The cross of St. George, England’s patron saint (the Catholic Church has demoted him, perhaps partly because of doubts about the dragon-slaying), is a red cross on a white ground. The cross of St. Patrick, Ireland’s patron saint, is a diagonal red cross on a white ground. The cross of St. Andrew, Scotland’s patron saint, is a diagonal white cross on a blue ground.
Scotland’s Royal Arms banner, emblazoned with a lion rampant, flies over Balmoral Castle when the queen is not there. Which means it could be used even more after Thursday.

http://humanevents.com/2014/09/15/sc...paign=heupdate

Vote YES On Scottish Independence – Scotland Finally Has A Chance To Get Free From The British

By Michael Snyder, on September 11th, 2014

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/w...ag-300x300.jpg Scottish voters finally have the opportunity to fulfill William Wallace's dream of a Scotland that is free and independent of England forever. All they have to do is vote yes next week. Without a doubt, a divorce from the British would be quite messy, and life would probably be more comfortable in the short-term if Scotland remains part of the United Kingdom. But hopefully the people of Scotland are looking beyond short-term concerns. Today, the United Kingdom is a horribly repressive Big Brother police state that is dominated by bureaucratic control freaks. You can hardly even sneeze without violating some kind of law, rule or regulation. And the London banking establishment is at the very heart of the debt-based global financial system which is enslaving so much of the planet. Scotland finally has a chance to get free from all of this. All it is going to take is a yes vote on Scottish independence.
It looks like it is going to be an incredibly close vote. Recent polls show that the result could go either way. Needless to say, this is causing the British establishment to freak out quite a bit.
For example, a couple of large banks have attempted to sway the vote during this past week by publicly declaring that they will have to move to England if the vote for Scottish independence is successful...

The Royal Bank of Scotland announced Thursday that it is making contingency plans to move its legal incorporation to England in the event of a “yes” vote. In addition, Lloyds Banking Group said it had made arrangements to establish “new legal entities” in England should voters in Scotland decide to sever ties with Britain.

And there have been lots of other warnings of "economic disaster" for Scotland if it does not remain part of the United Kingdom...

Standard Life, the pensions company, disclosed that it was planning to move part of its business to England to protect its customers, while BP and Shell backed expert predictions that North Sea oil will have all but run out by 2050. It also emerged that nearly $2-billion has flowed out of U.K. equity funds in the past two months amid heightened uncertainty over what separation would mean for the economy.

Honestly, it is probably true that there would be some short-term economic disruptions for Scotland.
But in the long run the Scottish would probably be in quite good shape considering how much of the North Sea oil they would own. Just check out the following excerpt from a recent Bloomberg article...

The discovery of North Sea riches in the 1970s planted the seed of modern-day Scottish nationalism as supporters of independence cried “It’s our oil!”
Four decades later, nothing will be more important to the economic future of Scotland than the oil industry should the country vote to end the 307-year union with the rest of the U.K.
Reserves of oil and gas would be split, possibly along the so-called median line, already used to allocate fishing rights. The division would hand the Scots about 96 percent of annual oil production and 47 percent of the gas, according to estimates for 2012 by the University of Aberdeen’s Alex Kemp and Linda Stephen cited by the Scottish government.

What most British politicians won't tell you is that it would probably be the British that would suffer the most economically in the short-term and in the long-term.
In fact, if there is a yes vote for Scottish independence it is being projected that the value of the British pound will fall substantially and we could see a "negative shock" in British financial markets...

Adam Memon, the head of economic research at the Centre for Policy Studies, said: “The principal immediate threat would be to sterling and the stability of the financial markets. The recent selloff is a mere warning of what may come if the Scots actually do vote for independence.”
Threadneedle Investments said: “Given the constitutional and economic uncertainties attached to a potential break-up of the UK, a vote for independence would be likely to deliver a negative shock to UK financial assets and lead to meaningful currency weakness.”

And actually, the Scottish are not going nearly far enough with this vote for independence. For example, according to Yes Scotland a newly-independent Scottish government would continue to have allegiance to the Queen...

The Scottish Government’s proposal is that the Queen remains Head of State in Scotland, in the same way as she is currently Head of State in independent nations such as Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
This would be the position for as long as the people of Scotland wished our country to remain a monarchy.

Speaking as an American, let me say that getting rid of the British monarchy has worked out exceptionally well for us.
Hopefully the Scottish people will make a similar decision sooner rather than later.
If Scotland does indeed end up voting for independence, it could give momentum to similar movements all over Europe.
Just this week, hundreds of thousands of Catalans took to the streets in Barcelona to demand the right to vote on independence from Spain...

