You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Whilst totally ignoring those in Wales.
I'm glad I'm English living in Cambridgeshire and not oppressed like all you Northern types. Must be horrible. 🙁
Point that I'm trying to make is that TJ is painting it as 'us vs them' geographically. There are lefties all over the country. England isn't all Tory scum, even down South, and Wales certainly isn't.
“I’m glad I’m English living in Cambridgeshire and not oppressed like all you Northern types. Must be horrible“
Youve enough bad shit to deal with in Cambridgshire, such as the total lack of hills, rubbish beer and irritating upper class students the oppressors feel sorry for you and leave you alone.
“Then there are those who can most kindly be referred to as suffering from Stockholm Syndrome”
That reminds me, I forgot to pay you for those paddles!
I felt like I was abandoning my friends in the north of England
I thought we friends in the north of England too. Then their attitudes in the Brexit debate and result changed my perception of them quite substantially.
However BoardinBob, if Scotland leaves – that deficit will only get worse
We currently have the pleasure of a collective £43billion deficit as part of the UK!
MOlgrips - sorry dude - and Wales. I am doing to Wales what scots nationalists accuse the english for doing to scotland - lumping it all in together. Consider me admonished!
You've enough bad shit to deal with in Cambridgeshire, such as the total lack of hills, rubbish beer and irritating upper class students the oppressors feel sorry for you and leave you alone.
Woah there, I will not have you slagging off our beer.
Bexar County and Three Blind Mice are but two exceedingly good breweries (I only mention those two as I know them personally).
Besides, even if we produced no beer our dray is generally delivered by van or lorry. If you ever make it beyond the horse and cart you too could embrace the technology that our county is so famous for. 😛
Glad to see that people have pretty much given up arguing that we'd be financially better off in an independent Scotland. But the idea that there are lots of figures and you "just don't know" is pish.
Next time someone says the economy is going badly in brexit UK, and you mentally make a note because it reinforces your biases, how do you think they come by those figures? Do you disregarded them because they are from the past? Do you tell yourself that they are just bad because brexit hasn't happened fully yet? (Would you laugh at someone who made those arguments?)
The UK has a deficit, but %wise its better than the Scottish one. The deficit isn't real though. Its theoretical because we benefit from pooling and sharing and without 13 Bn to replace that and no economic argument Scottish independence is toast.
edited for crap spelling
The goal of Brexit is to exclude foreigners no matter what it does to the country. You can argue economic details about how bad it is for the economy but it is always going to be a bad thing and something Scotland should get as far away as possible from.
Incidentally, the 13 bn is from August last year when the oil price was around $50. It's now around $75 so can we accept that the deficit is no longer 13 bn? Last year the oil industry brought in £208 million whereas in 2012 (oil price around $100) it brought in £8 billion.
So if the next report comes out and the deficit is below the UK's as a whole you'll then be in favour of independence?
By the way, I agree that the deficit is theoretical. It refers to a Scotland within a union which has little to do with an independent Scotland.
Actually eat the pudding that is the true position - we really don't know and for every economist we ask we get a differnt answer. My belief is that for decades financial policy for England has held Scotland back and without that brake after a period of readjustment Scotland would outperform England. Note the point about oil prices as well.
Scotlands economy has been rubbish under westminster rule - so your argument cuts both ways. Why continue with something that evidently is not working. remind me how well the UK economy is doing?
Whilst London taxpayers will be able to better prop up the North of England.
London taxpayers aren't propping up anyone. The rest of the UK is propping up London. That's the way the system is designed, all resources are drained from everywhere else and pumped into London. This is why 9 out of the top 10 most deprived places in Western Europe are in the UK.
The goal of Brexit is to exclude foreigners no matter what it does to the country.
No, it's to leave the European Union.
No, it’s to leave the European Union.
Yes, in order to end freedom of movement.
This is why 9 out of the top 10 most deprived places in Western Europe are in the UK
Source? And how would you rectify Londons dominance, do you think it has been done on purpose or because of Londons geographical position as being not only the capital but close in terms of trade links to mainland Europe? How do you suggest the North attracts more global investment and make it an attractive place for ambitious professionals to move to, over say.... London, Melbourne, New York, Geneva, Silicon Valley.....when have you ever heard of a vibrant tech company that says.....you know what.... let's move to ****ing Doncaster. They'd haemorrhage staff and investors, where buisnesses base themselves is often every bit about image and lifestyle as it is the economics.
