Forum menu
I think thats the aim - however if the government falls all bets are off
tj,
I'm trying to move on from this, but yes I have read the methodology*.
ALL economic statistics are estimates.
The fact that much of the information comes from Westminster is irrelevant.
There was an FOI to the SG stats department a few years ago (trying to put some of the FUD to bed) asking if they had ever been refused any information from westmonster that they asked for. They said no.
Nicola's stats dept has already revised the GERS stats to improve them and remove possible inaccuracies.
If they could improve them [in a statistically valid way] to make scotlands economy look stronger I'm sure their boss would give them her full backing.
They haven't, so either let them (and nicola) know about all the issues you've found, or please let it lie.
The reason this matters at all on an EU thread, is that lying liars and the lies they tell is what brought us brexit in the first place.
*including the bit that states
In general, GERS apportions a share of UK revenues from corporation taxes based on the
economic activity undertaken in Scotland and not the location of companies’ headquarters.
Public corporations’ and North Sea corporation tax revenues are excluded from the analysis
and are apportioned to Scotland separately.
Which directly contradicts the assertion you made upthread about scottish activities being apportioned to companies with HQs in england.
So if you read it again you should pay more attention.
Nice little anecdote here.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/13/brexit-government-orwellian-ministry-of-truth
From that article above quoting the Mayor of Bristol “All I’ve been given is a grand total of £210,000 by Westminster for our Brexit preparations. How far do they think that will go when they say it should cover policing food riots, and compensating problems Brexit causes for business, transport or anything else?”
Policing food riots? So this is expected as an acceptable part of Brexit?
The replies make for sad reading.
No thats not what I said eat the puddi9ng. The head office effect I mentioned is different - its the taxes paid by head office staff are all credited to where the head office is.
Now please - read up on it and understand why the measure is so vague - and also read up and try to understand why it does not show the position of Scotland after independence.
Its clear that you have not read up on it, don't understand it and simply want to use it as a stick to beat me. I have read widely around it, linked to discussion from an acedemic economist with no stake in this that describes how poor a measure it is, explained why it both under=estimates scottish taxes and over estimates scottish expenditure and finally it is not a measure of economic activity - only taxation!
And while you are at it - stop being so patronizing - Its Sturgeon not Nichola. Its patronising and demeaning to use the first name when you wouldn't for other politicians.
Its you that won't let it lie - accusing me of saying things I haven't. Refuting good arguement from independent sources without any evidence and generally just making stuff up to suit your position.
Also It’s De Pliffle not Boris.
TJ, If you think her name needs respect, then accept her opinions on economics.
"Making stuff up" haha
From the man who used the term "head office effect" without qualification and then when shown that GERS includes economic activity in the country where it happens regardless of where the HQ is, says "I was talking about taxes on head office staff".
Well;
a) if they work in the head office in slough maybe thats where their taxes should be recorded? and
b) they must be getting paid a hell of a lot, if their taxes equal a substantial portion of the cost of the NHS in Scotland (The S.I unit for "One Scottish Deficit").
Unlike you I'm not accusing anyone of bad faith, just an inability do separate opinion from well compiled statistics.
If you want to be able to claim:
and Scotland who support the UK economy – take london and scotland out of the picture then england is barely viable
Without anyone calling you out on it (when you later admit that scotland has a deficit, just not one you like the size of), maybe you should go somewhere where nationalists are allowed to run free.
GERS is not perfect but its the best indicator of the starting position after independence, (and accepted as such by the .. oh you know who already 🙂
Over the years we have repeated this conversation and you have tried to minimise the deficit, and refused to say what substantial bits you would chop off the scottish economy to afford independence (apart from nuclear weapons which at £180million/year means you've dealt with just over 1.2% of the deficit, woo!) and the HQ 'tax' effect, lets make that a generous 1% for some very well paid people in slough, and some handwaving about westminster.