Thousands of Catalans have rallied in Barcelona, Spain, demanding the right to hold a referendum on independence.
Participants, waving Catalan flags and wearing the flag's red and yellow colours, stood in a V-shape formation, indicating their desire for a vote.
Protesters were energised by Scotland's forthcoming independence referendum - and many also waved the Scottish flag.
The regional government has called a referendum for 9 November. The Spanish government says the vote is illegal.

Could we end up seeing a number of new nations emerging from the chaos that is about to engulf Europe?
This is clearly not what the establishment wants. In fact, George Soros says that "this is the worst possible time" for Scottish independence.
That alone is a really good reason to vote yes.
Personally, I am rooting for the Scottish people on this one. I truly hope that they are finally able to win their freedom.
The people of Scotland have been pushed around by the British for centuries.
Now they finally have a chance to stand up to the tyranny of London.
They finally have a chance to get free.
Let us hope that they take it.

Be Sociable, Share!

September 11th, 2014 | Tags: British, Debt, Debt-Based Global Financial System, England, Independent Scotland, London Banking Establishment, Michael T. Snyder, Scotland, Scotland Independence, Scottish Independence, United Kingdom, Vote Yes Scotland, William Wallace, Yes Scotland | Category: Commentary


http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/a...om-the-british

https://fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net...a50bd7f287efaf Human Events

After an emotional plea by David Cameron, terrifying warnings offered by economists, only two days remain before before Scotland's historic vote on independence.

https://fbexternal-a.akamaihd.net/sa...&sw=648&sh=339

What would Braveheart do? | Human Events
The disintegration of the Old Continent appears almost inevitable.
humanevents.com

What would Braveheart do?

http://humanevents.com/uploads/2014/09/177586577.jpg
By: Patrick J. Buchanan
9/16/2014 06:00 AM

British lawmakers warned on Friday that Scotland may be left in a currency limbo if it votes for independence, because it is uncertain if it could continue using the pound or immediately join the euro.

http://content-img.newsinc.com/jpg/1...g?t=1407492180

Video at the page link:

British lawmakers warned on Friday that Scotland may be left in a currency limbo if it votes for independence, because it is uncertain if it could continue using the pound or immediately join the euro. Uncertainty over what currency would be used after independence remains a major campaign issue--just weeks before Scots vote in a September 18th referendum on whether to leave the United Kingdom, after 307 years of union with England. Britain's three main political parties have ruled out a formal currency union, but Scottish nationalist leader Alex Salmond has said he is confident a deal would be done and that Scotland "cannot be stopped from keeping the pound".
http://assets.newsinc.com/newsincone...g?t=1407492180

No matter how the vote turns out on Thursday in Scotland, either for independence or continued union with Britain, the disintegration of the Old Continent appears almost inevitable.
Already the British government has conceded that, even if the Scots vote for union, Edinburgh will receive greater powers to rule itself.