Germany has thrown a **** tonne of cash at Eastern Germany for seemingly no or very little gain.
Anway, the North likes to complain about London, but without it, we'd be Greece.
And how would you rectify Londons dominance, do you think it has been done on purpose or because of Londons geographical position as being not only the capital but close in terms of trade links to mainland Europe?
Of course it's been done on purpose! Jesus Christ, have you just landed here from another planet?
Don't feed the troll
Of course it’s been done on purpose! Jesus Christ, have you just landed here from another planet?
The deindustrialisation of the North was well on it's way during and after WW1, the Great depression and WW2. Maggie et al just prodded it over a cliff. Unfortunately, the North hasn't had any industrialists with the foresight to help it keep up with the changing global economy. Besides that, my experience with having family up there and of the brexit vote - is that they have no intention of wanting or trying to anyway.
Ahem.......
Anyway, what will Scotland base it's economy on? Tax dodging, whisky and dwindling oil? Sounds great. I bet all the fellow lefties in Scotland will feel....reaallly included by that economy.
midge exports
Can the areas that did not vote for Brexit club together to form a new country with a new name, no flag or national anthem, and petition to rejoin the EU?
Yes, in order to end freedom of movement.
No, that's not axiomatic.
athgray be a bit of a funny country but why not? Remain bits of the rUK can join Scotland if you want. we could call it the "Republic of Scotland and the Sensible Parts."
If nothing else this map shows how divergent scotland is from the rest of the UK
<div class="bbp-reply-author">raybanwomble
<div class="bbp-author-role">
<div class="">Member</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="bbp-reply-content">Anyway, what will Scotland base it’s economy on? Tax dodging, whisky and dwindling oil? Sounds great. I bet all the fellow lefties in Scotland will feel….reaallly included by that economy.
</div>
Yeah, that’s all we’ve got up here. Oh, I forgot about deep fried food. That’s our number 1 industry.
its a shame England can’t find a way to monetise sanctimonious ****s. They could make a fortune down there
It certainly would be a funny looking country tjagain, and obviously not possible, however remember if the map was scaled for population density there is a lot of yellow in the South. Newcastle could stay by the skin of its teeth which pleases me.
scaled by population - an even funnier looking country
"economists opinions differ"
"independence would be different"
blah blah
You sound like climate change deniers with their "some scientists say" broken record.
Be in favour of independence by all means, but lying about the, let's say, "challenges" of the Scottish economy will do you no favours.
You might be prepared to face 10 or 20 years of austerity max (Westminster austerity was, for comparison, about 1or 2 billion in cuts for a few years followed by rises. See graph above) but at least be honest about with yourself about what 13 Bn (ish) of austerity will do to the the poor and vulnerable in Scotland.
Westminster austerity was far greater than that. YOu know if you aske half a dozen economists a question you get half a dozen different answers.
Yes the budget would be tight for a few years while the damage of tory rule is undone. We know that. What we also know is continued tory rule will destroy the fabric of the country irrevocably and we also know tory policy prevents scotland growing
Its utter nonsense to say that scotland is incapable of being a rich independent country. It has advantages that many rich independent countries do not have.
athgray be a bit of a funny country but why not? Remain bits of the rUK can join Scotland if you want. we could call it the “Republic of Scotland and the Sensible Parts.”
If nothing else this map shows how divergent scotland is from the rest of the UK
To be honest, I'd be alright with Scotland and London floating off into the sea together - preferably somewhere warm.
"few years"
Still haven't read Nicola's report eh?
All the stuff you've been denying is in there; massive austerity for 10 years (that's the good scenario powered by dreams) and out of Europe until economy / deficit improves.
I'm retiring until you read the report and I don't have to make Sturgeons arguments for her.
Brexit is bad. Independence is brexit squared.
The merits of independence can (and will) be argued until the cows come home, but you can't argue at how badly the Scotland (and Wales and NI) have been treated in the brexit discussions so far, and Scotland in general since the indy ref.
Germany has thrown a **** tonne of cash at Eastern Germany for seemingly no or very little gain.
