Forum menu
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?
eat_the_pudding
...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?
Now you're hitting the nail on the head.
They are already doing that, and have been since devolution. Note that this has been more or less the policy of the different govts we have had, not just the SNP, so that includes Labour, Tory, and LibDem involvement.
And what is stopping them doing more? The constraint of not having full control of Scotland's finances.
You have just made the case for independence.
Thank you.
Nooooooo I'm trapped in a snare of my own devising.. woe is me! 😭
A it happens I agree to an extent. I think the best way to achieve independence would be to improve Scotlands economy to the point where economics became an irrelevance.
Then we can talk about what people want to achieve, and even if it never happens we might have made a better place for nothing 😉
Until then constant talk of independence is a drag on the economy and my keyboard.
Nicola had the best idea when she thought 60% in the polls would be the right level to start campaigning again. She just thought it would be easier to achieve and even Brexit hasn't done it (it's been more of a warning about reality than a shot in the arm). Having a party full of new members eager for independence hasn't done her any favours, when the majority still don't want it.
You basically summed up everything I've been saying there ETP! 😆
Under the UK scotland is on a path to surplus anyhow, the austerity is already set in motion. 60 % is the right time to call a vote, and just get on with it till these things are settled. Only thing you missed out is that EU guarantees may be easier to obtain post brexit! 😆
Under the UK scotland is on a path to surplus anyhow, the austerity is already set in motion. 60 % is the right time to call a vote, and just get on with it till these things are settled. Only thing you missed out is that EU guarantees may be easier to obtain post brexit
ETP/Seosamh - that position makes a lot of sense - and I reckon is the one actually favoured by the SNP Leadership - if it wasn't for Brexit and the Bain Principle.
The current trajectory of the UK economy is likely to be impacted by Brexit. There's obviously an opportunity to avoid some of the pain if iScotland could somehow retain better links to the EU, even if that wasn't immediate full membership. It's possible that some constitutional "holding area" could be implemented.
On the Bain Principle, as long as Labour (and Tory/LibDem are also sometimes guilty) stand against SNP Policies as a matter of principle - even when UK Labour end up with those policies - then we are caught in a Mobius Loop of constitutional wrangling which can only be resolved by breaking the link to the UK once and for all. A truly Scottish Labour could re-invent itself, forming a decent opposition and with a chance of government rather than trying to prop up the sorry mess that is UK Labour.
They are already doing that, and have been since devolution. Note that this has been more or less the policy of the different govts we have had, not just the SNP, so that includes Labour, Tory, and LibDem involvement.
You sure about that? I seem to recall that when in power Labour did relatively little to differentiate themselves from UK party policy. e.g. they never used their tax raising powers. Scottish Conservatives are right behind may on the Brexit agenda. I'm trying to remember what policy the Libdems influenced in Scotland that would have been different to their UK position? and bizarrely whilst it was a long held SNP policy to replace council tax they haven't done so... conforming to the system south of the border. They tinker with policy differentiation but there is relatively little that is radically different.
Land Reform Act
Smoking in public places
Tinkering - or trying to address a major cost to the Scottish economy at source?
I agree on Council Tax, though I can only imagine how the media will/would handle it given the reaction to Workplace Parking and Income Tax differences.
Problem is scotroutes, I don't think you get independence until the financial argument is settled, least not in any confident sense.
Lets take an estimate at the numbers on either side. from my reading of it. basically nothing much has moved on since 2014. lets take the pessimistic stance.
45/55
Of 45% I'd say that vote is largely entrenched now, it was quite a significant shift over the last ref, and I don't see anyone going back on that(anecdotal I know, but largely true I think), it's actaully going up slightly if anything due to brexit, but not by much.
Of 55%, you have to say about 30% of them are hardcore unionist, they'll never change, so no point even convincing then, another 10% are unionist, but less so, and will probably stick regardless, will take alot to shift them anyway. So that leaves about 15% to play with.
To give them the confidence to switch over, you need to sort out the financial argument to give them the confidence to do so.
If scotland is in a strong financial position imo, we can all agree it isn't at the moment, but if it is the independence vote grows naturally, the only argument against falls apart.
Until then, I don't really see the point in trying to snatch it, it'll just cause problems down the road if there isn't a definite unified push for it.
More I think about it, 60% is about as high as you'll get.
scotroutes,
You see we all (kind of) agreed about something and then you ruined it.
There’s obviously an opportunity to avoid some of the pain if iScotland could somehow retain better links to the EU
rUK is 60% of Scotlands trade. Losing rUK would be worse for Scotland than losing Europe.
Losing both would be worse worse.
Which is what _I've_ been trying to say 🙂 i.e. Indy is no cure for Brexit.
So can we stop banging on about it until the deficit gets to a level that won't have us burning pensioners to keep warm?
