You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
tj.. the only recent years we didn't have a defecit (due to the oil price) were (I think ..) 2014 and 2014. Its going to take more than a return to "normal" more like an ongoing "exceptional".
eat_the_pudding
Member
Seosamh
At least you’re not saying it doesn’t matter 🙂
Also the SNP say it would take 25 years (of unrealistic made up growth figures) to get back to where we are now.
So no I’m not saying it would last forever. Just a few decades.
But until then … how does that make things better for the people of Scotland?
So are we imagining that the uk got from 10% to 2.4% in 8/9 years, was that hyper un-realistic growth? 😆
seosamh
Read the SNP report.
why would I bother, I've no intention of voting SNP post independence. Or pre, except at westminster.
Like I said, the decisions scotland makes in the future will determine it's viability, not all this bluster before hand.
I think that referendum fatigue and negotiation fatigue would make a successful independence vote in the near future unlikely. A second unsuccessful vote would probably also wind up a lot of people for a variety of reasons and result in even more polarised politics.
If Scotland were to vote for independence, given the moode apparently prevailing in England just now I worry that there would be a lot of public pressure on the Westminster government to "punish" Scotland as much as possible, as if doing so was some sort of revenge for the perceived unfairness inflicted on the UK by the EU during the Brexit negotiations.
seosamh
"why would I bother"
Because if you think that economics are important, then you might find it beneficial to read the _SNP_ figures that say indyscot would be an economic basket case (not a direct quote) and therefore be unable to e.g. rejoin the EU for 25 years.
I don't enjoy these threads and (despite appearances) I don't have a desperate need to keep repeating myself. But the facts are what they are and if the success of your political aims rest on deceiving "the people" you are allegedly trying to help then its not a good start.
See Brexit: "easiest deal ever!" and "no jobs lost!" to "there will be adequate food!" in 2 years.
If you want to drop the economic argument and make it all about flags, feel free.
If you want to have flags AND better conditions for your citizens, then that needs a little more application.
I understand people have to pretend they have a crystal ball, you and the SNP. lets not kid on any of you can predict the future.
Re brexit, tbh I doubt it'll be all that bad either tbh. few percent up or down don't mean a great deal to the majority. And before you say aye but you'll not be able to pay this and that, nonsense. Public expenditure largely has bugger all to do with how much is there and is more ideology than anything else.
But you crack on like you are the authority on the future. I'm sure someone will listen.
as for the EU:
The EU operates comprehensive approval procedures that ensure new members are admitted only when they can demonstrate they will be able to play their part fully as members, namely by:
1. complying with all the EU's standards and rules
2. having the consent of the EU institutions and EU member states
3. having the consent of their citizens – as expressed through approval in their national parliament or by referendum.
1. check
2. spain is the only obsticle there, and even they wouldn't be after the fact
3. easy to implement and get approval
If sure you'll throw the 3% thing in my face, but that's not a criteria for joining the EU, it's a criteria for joining the Euro.
Can someone explain why anyone in Scotland would want to replace the stability, maturity and wisdom of Westminster with the unproven and untried capabilities of Holyrood?
seosamh,
Carry on independencing.
The cognitive dissonance i get from listening to Brexiters and Indyrefers saying the same things with the same assumptions on the subjects of Brexit and Indyref, and yet hating on eachother for being idiots makes my head explode.
They deny any downside to their position, or that no-one knows the future (when they don't like the economic forecasts). Then when harm becomes obvious they claim "we'll survive" (like we did in the war/braveheart or some other other bloody historical reference that they didn't actually suffer through themselves).
How you can look at the real problems that a "few percent" austerity caused for the poor and the ill and the old. And then say;
few percent up or down don’t mean a great deal to the majority
Talk about "I'm all right Jack/Jock".
A plague on both your houses.
Speaking as as english person, if brexit goes ahead and scotland has the chance to go independent and join the UK, I very much hope they do and then I can move there.
nbt, your slip to one side ( 😀 ) I used to think the same thing, but swapping one economy that'll be on it's arse well in to my retirement years, for another that's also generally colder, doesn't seem such a smart move now I've given it more thought.
Cause if you read the rest of that sentence it explains why.
Anyhow. Eu membership, I call bullshit on your claims. And similarly with your claim of Scotland's inability to get out of deficit. It's gone from 15% to 8% in the last 10 years too. So I'm struggling to believe your claims.