Cheering for the breakup of the U.K. are Catalans and Basques, Bretons and Corsicans, Tyroleans, Venetians, Flemish, all dreaming of nations of their own carved out of Spain, France, Italy and Belgium.
Europe’s secessionists have waxed ever stronger since the last decade of the 20th century when the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia splintered into 22 nations and Czechoslovakia broke in two.
Abkhazians and Ossetians then broke from Georgia as Transnistria fought free of Moldova. Chechnya went to war twice to escape from Russia. Secessionists now battle Russia in Ingushetsia and Dagestan.
The decomposition of the nations of Old Europe is the triumph of tribalism over transnationalism. The heart has reasons that the mind knows not, said Pascal. And the wild heart is winning.
The call of blood, history, faith, culture and memory is winning the struggle against Economism, the Western materialist ideology that holds that the desire for money and things is what ultimately motivates mankind.
Economics uber alles. Here is Niall Ferguson in the New York Times wondering how these crazy Scots could think of seceding from England.
“The economic risks are so glaring that even Paul Krugman and I agree it’s a terrible idea. What currency will Scotland use? The pound? The euro? No one knows. What share of North Sea oil revenues will go to Edinburgh? What about Scotland’s share of Britain’s enormous national debt?”
A Scottish vote for independence, Ferguson wails, “would have grave economic consequences, and not just for Scotland. Investment has already stalled. Big companies based in Scotland, notably the pensions giant Standard Life, have warned of relocating to England. Jobs would definitely be lost. The recent steep decline in the pound shows that the financial world hates the whole idea.”
Niall Ferguson is not the kind of fellow who would have been out there at midnight dumping the King’s tea into Boston harbor in 1773.
And he would surely have admonished those stupid farmers on the Concord Bridge that if they didn’t put those muskets down, they could wind up ruining the colonies’ trade with the Mother Country.
“What currency will we use?” Ferguson would have demanded of Jefferson in Independence Hall in 1776.
Yet it is not only in Scotland where peoples are deciding that what separates them is more important than what unites them. Secessionism is ablaze all over the world.
All those straight lines on Middle East maps drawn up by Sykes and Picot are being erased. The Syria and Iraq we have known will never be the same again, as the Shia-Sunni divide deepens and the Kurds of Iraq, Turkey, Syria and Iran come together.
In this century, we have seen Ethiopia and Sudan break in two, and now South Sudan hosts a tribal-civil war between Dinka and Nuer.
Facing secessionist movements in Tibet and the Uighur lands of the west, Beijing is exporting Han Chinese by the trainload to repopulate the regions. Much like Stalin did with the Baltic republics he annexed in 1940.
Vladimir Putin is perhaps the most popular leader alive for bringing home to Mother Russia the Crimea and making a virtual protectorate of the Russified southeastern Ukraine.
But it is not only secessionism that imperils the One Europe of Jean Monnet and Robert Schuman and their historic achievement, the EU. In Britain, France, Holland, Switzerland, Austria, Hungary and most of the countries of Europe, populist parties have arisen to liberate their nations from what they see as the soft dictatorship of the EU.
Foremost among these are Nigel Farage’s Independence Party, the UKIP, and the National Front of Marine Le Pen, who is now running ahead of President Francois Hollande in national polls. This weekend, the Sweden Democrats, a rightist party, doubled its strength, taking 13 percent of the vote as Stockholm’s conservative government fell.
What assures the growth of these parties is what engendered them — mass immigration from the Third World and the attendant rise in crime, Islamism, and social disorder.
And what is there to halt the waves of immigration in boats and rafts from across the Mediterranean? Nothing. Out of a Middle East descending into chaos will come millions of Arab and Muslim refugees.
The African continent, which had 1.2 billion people in 2013, will have 2.3 billion in 2050, and 4.2 billion by century’s end.
Hundreds of millions of these African folks will be fleeing these lands to occupy the empty places left by the depopulating nations of Europe, not one of whom has a fertility rate to ensure that its native people survive.
As for the Scots, not to worry if Goldman Sachs is bearish on secession. When you enter the polling booths, just ask yourselves:
What would Braveheart do?

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of the new book “The Greatest Comeback: How Richard Nixon Rose From Defeat to Create the New Majority.”

http://humanevents.com/2014/09/16/wh...paign=heupdate

Scottish Referendum Preview: In 170 Years, Voters Chose "Independence" 88% Of The Time

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau.../picture-5.jpg Submitted by Tyler Durden on 09/16/2014 18:15 -0400

Ahead of Thursday's critical Scottish Independence vote, we thought some context was worthwhile. As The Guardian notes, history shows that when people are asked, they almost always say yes to independence. Every election, country and place’s history is unique and different. Scotland is no exception. Yet, when given the opportunity, The Guardian finds countries tend to vote in favour of independence, and to do so decisively - across 50 votes since 1846, the vote for independence came out on top 88% of the time (and when the margin was small, voters always sided with independence.) But this time is different, right?

88% of Votes chose Independence since 1846

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau...0916_vote1.jpg


Full dataset:

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau...0916_vote2.jpg

Source: The Guardian

* * *
We leave it to ChunkyMark the tax-driver to explain...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i7qXYaepKPA


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-0...ndence-88-time

Scotland Prepares For Bank Runs; 'Quietly' Sends Millions Of Banknotes North

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau.../picture-5.jpgSubmitted by Tyler Durden on 09/16/2014 08:57 -0400

As the Scotish independence vote draws near and remains too close to call, some analysts are suggesting Plan B for Scotland may be to choose to opportunistically default. This has done nothing to calm concerns of the aftermath of a "yes" vote - despite US asset managers proclaiming it irrelevant. Nowhere is that more clear than, as The Independent reports, Britain’s banks have been quietly moving millions of banknotes north of the border to cope with any surge in demand by Scots to withdraw cash in the event of a Yes vote in Thursday's independence referendum, it has emerged. Bankers stressed there has been no sign yet of any increase in the amount of withdrawals from deposit accounts or ATMs, but the moves have been taking place over the past week or so in order to make sure ATMs do not run out on Friday in the event of a panic reaction to a “yes” vote.