Er…Eastern Germany has been transformed economically. Of course, what they really need now, is a large influx of immigrants for the workforce, for any further progress. There's a population hole due to people moving from East to West before the investment had a chance to kick in. There are some extra parallels with Scotland there.
Everyone has been treated badly by this brexit luvin government. But Independence is not the cure.
the 13 billion is not in the SNPs document - thats using the badly flawed GERS figures that as you should know underestimate Scotlands tax base enormously. there has been plenty of analysis of why GERS paints a bleaker than true figure but that does not fit your ideology
https://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/eastern-germany-experience-economic-miracle
Still a bit of a mixed bag Kelvin. How do you think East Germany would have fared with a more hands off aporoach? Considerably worse or mildly?
Considerably worse. The flight of young workers would never have abated.
A link to add to yours… says much the same thing as yours, but with far more breadth.
https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2015/10/02/germanys-reunification-25-years-on
Jebus Cribst. You do know (because I've told you several times) that GERS is produced by the Scottish Government, by Nicola's own statisticians. You've never explained why she supports this Westminster trickery. Or why the moves to improve these stats a few years ago (overseen by SG and the aforementioned statisticians) were apparently less insightful about the Scottish economy than.... you.
Just you.
There was even an FOI to the SG statistics dept. asking what information was being withheld by Westminster. Guess the answer?
Spoiler..... none.
Believe what you like. Your bias is showing in calling Sturgeon "Nicola" - patronising
GERs is produced using standard methods that pre-date the creation of holyrood by decades. It underestimates scottish tax income and overestimates spending excluding tax revenues that would accrue to an independent Scotland and including cost that would not be accrued by an independent scotland.
I could show you much academic and rigorous analysis independent of the SNP that shows this but I understand its pointless as it does not fit your narrative. Its useful as a comparison year on year. It is useless as a predictor of Scotlands finances if Scotland were independent
I am no ideological independence supporter. But I am capable of reading wide ranging analysis and deciding where the truth lies. the truth is Scotand would have a deficit but its far less than 13 billion per year. ONe set of accounting shows Scotland raises 9.9% of the UKs tax base. I don't believe that either.
MOst of the data for GERS comes from westminster
Most of it is estimates - you should look into the methodology
Your bias is showing in calling Sturgeon “Nicola” – patronising
Errr.. Jezza, Boris etc?
TJ
Still no explanation of how Nicola (RU for real?) has fallen for this obvious chicanery then?
Still nothing on how her best and brightest failed to spot the things that are so obvious to you and so many other true believers?
I put forward two possible explanations:
1) Theresa (!) has compromat of her spilling irn bru on a hotel mattress.
2) You genuinely know more than Nicola does about the Scottish economy.
As for all this stuff about things fitting "my own narrative" I think that's called projection.
TJ you can have your own opinions but not your own facts. Read the (SNP) report.
Its facts don't fit your narrative (tho' it's put forward in a very positive way), but then maybe we can have a reasonable discussion over whether squaring the effects of brexit might be too much for Scotlands poor.
TTFN
PS the misread 'insult' of using Nicola's name reads like a warning that you don't like what I say so you're veering towards attacking me instead. Nice.
“Anyway, what will Scotland base it’s economy on? Tax dodging, whisky and dwindling oil? Sounds great. I bet all the fellow lefties in Scotland will feel….reaallly included by that economy.”
Well, to start with we’re a small county of what 5.5 million, for context the London Metro area has around 14 million people.
So straight from the off we don’t need a big world beating economy. Just one that in the long term provides a decent living to those that live here.
As to what that economy consists of, of the top of my head, a mix of land based industries, tech, financial, manufacturing (yes including Whisky), tourism, with a splash of declining oil production.
Again, none of those need to be particularly large on a global or even regional scale. Because we’re not a large country.
eat_the_pudding
...Still nothing on how her best and brightest failed to spot the things that are so obvious to you and so many other true believers?...
And there we have it, the demeaning insult. The sneer from the superior Unionist.
Apparently it is cultish to want your country to be run by the people living in it, and not by those next door.
Apparently, unlike all the other countries that have gained independence, we will be unable to manage our own economy.
Apparently, we will stick rigidly to a proposal put forward by one political party regardless of what government we vote for after independence.