Anyhow I don't think the should be another vote until Scotland is running a surplus anyhow, or at least sitting at the accepted 3% for most countries. The Scottish gov should be planning a way out for that and you know the UK will be happy to leave it around the 8%. I'd think that could be achieved within 10 years quite easily. And that's even with the minimal growth the UK has seen over the last 10 years.
seosamh77
...Like I said, the decisions scotland makes in the future will determine it’s viability, not all this bluster before hand.
Hits the nail on the head.
As for the economic arguments, it's hard to hold the UK up as an exemplar. It's been on the bones of its arse more than once. Is that because the politicians don't listen to the economists, or have the economic projections been wrong?
Once again the argument is being put that Scotland can not successfully run its own economy. One can only draw the conclusion from that that our people are regarded as terminally stupid.
Can anyone give an example of a 1st world country that has failed after achieving independence?
I don't think there's precedent for the Scotland situation is there? Really?
You could argue the likes of the baltic states and and probably slovenia and croatia are all fairly successful european countries, and they all came out of situations much worse than what scotland is facing.
Yes, exactly - the situations in the Baltics were so much worse they only had one direction in which to go. They were occupied by a totalitarian with totally different goals to their own, and no, the Scotland/England relationship is NOTHING like that before Epicyclo going on about oppression and occupation.
molgrips
I don’t think there’s precedent for the Scotland situation is there? Really?
Not really.
As seosamh77 says we're coming out of a better position than the Baltic states, and so why would we fail when they didn't?
They have less resources, so what is anyone projecting our failure actually saying?
That our people somehow are of lesser quality?
molgrips
Subscriber
Yes, exactly – the situations in the Baltics were so much worse they only had one direction in which to go.
Theres' plenty room for improvement in scotland. But, listen i'm entirely upfront, I'm not painting a guaranteed rosey future. Like I say, if scotland goes independent, the decisions the scottish people make with in that will determine whether it's better or worse. Nothing else.
Also do you see the Irish wanting back?
Theres’ plenty room for improvement in scotland.
Yeah but I don't think it's quite the same as the USSR.
Thing is, I'll all for unity, but the UK govt has totally destroyed any notion of that now, for me.
Yeah but I don’t think it’s quite the same as the USSR.
Yip, agreed. But the idea is that small nations can stand on their own.
Can anyone give an example of a 1st world country that has failed after achieving independence?
Greece.
Anyway no-one is arguing Scotland will "fail". An independent Scotland would do okay. However we would be worse off than if we stay united with our closest neighbours and trading partners.
However we would be worse off than if we stay united with our closest neighbours and trading partners.
He said with such confidence through is his crystal ball! 😆
kennyp
However we would be worse off than if we stay united with our closest neighbours and trading partners.
Like the really big market in the EU?
There is no argument (from me) that Scotland couldn't be independent.
Only that we would be worse off if we were.
If the economic argument (as a few people have stated) doesn't matter to you then that's fine. Own it.
But it does call into question any claim you then make about the advantages of independence for spending more money on e.g. the NHS, the WASPI women (who have received no help from the SNP, when it is within their power NOW), the people suffering under the so called "rape clause" (slogan recently retired?) and the general benefit of society.
If you think that the impoverishment of various segments of society (by lets say 5* austerity) is a price you are willing to pay, then at least be up front about it to the other turkeys who might be voting for Christmas and have less of a safety net.
The finance paper even led Nichola to say that Scotland would deal with a deficit in the same way that other countries do (Ahem .. austerity).
How does that make you feel?
TL:DR
It IS important or the SNP wouldn't spend so much time and effort obfuscating the truth.
Brexit is bad for the economy, Scottish independence would be bad squared.
eat_the_pudding
There is no argument (from me) that Scotland couldn’t be independent.
Only that we would be worse off if we were.
Really?
Let's say we continued every other Westminster policy as is, but did the following:
Stopped conducting foreign wars
Got rid of Trident
Adopt EU regulations for treatment of tax evading big corporations.
Collected 100% of revenue from taxes on things like whisky, oil, etc
There's a lot of saving right there.
The various flavours of govt we have had in Scotland since devolution have been fiscally responsible, and it's unlikely that would change in the short term.
Then there would be the immeasurable benefit of not having 3 parties within the Scottish govt actively working against Scotland's interests because they're getting their orders from London.