And remember, a whole new country can be set up for "less than 0.2 billion" by the people who've spent five times that setting up part of a benefits agency.
I can understand why you want to minimise the deficit, and sew FUD around the "easy" cuts that could be made but fail to put realistic numbers on. But at least be honest with yourself.
To make a slightly roundabout point, when you say you're "well read" on the subject, I know how you would probably react to someone saying they were "well read" on chiropractors and homeopathy from chiropractic and homeopathy websites.
Well thats how you look from here.
(PS, re: nicola's name, I think we've had this conversation before when you run out of factual points to make, and decide to get personal by accusing me of getting personal (classic tj!).
I also call boris boris, theresa theresa and jeremy magic grandad. You can read anything you like into that and I'm sure you will, again).
I think that’s enough now chaps. Can you take your penis bashing to another thread please?
I'll bash what I like thanks 😉
Anyway that was my last hurrah now that we've reached the "patronizing poor nicola" stage, it's deja vu all over again. Ta Ta.
Good - then you will stop talking utter pish 🙂
Its you who got personal first!
Sorry DD.
And remember, a whole new country can be set up for “less than 0.2 billion” by the people who’ve spent five times that setting up part of a benefits agency.
Another totally made up thing - not something I said or would say
One more - on Scotland supporting England - Hammond the UK chancellor said that!
I refuse to say what parts I would chop off for 2 reasons - I wouldn't! I'd raise taxes and as we all know the deficit is much smaller than you claim. too poor, too wee too feart .
Just remember - independence is not my preferred option. I do not vote SNP. I just like truth and understanding - please read up on GERs and learn something about what it is and what its limitations are. You might be suprised.
OK - I am done with this
I didn't say the 200Million figure was yours.. it was just another example of a 2014 natfact.
i.e. Not "made up by me"
TTFN.
Yawn
The SNP money tree can’t be any worse than the Labour / Tory / LD one.
With a hard Brexit it’s hard not to see a second Scottish referendum and a leave win. My parents and brother live in Scotland (& voted remain both times) and they would vote leave if it gave a chance of rejoining E.U. I’d be trying to get a Scottish passport...
Yeh the whole Scottish independence thing is a huge issue, the first Scott ref was in the context of the UK in the EU.
Now the goal posts have moved to put it lightly. The Scotts are being taken out of the EU and losing thier rights in the process.
It's completely legitimate to hold another Scott ref to leave the UK. Things have changed.
Filthy collaborators now...
https://news.sky.com/story/boris-johnson-accuses-mps-and-eu-to-collaborate-to-block-brexit-11785259
Interesting how Boris is picking formats that allow him to talk shite without being questioned. Still 'democracy' and 'taking back control' etc
This is also quite a good read: https://news.sky.com/story/sky-views-we-cant-prepare-for-no-deal-nearly-as-much-as-you-might-think-11784954
I' m really hoping one of the brexit faithful will be along to cheer me up with some alternative facts.
Watching channel 4 news from Derry, it’s clear that in the event of no deal, then it’s going to go off again in Ireland. It’s a certainty.
All parties in Ireland, North and South, Catholic and Protestant, seem to be in agreement on that.
A great phrase used by one of the blokes interviewed about Boris Johnson:
“Some people’s ignorance is a small gap in their knowledge, Boris Johnson’s knowledge is a small gap in his ignorance”
Nicely summed up
Oh look - Westminster tories caught talking mince about scotlands finances again!
Note the source, have y9our pinch of salt ready but Truss has been caught
https://www.thenational.scot/news/17834812.tory-minister-caught-lying-scottish-budget-cuts/?fbclid=IwAR1sktEIGCBxI5tzc9wI4FpF3Bc6zz1B5t_5GMHsVJXIaQPP4SQQarPA4Pc
Not really the thread for that is it TJ?