The arguments against independence all add up to "You're too wee, too stupid, too poor" but couched in more polysyllabic words.
And there we have it, the demeaning insult. The sneer from the superior Unionist.
If you don't like it, reflect on your own behaviour in this thread.
Apparently it is cultish to want your country to be run by the people living in it, and not by those next door.
It isn't.
Hi epicyclo (waves)
I thought TJ was the only one reading my posts looking for something to take personally (Like calling a woman called Nicola Nicola with malice aforethought!) so that he could disregard any further points I made.
But it looks like you got in too.. Yay for you!
For what its worth I don't think "true believer" is an insult when applied in this context.
What else would you call those who continue to deny uncomfortable economic facts which have now been (quietly) accepted even by the SNP?
People who insist that economics is mince and GERS is an estimate (the horror), but spent 2014 arguing that we could be one of the top (?) richest countries in the world based on what Salmond called the gold plated GERS statistics?
People who get all het up and emotional about the poor and disadvantaged people of Scotland, but think that the costs of independence and the austerity involved would be a price worth [them] paying for a generation (or 5 depending on the length of a Scottish Standard Generation these days).
Brexit is idiotic and destructive, but Independence is worse, for the very same reasons (squared).
If you see one but not the other .. it may be because you are a true believer©.
But as Brexit has shown, it is not all about the economy.
Well, I don't think we're the only ones ignoring things on this thread.
You still haven't responded to my point that the deficit is almost certainly no longer 13 BN (receipts from oil revenue 208 million last year vs 8 billion in 2012, oil price at $50 last year vs $75 now vs $100 in 2012).
Presumably as soon as the oil price goes back up you'll be in favour of independence. Or are you a unionist because you're a 'true believer' and there is no conceivable situation that would make you support independence?
You keep saying that independence would be 'idiotic squared' despite providing no explanations about how this would be so. You completely ignored the fact that EEA membership would allow us to maintain close relations with both the UK and the EU.
So tell us, is there any situation you could see yourself supporting independence or are you a 'true believer'?
PS. I've been trying to practice sneering for the last minute or two.
I honestly don't think I can carry it off without giggling, but I can raise a single eyebrow if that would help?
As I explained - I am not a true believer. I am pragmatic not ideologically bound.
YOu say that even the SNP has accepted the economic facts - as have I. times would be tough for a few years But 13 bullion deficit is nonsense
Unlike you tho I have my eyes open, I listen to various sources including the SNP - the 13 billion deficit is nonsense for a whole variety of reasons - try reading the stuff from the SNP #Try reading reposrts from internationally known economists. try rading stuff from a variety of sources It underestimates scotlands tax base and includes a lot of spending that would not come to an independent scotland.
But unlike you I am able to do two things - read widely and sceptically. I have seen for example one analysis that shows Scotlands tax receipts to be 9.9% of the UK which of course would have us in massive surplus from day one. I don't believe that either.
It would be nice if you could stop being so patronising and had an open mind and were capable of listening
There may well be less money in the pot after independence. This could be for 5 years or for 500 years. It doesn't really matter to me or to many others, there will be enough. What does matter is how and where that money is spent. Under independence 100% of it will be controlled by the Scottish government. If one particular government ****s that up, it will be easier to replace them with another than it is currently where we do not have control over 100%.
It's not a difficult concept and a very easy choice for me.
eat_the_pudding
...What else would you call those who continue to deny uncomfortable economic facts which have now been (quietly) accepted even by the SNP?...
That's the too poor argument. As used against Malta, etc, etc, etc
Problems can be overcome, unless of course, you're too stupid.
Scots are well aware of the likely costs. It's less than the price we will have too pay if we stay in the Union. We won't need nukes, we won't be waging foreign wars, we will be maintaining our NHS.
As for being a believer, please explain to me what is undesirable about not wanting your country ruled by another.
It doesn’t really matter to me or to many others, there will be enough
So for you, it's worth turning yourselves into a poor country to be free from tyranny?
I wonder, have you ever lived in a poor country?
Apparently it is cultish to want your country to be run by the people living in it, and not by those next door.