How does that make you feel?
Same as current, I guess. You keep making all these claims as fact, but it's nonsense. All you can do is point to what the starting point for an IS would be like. You are speculating.
You can try and pin us to an SNP manifesto for the next 100 years all ye like. But that's not what is going to happen. I can say that with confidence.
If Scotland has a starting point of zero deficit or is in surplus all your arguments melt. As you can't predict any further than that. You simply have no data to base it on. You don't know what the government of Scotland will look like nor can you predict the decision that will need to be made.
You crack on like mystic meg all you like though.
Stopped conducting foreign wars
Got rid of Trident
Teeny weeny savings.
Adopt EU regulations for treatment of tax evading big corporations.
Don't know much about this. You might need to think about the place to the South though, and what it's policy would be, and the likely effect on inward investment.
Collected 100% of revenue from taxes on things like whisky, oil, etc
You already do - it's accounted for in those GERS figures that show a big deficit.
Then there would be the immeasurable benefit of not having 3 parties within the Scottish govt actively working against Scotland’s interests because they’re getting their orders from London.
Who says the interests of England and Scotland are mutually exclusive? They're fairly similar economies. The UK's economic performance has been perfectly respectable over the last few decades, compared to similar mature economies; I find the notion that the UK Govt are deliberately hobbling Scotland, reducing their tax take and increasing their spending, curious to say the least. iScot would have to grow at a massive rate for the next few decades to make up the difference, and exceptionalism isn't really an argument for suggesting this will happen.
"Why would England want to stay in a Union with Scotland if they're so fiscally dependent" is a counter-argument you hear... I think that Scotland brings a lot to the Union: resources, tourism, agriculture, and it's very well placed for future opportunities like renewables. It's not as simple as "England subsidises Scotland", in fact London subsidises everywhere else, Scotland less than most of the rest of the UK. The costs of separation would be very large and Scotland's position is very handy geo-strategically. The future isn't certain, so the bigger and broader your hand, and the more self-reliant you can be, the better placed you are to handle whatever comes next. That's what's in it for England.
I agree with everything eat the pudding has said, and I think it's very nice that this hasn't got Twitter-shouty on such an emotive subject!
Teeny weeny savings
Massive ideolgical difference though.
airtragic
...You already do – it’s accounted for in those GERS figures that show a big deficit...
Those GERS figures are estimates.
The problem I see with them is that a lot of the big money Scottish companies have their HQ in London.
I cannot see what mechanism is used to allocate Scottish revenue from them - it all appears to be allocated as English in those cases.
Am I missing something?
Like the really big market in the EU?
True, however for Scotland our biggest market by some considerable way is the rest of the UK.
kennyp
True, however for Scotland our biggest market by some considerable way is the rest of the UK.
And unlike all the other countries that got independence from the UK, they are going to stop trading with us?
Is that what you're implying?
epicyclo,
You're doing it again.
Disagreeing with the SNPs current (not perfect but more than book of dreams) realistic view of Scotlands economy.
Airtragic is right about trident whisky etc. etc. (I refer you to my first post in this thread on the same subject)
So;
a) explain why Nicola/SNP are hiding Scotlands TRUE RICHES® (in a report written by their favourite economist that was delayed by about 18 months, possibly because they actually believed what they were shovelling in 2014 and were confused by reality), or
b) explain what bits of society indyscot won't need that amount to 13Bn ish (NHS or Pensions or social care?).
Or just say that "economics don't matter" until you really mean it and try to carry that thought in the same brain that thinks things like social care and the NHS are worth having.
EDIT: It bears repeating that GERS are produced by Nicola's employees in her own Stats department. The Scottish Government have improved them and continually refine them. They say themselves that no request for information to Westminster has ever gone unanswered (subject of an FOI a while ago) Why would she/they get them wrong in a way that you keep harping on about?
Also. _ALL_ economic figures are estimates, thats why we have statisticians.
Here have a read LINK Thank me later 🙂
seosamh,
Try getting a mortgage on the basis that "I look broke based on todays figures but thats only the starting point, and you can't know what will happen tomorrow". Enjoy.
And unlike all the other countries that got independence from the UK, they are going to stop trading with us?
Is that what you’re implying?
Same question re leaving the EU! Which I also think is wrong-headed.
Massive ideolgical difference though.