As The Independent reports,

Britain’s banks have been quietly moving millions of banknotes north of the border to cope with any surge in demand by Scots to withdraw cash in the event of a Yes vote in Thursday's independence referendum, it has emerged.

Sources told The Independent the moves have been taking place over the past week or so in order to make sure ATMs do not run out on Friday in the event of a panic reaction to a “yes” vote. There have been some suggestions that people will want to move their money to English banks in the event of an independence vote.

Bankers stressed there has been no sign yet of any increase in the amount of withdrawals from deposit accounts or ATMs, stressing that there was no need because the Bank of England has pledged to stand behind all accounts for at least 18 months in the event of a “yes” vote.

However, concerns about how safe is their cash still linger.

...

Sources at major banks said they had been issuing clear instructions to their Scottish branches to reassure customers there was no reason to panic.

One said: “We have seen a big rise in customers coming in and asking us what would happen, but there is no sign of any significant flow of deposits from north to south.”
...

Figures from the Bank of England show the number of notes in circulation has been creeping up steadily over the last year. This month there are 62.3 billion notes in the country, compared with 59.8 billion a year ago.

A source at one bank said: “This forms part of our contingency planning. We are, of course, monitoring the situation very closely from hour to hour.”

* * *
As Bloomberg reports, Salmond May Favor Opportunistic Default

Adopting sterling informally while reneging on debt might be Scottish govt’s plan B, Angus Armstrong, director of macroeconomics at Niesr, says in statement, citing comments from Scottish First Minister Salmond.

If Scotland refused to accept fair share of existing U.K. debt, it might be interpreted as a default, even if technically it wouldn’t be failure to pay

If Scotland were to not pay its share of debt, junk status is probable; it’s unlikely to be excluded from markets for the avg time of ~10 years, but there’s “no free lunch” from opportunistic default

Biggest hurdle for any Scottish bid for EU entry would be obtaining Germany’s “yes”

If Scotland sets precedent for EU membership after secession, despite debt repudiation, Germany would be exposed to other post-secession insolvencies

If Scottish govt chose to combine “sterlingisation” with reneging on fair share of existing U.K. debt, it would boost fragility of exchange-rate arrangement; Niesr economists expect currency arrangement would fail and Scotland forced to introduce its own new currency within 1 year.

* * *
Yet, American investors should not worry for some talking-head yesterday on CNBC proclaimed Scotland irrelevant (maybe he should tell the $30 billion in outflows that)...

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-0...anknotes-north

http://www.drudgereport.com/i/logo9.gif


https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bxr3Q38IUAIWUWe.jpg


24 HOURS...

POLLS MAY BE VERY WRONG...

London Promises New Powers if Scotland Votes No...

Desperate Cameron, Clegg and Miliband in last-ditch bribe...

BANKS FEAR RUNS ON ATMS....

Fate may rest in hands of women voters...


http://drudgereport.com/

The REAL Reason Britain is Freaking Out About Scottish Independence

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau...cture-7813.jpg Submitted by George Washington on 09/17/2014 13:37 -0400

David Cameron and the British media have been freaking out about the potential Scottish independence.
They've blathered on about "history", "common defense" and other red herrings.
But it's really all about oil ...
Specifically, if Scotland becomes independent, it gets to keep 90% of the revenues from its huge oil reserves.
The New York Times reports:

Scottish nationalists have long argued that being governed from London has deprived their country of its fair share of the wealth from Britain’s oil and natural gas fields, which mostly lie in North Sea waters off their shores.

“It’s Scotland’s oil” was the rallying cry in the 1970s that helped raise the profile of the Scottish Nationalist Party, which now leads the country and is pushing for a vote to secede in the referendum on Thursday. Alex Salmond, the politician leading the separatist movement, has pointed to North Sea energy as the treasure that would help finance an independent Scotland — ensuring that the country could continue the generous public spending, including free university tuition, that he is promising voters.

Al Jazeera notes:

Massive oil reserves in the North Sea are at the heart of the Scottish independence debate. Many are questioning whether the reserves are just for Scotland or if the rest of the United Kingodm should continue to benefit from their profits.

NBC writes:

The ‘Yes’ campaign … says Scots should have total control of their own affairs and that revenue from Scotland’s offshore oil fields would sustain the country’s economy.