That's just populist and nationalist crap. Scotland is represented in Westminster. The English and Welsh have had Scottish PMs and there are loads of Scots in all branches of government. You're just a nationalist. And nationalism isn't a good look, and it gets even more ridiculous when you look at history.
Can someone tell me what exactly is so special about that line on the map?
I'm not sure if the folk on this thread who are in favour of independence are the ones who are 'True Believers'. Some have switched from No to Yes. Some describe themselves as reluctant Yes voters. Almost all can envisage a situation that would make them switch from Yes to No.
So if you're a No voter and you don't consider yourself a True Believer, can you describe a situation that would persuade you to vote Yes?
We won't be poor. There will be enough money if it is spent properly.
To me, nationalist has come to mean getting rid of foreigners. Independence is about getting away from a country that has adopted that mindset and is rapidly forcing that reality on us.
If it was really that expensive to subsidise Scotland then the conservatives would have been trying to make it happen for years to get some nice juicy tax cuts.
Maybe it's just because we're fed up of this sort of stuff...
[url= https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1751/42762326172_4c78f7b612_o.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1751/42762326172_4c78f7b612_o.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
molgrips
So for you, it’s worth turning yourselves into a poor country to be free from tyranny?
I wonder, have you ever lived in a poor country?...
Yes, desperately poor.
Strangely enough it was ruled by Westminster.
It got its independence in the 1960s, it's still not a rich country, but none of the people there want Westminster rule again.
BTW Scotland is not a poor country. That is the big Unionist lie.
As for Scotland being represented in Westminster, representation is meaningless if you are ignored, and that is what the walk out was about.
Like I said, have a word with Nicola.
If these sources you describe were relevant or positive would they not have been asked to write a chapter in the SNP report?
So I'm sorry to bang on about it, but the SNPs acceptance of the size and extent of the economic reality speaks louder than your refusal.
As does the SG statistics department.
I'm not trying to convince you, I'm just providing a counterpoint to you talking up independence using a false prospectus of a "few years" of austerity
With that level of discourse, you might as well write it on the side of a bus.
Side question; Will this be the kind of austerity that kills disabled people and causes food banks or some sort of unicorn powered rainbow austerity?
PS A quick look up sees me described as; demeaning, superior, sneering, closed minded, patronising, unread, unsceptical, unlistening, a sock puppet and a troll.
Does that beat "true believer" on the personal poke front? Asking for a friend, answers on a postcard.
epicycloMaybe it’s just because we’re fed up of this sort of stuff…
Yeah, that account looks really legit doesn't it.
I don't know what skeletons he may have in his closet, if he does I am sure someone will tell me, however watching QT last night I was impressed with Dominic Grieve. Spoke very sensibly on Brexit, and displayed sympathy with the conditions that drove the SNP to walk out if not the walk out itself as a protest method. Leanne Wood pointed out that had the SNP not done it then we would not be talking about it now. So I would agree with Rene on page 1 that it had its desired effect.
Another fanciful wish from me would have been if the SNP drop its independence stance and stand UK wide. There is no appetite for it sadly, however could have been interesting in the face of a whithering Labour party.
People are switching from no to undecided, and from undecided to yes on Scottish indy, and I am fairly certain there are few if any going the other way. I am far more likely to be pragmatic this time around. I am far more likely to take heed of the views of people like Henry McLeish or reluctant voters as the people that may add a degree of common sense to the indy side.
Regarding common sense, having been someone else who lost a close friend recently in the cull described by the OP, I am another that finds his 'Us and Them'' mentality and depth of grievance, extremely unhelpful and off putting, and no more than Brexit under a different flag.
UK politicians have themselves to blame for the shit storm in which we currently reside. This need not have been the case.
eat_the_pudding, you still haven't said, are you a True Believer or not?
If not, under what conditions would you consider voting for independence?
As for being a believer, please explain to me what is undesirable about not wanting your country ruled by another.
It isn't.
BruceWee.
To answer your earlier points 13.5Bn deficit is the real figure If you disagree why don't you FOI the SG stats people about it (tho thats not necessary as they publish the data freely). If the deficit improves then great! and I'll use the new number. (but why does the current one make you uncomfortable?)
Just saying "it isn't" doesn't work and makes Nicola or her staff (and the recent changes to GERS calculation her administration made) out to be incompetent.