True, but I’d suggest there’s a certain hypocrisy in wanting to sit under NATO’s umbrella whilst being anti-nuclear. Bit nimbyish.
And unlike all the other countries that got independence from the UK, they are going to stop trading with us?
Is that what you’re implying?
Of course they will still trade with us, but on less favourable terms. If Scotland walks away greedily saying "This is our oil and we're not going to share a drop of revenue with the rest of you" then the rest of the UK will apply harsh terms on any trade agreements, and who could blame them.
The brutal reality is that in any trade agreement the upper hand lies with the bigger of the two parties. As Scotland would find out. We certainly wouldn't be bankrupt, or even poor, just not nearly as well off as we are just now.
seosamh,
Try getting a mortgage on the basis that “I look broke based on todays figures but thats only the starting point, and you can’t know what will happen tomorrow”. Enjoy.
You are right government financies are exactly the same as personal financies. 😆
Can we get some more bullshit please?
This is our oil and we’re not going to share a drop of revenue with the rest of you
If you notice when I mention 15 to 8% that means without oil. So going forward on the current trajectory, when I think a ref should be held ie late 2020s, Scotland will be in surplus without the oil. Oil is already an irrelevant point at the minute. I the future we should only treat it as a bonus. Nothing more.
**** the oil! 😆
seosamh
You're right. The bullshit shovelled by the SNP through 2014 was dense and smelly.
It's a wee bit better now.
You should offer your explanatory services.
If the SNP aren't interested there's a chap called Farage darn saff who needs you to explain how Brexit is a great thing (despite economics) using your special skills.
I wonder how much England would be prepared to pay to lease Faslane.
Eat the pudding It's obvious that economics matters. Everybody would agree that it should be easier to have more generous social security and better health services if a country is more wealthy. However decisions about looking after the poorest or weakest are not only about economics. It's about the kind of society you aspire to become. Ghandi said ‘the true measure of any society can be found in how it treats its most vulnerable members’. A bigger slice of a smaller pie for those in need might mean less for those who have enough or more than enough but produce a healthier more unified society
I'm not claiming Scottish exceptionalism .
I also wonder if the last 10years of austerity was imposed for economic reasons or for idealogical ones.
epicyclo,
You’re doing it again.
Disagreeing with the SNPs current (not perfect but more than book of dreams) realistic view of Scotlands economy...
You bet I disagree with the SNP. They are doing several things that are detrimental to the less populated parts of Scotland, but I can see why, and any other party would have the same dilemma - not having full fiscal autonomy.
Independence would get us that fiscal autonomy, and how we voted to have our finances allocated wouldn't be subject to the approval of the bunch of braying upper class hyenas and ideological one socialist worlders who are currently buggering up Brexit in Westminster.
The independence movement is not the SNP.
Oh come on.. Even the SNP didn't want fiscal autonomy when they realised it meant a 13 Bn cut. The SNP can distribute the cash Scotland gets in taxes (plus 13BN) how they want right NOW, and you think having LESS money and the same (or slightly different) government will make things better?
If seosamh rejects the job explaining the benefits of brexit for Farage.. would you like to step up to the plate and take a swing?
PS. Despite all the deeply held feelings and passionate expressions of Scottish exceptionalism it seems that economics is still looking more important than flags.
Honestly not surprised but nice to have it confirmed 😉
eat_the-pudding
Despite all the deeply held feelings and passionate expressions of Scottish exceptionalism it seems that economics is still looking more important than flags.
Based on the way the UK economy is run, I suspect haruspication would serve us better than economic theory.
At least with haruspication you get to eat the goose... 🙂
Staying in the UK I can only see economic state of Scotland getting worse year on year. Scotland has a small aging population which needs addressed sooner rather than later. It has somewhat different needs to the UK as a whole and attempts to address those needs can too easily be over ruled by UK government as they are not always in the interests of the UK.
In a hard brexit scenario and with the prevailing attitude dominating politics in England, does anyone honestly believe that '13Bn' is going to continue to go north of the border for much longer? Is it hell.
There is no great choice really for the short term. It's shite sandwich or shite sandwich as far as I am concerned. The best long term prospects for me is Scotland out of the UK and in the EU. Time to make the break from the union, grow the economy and sort out the aging population. Make cuts where they can be made with minimum impact, and borrow to mitigate against the worst.