In addition, as Max Keiser explained:

(1) The UK can now borrow cheaply using the giant Scottish oil reserves as collateral

(2) If Scotland leaves, the collateral (oil reserves) is no longer available

(3) So the cost of borrowing money for Britain skyrockets

Scotland’s North Sea oil reserves are slowing running out, and so oil won’t be such a valuable resource forever. But for now, it is still invaluable (especially as collateral for British borrowing) … and the key to Britain’s panic over potential Scottish independence.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-0...h-independence

Scottish Independence: Politicians Love Democracy So Much They're Trying To Subvert It

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau.../picture-5.jpg
Submitted by Tyler Durden on 09/17/2014 16:32 -0400

Submitted by Simon Black via Sovereign Man blog,

The polls in Scotland will close this week on one of the more important elections in recent history… perhaps one of the only elections that actually matters.
Rather than a typical vote to see who the captain of the Titanic will be, Scots are deciding whether they want to be free and independent from the UK.
Every eligible voter has a say, and a simple majority decides the outcome for everyone else.
By definition, this is the PUREST possible form of the democratic process.
What’s ironic here is that ‘democracy’ is typically held up as the hallmark of free society.
Western nations have spent years (and trillion of dollars) force-feeding representative ‘democracy’ down the throats of developing countries at gunpoint.
Opening his second Presidential term in 2005, George W. Bush famously told the world that “it is the policy of the United States to seek and support the growth of democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture. . .”
Given the west’s big love for democracy, you’d think this instance in Scotland– the most fundamental example of the democratic process– would be able to take place free, unfettered, and uninfluenced by government.
Government, in fact, is supposed to be the responsible steward to protect and champion democratic rights. At least, that’s the BS they’re constantly selling us.
But that’s not what’s happening.
British politicians are scared to death that Scotland will file for divorce. So they’re doing everything they can to influence the outcome of this supposedly impartial democratic process.
They’ve spent an incalculable amount of money trying to influence the outcome, effectively subverting a democratic election.
Their claim is that the government knows better than you do. They say they’re doing this for your own good. If Scotland breaks away, your children and grandchildren will suffer immeasurably as a result.
In other words, you NEED US TO TAKE CARE OF YOU. You cannot function without us being in charge of you.
The British government is spreading untold fear, paranoia, and propaganda to drive this point home, all in an effort to influence the outcome of a supposedly free and fair election.
It’s incredibly hypocritical. And the government’s desperation drives home how fragile this system really is.
They know how much weaker and impotent they’ll be if Scotland becomes independent. And they’re terrified of it.
But here’s the thing– this isn’t even the real story. The outcome of the election is irrelevant.
The real issue here is that this election is even happening at all.
Bear in mind that human nature is highly resistant to change. This is the way of the universe.
Sir Isaac Newton told us that an object at rest tends to stay at rest unless acted upon by an external force of sufficient enough to overcome the object’s inertia.
In chemistry, activation energy is defined as the minimum energy needed to be input in order to produce a chemical reaction.
A wooden log in a fireplace doesn’t spontaneously combust. You must first add sufficient energy (heat) to the system before the wood will burn.
Until that activation energy is reached, no reaction will occur.
Humans are the same. Our natural state is to remain at rest. Overcoming our inertia is incredibly difficult. Doing so requires tremendous energy. And motivation.
The fact that millions of people in Scotland are even considering rocking the boat and radically change is very telling.
It shows there is a deep, deep dissatisfaction with the status quo. People are sick and tired of the way things are. The system has completely failed them. And they want change.
This is huge. And it’s a sign of things to come.
The dissatisfaction is growing worldwide. As I reported yesterday, the latest Gallup numbers show that only 23% of Americans are satisfied with the direction of the country.
Change is coming. And not just any change. Deep, radical change– a fundamental reset in the way we do business, the way we organize ourselves as societies, and the way we view money.
There’s tremendous opportunity for people who understand this trend and stay in front of it. And frankly I think this makes it a very exciting time to be alive.

I invite you to spend some time with me this afternoon exploring this incredibly important issue in our latest Podcast episode. (click image for link)

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/defau...40917_scot.jpg


http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-0...ing-subvert-it

http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/F4r...DEPENDENCE.JPG


HERE WE GO!


http://www.drudgereport.com/i/logo9.gif


http://media.skynews.com/media/image...-1-329x437.jpg



DAY OF DESTINY...


Global Crisis of the Elites...


Nationalist leader urges Scots to grasp independence...


Campaign Borrowed Heavily From Obama Tactics...


British Pound at 2 Year High; Currency Traders Bet 'No'...


4.3 million registered voters...


Eight separatist movements that could be next...






http://drudgereport.com/