Brexit squared is based on the following (I think I've said this already, but hey):
If leaving a union with you closest neighbours and business partners and introducing barriers to trade, while handing over (losing) large amounts of cash you don't have to is crazy in the case of brexit, then doing the same on a smaller scale geographically but larger scale economically (%wise) is also crazy. Doing them both (leaving the UK single market on top of the EU single market, and having neither) is brexit squared QED.
You might not agree, but that is what I mean (and if you think you'll continue to be in the EU or get accepted in immediately on independence then see the SNP growth report).
I never said or considered the words true believer to be an insult. I didn't capitalise it and I kind of wonder why it seems to have touched a nerve for y'all?
As for what would make me support indy? Maybe for starters, not being called:
demeaning, superior, sneering, closed minded, patronising, unread, unsceptical, unlistening, a sock puppet and a troll.
For having a grasp of economic reality and writing down my opinion.
I'm honestly not feeling courted here.
I kind of wonder why it seems to have touched a nerve for y’all?
It's any excuse to feel put out. I reckon they want to be oppressed, gives 'em something to moan about other than the bitter aftertaste left from suckling on Westminster's teat. They actually do believe that they are too wee, too poor and too stupid to run their own country which is why they (are the only ones that) keep mentioning it. The drive for independence is just one big bluff.
It was a real figure last year (although meaningless, as you said earlier). It will not be the same now given that receipts when the oil price was $100 were £8BN vs the $0.2BN they were last year with the oil price at $50. Does it make me uncomfortable? No, because it's a meaningless number (as you said) and even if it wasn't meaningless it is no longer £13BN.
What deficit would make you support independence?
As I said, joining the EEA will allow us to trade with rUK and, to a certain extent, with the EU. As opposed to sticking with the rUK which would drastically reduce trade with the EU and still affect trade with rUK given that we will be completely ****ed economically.
You didn't capitalise true believer but you did put the copyright sign after it (your forum skills are superior to mine, I'll give you that. If I knew how to do that I wouldn't have had to capitalise it.)
I never said demeaning, superior, sneering, closed minded, patronising, unread, unsceptical, unlistening, a sock puppet and a troll. I did imply that you wouldn't even consider the possibility that independence might work and if that was the case then there wasn't much point in continuing discussing it with you.
I also don't feel like I'm being courted, if it makes any difference.
Can you please tell us what set of circumstances would make you support independence? Or is there none and you are a true believer (with copyright sign).
sbob,
You may think you are on my side (or that I'm on yours).
But based on what you've just written, I'm really really not.
Please don't take anything I write seriously. It was just a piss take inspired by repetitive use of the victim card.
🙂
eat_the_pudding, I get why you would feel that everyone is attacking you. Looking at what I said it probably seems like I'm attacking you as well so sorry about that.
I just feel like I can't find common ground with you if I don't know what would make you support independence. If you can tell me then we can discuss whether what would make you change your mind is possible or not.
What would make me change my mind has to start with ditching Brexit. From there it has to be wholesale restructuring of the way the country is run. With the current first past the post system the minority of voters decide the direction of the country, no matter which party is in power. Coalitions should be the norm.
The HoL would have to go, even if they do seem to be doing their job at the moment.
The biggest obstacle would have to be overcoming my belief that a country of 5 - 10 million will always be better governed than a country of 60 million. There are simply too many differences in culture over such a large population, especially when one part of the country has drastically different views to the rest.
What would make me think remaining in the union was a good idea?
Proper representative democracy not FPTP
An end to the HOL
A proper federal solution for UK wide issues
so thats a parliament for each constituent nation with the same powers and a federal "senate" that is representatives from each national parliament for UK wide issues
Don't think I said meaningless. I'm open to correction, but if forced I'd summarise my attitude to "best available" "gold standard" or "SG official statistic" or "Nicola's magic number". Estimate =/= meaningless
Your next paragraph is just hand waving. See Brexit for an education in hand waving vs reality.
I added a copyright symbol AFTER I was accused of using the phrase as an insult.
Hold down Alt and type 0169. (or Alt+0176 for a degree symbol .. now you can describe temperature, and direction!)
I didn't say that you called me anything, (though you might have .. I'm not keeping score, just had a quick look to see what the grievance police were doing on their own time).