It has somewhat different needs to the UK as a whole and attempts to address those needs can too easily be over ruled by UK government
UK government has little power to overrule. Matters are mostly either devolved or reserved which quite clearly allocated them to the devolved administrations or UK government. In some cases, legislation is mixed but that is a lot less common.
grow the economy and sort out the aging population
What specific policies would that entail and what are the costs/funding of them? Bear in mind the Growth Commission concluded that Scotland would start independent life with a large deficit and could not find any alternative to a few decades of austerity to sort it out. The SNP
What powers does Scot Gov need that it doesn't currently have and how would they be used?
Why does growing the economy require independence?
Besides the Growth Commission, I've not yet seen anyone propose a Scottish Budget and a costed set of policies that show how we could be different and that also requires independence to make it so. It's easy to wave hands and say "we need to grow the economy." It is a lot harder to say how but the how is the key bit. Even the Growth Commission said that some of its objectives could be met with devolved powers but unfortunately it didn't separate what would be done under existing frameworks from what could be done under independence.
Powers - all the economic levers belong to Westminster and Scotland has no powers to borrow. When your budget is set outside of your control you have very little actual control
UK government has little power to overrule. Matters are mostly either devolved or reserved which quite clearly allocated them to the devolved administrations or UK government. In some cases, legislation is mixed but that is a lot less common.
It can't overrule things that are devolved but it can and does decline requests to make changes to things that are reserved.
What specific policies would that entail and what are the costs/funding of them?
Immigration for starters. We have different needs and opinions over immigration. Student visas as well so students can stay and work for a while after graduation. Settled people either in secure jobs, business owners, young families being removed from the country by home office policy against wishes of Scottish officials.
What powers does Scot Gov need that it doesn’t currently have and how would they be used?
Why does growing the economy require independence?
All of them. They would be used with Scottish needs as a priority. The economy is all ready growing slowly. That's with policies being set by two different governments that are at odds with each other. It doesn't take a huge leap to believe that the economy would grow faster if either the two governments were aligned or if all decisions were made by one party, therefore removing any conflicts.
grumpsculler
UK government has little power to overrule...
That's an amazing statement in view of what has been happening lately.
EG the grabbing of Scotland's powers currently held by the EU.
epicyclo..
"power grab"
We're going to need an SNP slogan Klaxon!
Please name one (just one) power currently held by the Scottish Government which has been grabbed.
I'll wait.
Maybe you can ask Nicola for a list when you call her to tell her where the hidden riches are?
eat the pudding - as you probably know its powers ie fishing in areas that are devolved that are currently held by the EU but will be taken to Westminster instead of Holyrood . Even the scots tories are angry about it.
eat_the_pudding
...Please name one (just one) power currently held by the Scottish Government which has been grabbed....
You know fine what I am referring to.
Trying distortions like that throws into question whatever else you say. Why not just leave that sort of drivel to the professional politicians?
epicyclo, tj
So what you mean is that the slogan is misleading and badly formed attempt to imply theft of something that was never yours?
Trying distortions like that throws into question whatever else you say. Why not just leave that sort of drivel to the professional politicians?
I note that you haven't explained why the SNP don't help the waspi women or the victims of the so called rape clause? Am I distorting that too? (hint.. they have the power to do something other than moan about both). But they don't. Why? I love to see you repeat the SNPs "reasoning" on that front with a straight face. Then I could say again (with feeling) :
Trying distortions like that throws into question whatever else you say. Why not just leave that sort of drivel to the professional politicians?
For the avoidance of doubt I'm not on the tories side here. I hold politicians on both sides in contempt.
But I reserve particular condemnation for those who claim to walk on water, while cutting councils and trashing education and refusing to help those they sloganise about.
eat_the-pudding
Again, more deliberate distortion. It's not clever, it just tarnishes your comments.
And diversionary tactics - Why don't you attack the people responsible for their dilemma of the WASPI women and the rape clause. And as for what the SNP is up to, why don't you ask an SNP member to explain what they are doing within the budgetary limitations set by Westminster?
There's lots of people who disagree with what the SNP does, but vote for it because the over-riding issue is independence. We may not like the colour they are painting the house, but we can fix that when its ours.
Oh please, calling all criticism of the SNP "distortion" and suggesting I'm a tory is not a good counterargument.