Not really but I thought eat the pudding might like it
In other news 20 labour MPS are proposing to try to get a vote for mays deal! this is because they do not want Remain. Funnily enough led bty Kinnoch junior - a rightwinger and staunch blairite! This is instead of a second referendum which is labour policy!
So yes - its all Corbyns fault
This is likely to be a key development, and should be posted here I think…
https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1161751909788782594?s=21
What’s this? A letter? Offering a second referendum and a remain option? With his signature!
Can we please put this to bed now?
The choice is now with the Lib Dems and anti-brexit Tories. No deal or a second referendum delivered by Corbyn. What’s it to be?
I think they’ll look for a way to avoid no deal without making Corbyn PM first (not that I can see anyway they’ll succeed in that).
That letter is enough for me to vote Labour again if they manage to get that election. Not sure it’s enough for them to win a majority though.
Ffs Corbyn.
3 f****** years!
Where were you?
I desperately want to vote Labour and will. Why was it mate this hard though?
I desperately want to vote Labour and will. Why was it mate this hard though?
Same reason this thread couldn't reconcile itself.
Public voted for something related to leave, MPs couldn't deliver majority vote on anything; and the machinations of parties trying to exist in a low majority Government ready to topple.
Corbyn had to wait until there was a Tory minister crazy enough to pursue no deal for there to be a point in blocking it.
That's in their 2017 manifesto.
Of course we will be maintaining our food standards as promised: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-49353220
Ffs Corbyn.
3 f****** years!
Where were you?
I desperately want to vote Labour and will. Why was it mate this hard though
Agree with Rone.
I've been hugely frustrated by Corbyn but in reality he had to let this play out as it has. The Tories needed to get to this point to get the tide turned against them.
Is the “tide turning against them” though, or have they managed to move from…
Leave EU > Leave Single Market > Leave Single Market without a deal
…successfully in the last few years, and taken an awful lot of the country with them?
Li9b dems still holding true to their yellow tories. Swinson refusing to rule out a deal with the tories, refusing to do a deal with labour unless Corbyn goes. so much for principles. If anti brexit is so important then surely Corbyn is a price worth paying?
Swinson simply staying true to her tory lite philosophy. Well it will not wash Swinson. We can see thru you. She would rather have brexit than leave Corbyn as PM in a short term caretaker government
(psst - if you wanted Corbyn as PM, why didn’t you vote Labour at the 2017 general election?)
He would rather have brexit than have any Labour politician other than himself as PM in a short term caretaker government
There needs to be some compromise here, dirty or otherwise. If it’s not realistic to get Tories (yellow or otherwise) to vote for a caretaker Labour PM if it’s Corbyn, but it is if it’s someone else… why not propose someone else?
(psst - will you be joining me in voting Labour in a snap general election TJ?)
There needs to be some compromise here, dirty or otherwise
Sounds good.
why not propose someone else?
Ah so by compromise you mean Corbyn does want they want?
The SNP and Plaid Cymru counter suggestions seem sensible and would be the sort of thing to negotiate about. Either get the referendum in first or put extremely strict time limits on the temporary government. Simply throwing the hands up and saying no way shows a certain lack of willingness to compromise.
I will be voting tactically. Depends on my local candidates and what the polls say. My seat is unusual in that its now a 3 way marginal ( SNP. Labour. conservative). Vile SNP incumbent. labour candidate tarnished by his time on the council last time. I cannot vote for either. A liar and a carpetbagger or a corrupt buffoon complicit in a rip of of thousands of edinburgh folk. Maybe we get a decent labour candidate?
Gonna be a tricky decision. Brock is so vile I will never vote for her. Munro is a at best a hopeless stooge for corrupt building firms. Of course the tory is beyond the pale. Lib Dems are nowhere so that would be a wasted vote
From a wider point of view labour or SNP makes little differnce in reality.
Ah so by compromise you mean Corbyn does want they want?