Personally I don't think independence is a good idea for the same reasons that brexit is not a good idea (as described above).
Also all nationalisms tend towards small minded, petty, divisiveness, and will ultimately do or say anything to get their own way. Scottish Nationalism is no different.
If you think I'm wrong then why is Nicola tearing her clothes about the terrible slurs to devolution and Holyrood when the SNP campaigned <i>against</i> it ever being set up?
I'm not trying to say that independence can't work or that scotland can't handle independence. Just pointing out the cost. Traditionally you should now call me "project fear". But before doing that consider brexit again where boris and chums used that phrase to good effect and where are we now?
I'm not here to change your mind, just try to stop you passing off opinion as fact in a race to the austerity bus. If you want independence, then fine, but don't try to say you care about the poor people in Scotland and then plan to chop off 13 (ish) Bn of the money that supports them, every year until the unicorn farts a rainbow.
just try to stop you passing off opinion as fact
What makes your opinion fact? Don’t say the 13.5 billion figure you tout because we’ve already established that’s the current deficit under the union and no one, not even you, knows what that would be under an independent Scotland
youre either a THM alias or his long lost brother
I'm not actually feeling attacked. Just pointing out that If i screwed up my eyes and looked really close I might be able to justify it more than those here who keep accusing me of insulting them.
I also don't really see why I should feel anything about scottish independence (apart from wanting a reality based debate). Its the status quo. Its up to you to argue for change.
Before you say that thats a bad thing please note that it does give you a big advantage.
"More of the same!" was a burden for the no side in 2014 and also for the pro EU side in the brexit referendum.
Change always has the advantage, because the destination is not yet reality and can be all things to all men (as exploited by Cambridge Analytica and their facebook based individual marketing).
So someone has to keep you grounded in reality.
If no-one does that job, you'll wake up and find yourself with brexit™ (0153) all over the carpet and people telling you its what you voted for.
not knowing for sure =/= no idea
Its the starting position, Its the cutting of 13Bn from a 50 ish Bn budget on day 1 of independence.
Yes things will be different in the future (thats what its for), but the best people the SNP could find to write up a prospectus for indy have accepted those numbers and with the best will in the world (and probably a lot of people looking over their shoulder), couldn't wish their way out of the defecit for at least 10 years (and that required growth figures some would call unreasonably positive so lets say 25 instead).
Stop banging your head off the facts we actually know (estimated or not).
Its beginning to look like you can't decide if economics matters or not. It almost looks like positive things matter and negative ones should be ignored or obfuscated.
If all that you guys say about the scottish economy is true then it would be in the growth report, on the front of the nat onal, and on posters on every street in scotland.
Its not. QED
You're right, you didn't say meaningless.
The UK has a deficit, but %wise its better than the Scottish one. The deficit isn’t real though. Its theoretical because we benefit from pooling and sharing and without 13 Bn to replace that and no economic argument Scottish independence is toast.
You said it isn't real, it's theoretical. It is theoretical because it's impossible to properly calculate while we are part of the UK. It reports much of the income generated in Scotland as being generated in England given where businesses are based. That's only one factor that makes estimates difficult.
Also, can you stop saying that it would lead to 13BN disappearing overnight. Almost all countries run a deficit. Much of that money will still be available and if the increase in oil price has returned the deficit to it's historic average then Scotland will be better off than rUK.
However, as you and I both said, this is all conjecture. The deficit for Scotland isn't real, it's theoretical. If you want to believe the reality is worse than the theory that's your right. Just don't try to pass off your opinion as fact.
An end to the HOL
Be careful what you wish for. I am not sure it would be replaced with anything better.
Parliament needs a second opinion imo. Checks and balances.
By the way, I don't think the SNP were trying to make the report seem as rosy as possible. I think they were aiming for the worst case scenario.
During the referendum the No side was able to spend a lot of time attacking the numbers, saying they were far too optimistic. I've noticed that this time around no one on the No side is attacking the numbers, just saying how bad they are.
People feel like they are making their decision based on reality without the No side constantly saying the argument is based on false data.
These numbers are not the best the SNP could come up with if they really wanted to, I'm sure.
Yes, in a country that has an electoral system that is fundamentally flawed checks and balances are very important. Much more so than in a properly representative government.