I'll willingly attack the tories for their inhuman policies, but it's not distortion to say that the SNP use victims of the tories for grievance mongering and then say its not their place to put it right.
With the waspi women they complained loudly, but said that they had no power over pensions to fix the situation.
When it was explained to them that they have full power to create a targetted benefit to cover the cost, they said it wasn't their job.
Well then, what are they for?
It's _not_ distortion to say that it appears to me (and others) that they'd rather have a grievance than a solution.
That these policies exist is on the tories. That the SNP refuse to mitigate the effects is on them.
That's not distortion. You can maybe say we can't afford to mitigate these policies without independence?
But we'd have less money then, so how many waspi and rape clause-like policies would we have to generate at home to make up the shortfall?
It's perfectly reasonable to question a "holier than thou" administration about how deep their morals go. If you opened your eyes you'd see its not an uncommon view in Scotland that only having one real policy before which all others must fall might not be the best form of government (also applies to Westminster at the mo').
eat the pudding - what would you cut to do that? The SNP did alleviate the bedroom tax. They have a fixed budget so any extra spending in one area means a cut in another.
And yes - taking powers in devolved areas to westminster when they return from the EU is a power grab - and the scots tories are livid about it as they had using the repatriated powers over fishing in their manifesto at the last election.
I don'ty vote SNP but loathe the SNP bad rehtoric that some espouse.
eat_the_pudding
You're off at a tangent again. Sad...
tj, You ask what I would cut now, to get a few million quid but advocate a policy (independence) which would result in 10Bn less money overall and refuse to say what you would cut then? Consistent 😉
epicyclo, I'm discussing the fact that the evidence says that iscotland would be poorer and that the main party advocating it are dishonest, lie to their followers and make cuts and decisions a tory should be ashamed of.
What point are you making except that you disagree while supplying no evidence?
Sad.
@ETP
epicyclo, I’m discussing the fact that the evidence says that iscotland would be poorer and that the main party advocating it are dishonest, lie to their followers and make cuts and decisions a tory should be ashamed of.
The prediction of a future budget deficit is just that a prediction. Worth reading and bearing in mind.
The statement about the SNP is your opinion. That's all.
eat_the_pudding
epicyclo, I’m discussing the fact that the evidence says that iscotland would be poorer and that the main party advocating it are dishonest, lie to their followers and make cuts and decisions a tory should be ashamed of.
You weren't. You were responding to my posts like a tricky 6th form debater with "cunning" distortions.
But seeing as we are now talking about Scotland's economy after Independence, it's well known that Westminster has gone to great lengths to hide the true value of Scotland's economy. The McCrone Report for example was kept quiet for 30 years. That sort of thing is why we mistrust anything produced by Westminster - it's probably untrue or shaded to put Scotland in the worst possible light (much as they did with every other country that was aiming for independence). Lie once, and that's an end to trust previously given.
Maybe you've heard of Jim Rodgers?
Jim Rodgers on Brexit and Scottish independence.
BTW I am pleased to see your concern about the WASPI women and the Rape Clause. I presume your principles didn't let you vote for a party that supported those policies or abstained from voting against the austerity measures?
I’m discussing the fact that the evidence says that iscotland would be poorer
As I said earlier, **** the oil for any argumentative sake(note the ideological decision there, completely in the face of UK policy, it should be money saved in a sovereign fund anyhow), lets take that as a bonus going forward when relating to Scotlands finances, not to be included in the year to year balance sheet(even though there will be money to be had from it for a good while yet.).
Have a gander at the blue line, it's entirely possible to turn that into a surplus in about 10 years, if you take an average line. Also note that reduction has also taken place will having to mitigate westminster cuts.
Your argument goes completely against the trajectory of scotlands current finances. You are stuck with the same 2014 arguments.
Why is it impossible for scotland, to do what every country in europe is basically doing, and reducing their deficit over time?
To balance the books, like every other country on the planet, scotland doesn't need to find the 10bn immediately, they do what everyone does, including the UK, and reduces it over time. It's pretty simple economics.
[img] 
[/img]
Just like with Brexit the economic arguments for and against independence are a total red herring.
The economics are not great right now and oil being a large part of the scots economy and volatile makes predicting difficult but look to other nations who are of a similar size, have similar logistical issues and are without Scotlands advantages in natural resources and its clearly absurd to suggest that and independent Scotland is not viable.