By compromise, I mean that if MPs from other parties are prepared to make a Labour MP the caretaker PM, but don’t want it to be the leader who they will be up against in a general election, then Labour should grab that opportunity to get the election they have been calling for consistently since 2017. They then get to campaign in that election to get a majority and make their chosen man PM.
If the LibDems or Tory rebels insisted on an MP from one of their own parties (or even an independent) was the caretaker PM, I can see why Labour might be miffed (I still think Lucas would be a great choice, but there you go)… but if they’ll back a Labour MP who won’t be leading the campaign in the snap election… why not go with that to get the election and seek a mandate?
The libdems have failed at the first hurdle. Their single policy has been no brexit by any means necessary. Now their is a solid proposal from the opposition leader to achieve that it seems that's not their policy any more and instead it's no brexit as long as there is some political benefit for the lib dems. It's like 2010 all over again.
I cannot vote for either
so wait, you've been telling every one on this thread who's expressed their reluctance when it comes for voting for Labour (and by extension Corbyn) how ignorant and short sighted they're being, and yet you express exactly the same reservations when it comes to your own choices?
hypocrisy much?
Now their is a solid proposal from the opposition leader
Whose been solidly opposed to the E.U. all his life.....& you want to vote for him in the hope he’ll change the habit of a lifetime & embrace the E.U.?
🤔🤥
you want to vote for him in the hope he’ll change the habit of a lifetime & embrace the E.U
He's not offering to embrace the EU, he's offering a cast-iron opportunity to avoid no deal, followed by an election, and a restatement of labour policy to offer a second referendum with a remain option. Do you want to stop a no deal or do you want Corbyn to say he's pro-EU? Which is more important?
NOpe -
There is a particularly scottish element to this ie the SNP and also the behaviour of labour in Scotland. Then there is the fact that the actions of the last labour candidate in part cost me 17 years of legal battles and tens of thousands of pounds and billions to Edinburgh council tax payers
Then there is the fact that from a brexit point of view there is little difference SNP or labour. ( SNP stronger anti brexit but weaker politically)
You might also note I continually propose tactical anti tory voting.
In an English constituency without these particular local issues I would vote labour or lib dem ( or whoever) had the best chance of beating tories in a marginal. In a safe seat it does not matter.
IN my constituency the anti tory choice is not easy. SNP a liar who has refused to help constituents or the last labour candidate who helped cover up massive corruption that has cost me personally a lot.
In this highly flawed FPTP election given Edinburgh and scottish dimensions then its not an easy choice. If there looks to be a tory surge ( doubtful) then I will vote for the candidate most likely to beat the tories. If there is no tory surge then I really do not care which of the SNP or Labour win and that choice has little bearing on brexit
Edit - if Mark Lazarowicz was still the labour candidate I probably would vote for him. Or if we had a decent SNP rep like my MSP I would probably vote for them.
the choice really is between would you like your backside booting or your shins!
The libdems have failed at the first hurdle. Their single policy has been no brexit by any means necessary. Now their is a solid proposal from the opposition leader to achieve that it seems that’s not their policy any more and instead it’s no brexit as long as there is some political benefit for the lib dems. It’s like 2010 all over again.
The LibDems are the alternative offering for any constituency where Labour has absolutely no chance of winning such as mine (Cheltenham). That Labour have come out as No Conf./Referendum/Election simply means that Labour Remainers can now support them with a clear conscience. It will muddy the marginals but I can only see it as a good thing. So long as it gets publicity and some money behind it. Not necessarily in that order.
Anti bexit / anti tory tactiual voting is the key - not some sort of ideological purity. ( so long as your candidates are not vile or corrupt
It's completely sensible to say Corbn shouldnt be leader of a caretaker govt; A Govt. Nat. Unity will need the tory rebels on board. I can't sen them voting Corbyn in. The sensible thing in my mind would be a prominent labour frontbencher (given that labour are the second largest party), the obviosu choice would be Keir Starmer. However I can't see Corbyn and crew accepting that.