Yawn.
a. Let's talk independence.
b. No one votes to be poorer and here's where we are economically right now.
a. Economy doesn't matter because we'll be better and more caring.
b. How will it be better and more caring with less money?
a. Economy doesn't matter because tomorrow is a new day and things will be different.
b. But some things can be different NOW. Why not do that first?
a. You're a sixth former who thinks that tomorrows conditions can be estimated using information from today.
Also a Tory. Also Westminster austerity is a murderous policy of oppression but iscotland austerity will have less money and more flags. So there! Tory!
Similarity to pro-brexit argument intensifies...
If you think its the same argument as the pro brxit one you have a total lack of understanding of the issues.
its not at all
Do you think that flag waving is a substitute for social services, the NHS and pensions (even if it's only other peoples)?
Then I have [brexit/iscotland] you might be interested in.
Delete as applicable.
Do you think that flag waving is a substitute for social services, the NHS and pensions (even if it’s only other peoples)?
I don't see the Scottish independence movement as being based on flag waving. Obviously there are some who fall into that category but it's a much broader, more rational, more inclusive and outward looking movement than that.
You would think Scotland should be able to support itself. 6 million people, first world country.
I would imagine (I am no expert) that would require
1) a lot of immigration
2) companies to employ the immigrants
3) opportunities for the companies to trade
4) tax increases
1) We have an age-ing population and there is definitely room for more people. More people = more economic activity
2) Will require development and a business environment that is attractive, which leads to:
3) Relationship with the UK and EU will be important. Retaining/regaining EU membership would help here (and with point 1). If the UK was out of the EU and Scotland in, that might make the country an attractive place for businesses
4) More people will require more infrastructure to support them - more than houses - schools, roads, parks, health services etc. Without that, current residents will get fed up with the immigrants. Scotland generally also wants to provide more public services and so on - that means more personal taxes. However point 2 (attractive business environment) may mean lower taxes for companies which will be a difficult one to sell if you increase personal taxes.
So it is (probably?) do-able, but will take a long time and may involve compromises that are unpalatable to many people - more immigrants and more taxes isn't a conventionally popular slogan!
While Brexit has highlighted the utter incompetence of Westminster. It's also shown the dangers of Indy without a plan.
Interestingly if we end up with No Deal Brexit or hard Brexit it would make Scotland want get quit even more BUT a hard border would make Scot-rUK trade that much harder.
The brexiteers pretending that technical solutions to the NI border problems can of course also be used to wish away the same situation with Scotland tho.
eat_the_pudding
Do you think that flag waving is a substitute for social services, the NHS and pensions (even if it’s only other peoples)?
You continue to make assertions and then proceed with your argument as if they were facts.
While Brexit has highlighted the utter incompetence of Westminster. It’s also shown the dangers of Indy without a plan.
Yup. The last thing we need is more unicorn salesmen, of any stripe.
epicyclo
ffs try to behave more like a sixth form debater.
Instead of saying "you're wrong"; show me the money.
If you think Scotland has the cash in hand despite both me and the SNP disagreeing with you then produce the numbers or shut up.
If you think that the defect isn't approximately the same size as the NHS budget, then pass the information along.
Produce some facts yourself before you make assertions about others.
Overall
C- Dissapointing relationship with reality. Sees only enemies on one side and only unicorns on the other.
Do you see that deficit being funded indefinitely post brexit? I don't, the more rabid and right wing the UK government gets the less likely that's going to happen.
What policies do you see from UK government to grow the Scottish economy?
Cuts will be coming in either situation. It's inevitable. I'd much rather go it alone to do so. That way we have full control of welfare, immigration and borrowing so we can set policies specific to Scotland's needs to grow the economy at a faster rate than it would as part of UK, and protect the most vulnerable whilst doing so.
rene59
Are we allowing discussion about what might happen in the future? I thought no one could possibly know or even surmise based on current trends? 😉
I completely agree that brexit will make things worse. Its like punching yourself in the face until someone gives you a pet unicorn. But even the worst brexit projections are not in the same scale as the Scottish defecit.
You don't get to grow the economy fast AND look after people. That's almost a law (Google the fastest growing economies).
Independence is not the answer to this question. Even for those that think independence is the answer to every question.
What (and I realise that this is right out there) if we used Holyroods powers to make life as good as possible NOW and then see how things work out later?