There are other (non economic) reasons that I'm not a fan of independence (Summary: same as the reasons I'm not a fan of brexit, but on a different scale).
But we all know what the real issue is.
Once again you are only talking about financial pain. I assume you are happy to see endless Tory rule, workers rights removed, a cap on immigration, "chlorinated chicken" and an NHS run for profit?
These factors will influence some of the 15%. Enough? Not convinced.
Further to seosamh point about numbers. Theres a fallacy that independence support surged from something v. low (25%?) to 45% over 2 years so another years shouting will take it up another 10%.
Thats not how it works. After 2 years shouting and a massive turnout in 2014, everyone had already developed a pretty strong opinion.
It doesn't have to be labelled "unionism". For some it could be labelled "please stop feking about with constitutional stuff and give it a rest for a while". I personally think that the high pro europe turnout in scotland was both about europe and also a cry to "just leave things alone you arseholes".
2014 was a perfect storm of high oil prices, conservative shenanigans, commonwealth games (dancing tunnocks!), bannockburn anniversary and probably more, and it didn't work.
People have seen (mostly) that the ideas of the book of dreams were rubbish, and the notion setting up iscotland for £500m (?) in 2 years may have been slightly exaggerated.
The recent treatment of Anna Soubry outside westminster also brought back memories of the treatment of some unionist politicians during the indyref (and the contrast in reactions from nicola, this time, was a bit stark).
So most people just don't want to go back there. The SNP have already lost their majority, and should consider forcing another constitutional vote at their peril.
As Terry P. once said (possibly based on a real chinese proverb?) "may you live in interesting times" is a curse not a blessing.
scotroutes,
Um ... No.
I thought we'd agreed that financial pain is real pain for some people?
Maybe not you, but what about the others?
I'm from N Ireland, I know lots of people over there who consider that their politics outweighs other peoples right to even have rights.
Its not a good look.
Also (again) anti-indy != pro-brexit
I'm against both, and the fact that you seem unwilling to even consider the similarities between the two may well be the definition of scottish exceptionalism.
Thats not how it works. After 2 years shouting and a massive turnout in 2014, everyone had already developed a pretty strong opinion.
Currently I agree with that, but in 10 years time the demographics will also have moved significantly. If you can add in a scotland showing, through GERS(as it's the only way to show it), that scotland is in the black. (Over to the SNP on that yin.)
Well I think you have another perfect storm waiting to happen. At the minute under the cloud of Brexit and iffy financials, I just don't see it. People will hesitate and it'll kill off that opportunity.
To be clear here btw, I'm not arguing against IS, I'm all for it, I'm just saying bide your time. It'll come.
scottish exceptionalism.
You should stop making up things that don't exist.
Believing that a smaller tighter democratic unit can function more efficiently with the benefit of those people more in mind than the larger one has isn't exceptionalism.
It just makes you look bitter.
The recent treatment of Anna Soubry outside westminster also brought back memories of the treatment of some unionist politicians during the indyref (and the contrast in reactions from nicola, this time, was a bit stark).
But not the treatment of the independence politicians during the same indyref? Blinkers on had you?
Bawbags on either side, lets move on from that. Agreed?
I assume you are happy to see endless Tory rule, workers rights removed, a cap on immigration, “chlorinated chicken” and an NHS run for profit?
seosamh,
Not bitter 🙂
I've started using the phrase "scottish exeptionalism" to describe the idea (conscious or unconscious) that people supporting independence express when they talk about how the people in Scotland are basically different from the people in e.g. England.
Often/mostly in the context of how these differences will (they hope) drive us apart.
Sadly (genuinely), the statistics don't bear it out. There is as much racism, opposition to immigration, probably more sectarianism, people of every political flavour and persuasion in Scotland.
As an example; How many of you were genuinely shocked by the rebirth of the tories in the last few elections? Was the shock because it doesn't fit with your mental image of "Scottish people"? So whats wrong? Their nationality, or your mental image?
For all that, there is definitely a slightly more left wing/centrist bent in Scotland, than overall in England, but that also applies to other parts of the UK of similar population.
My argument would be that we are more than anything, one people (in good and bad ways) after 300 years of union. I'm Irish and British by birth, Scottish by location, European (hopefully ongoing) by choice.
A lot (55% at the last count) of people don't see blaming the bad stuff on part of their identity and wanting to get away from it as necessarily a positive thing.
Many on here see independence as a positive, and I can see your point (even if you often ignore an asking price which could include the ability to pay for the society you envisage).
But I think that barking up the nationalist tree and looking for separation is the wrong way forward (in indy as much as in brexit).
Rebiurth of the tories - to half the vote in England based on a non aggression pact with labour and cleverly focussing on the unionist vote including repatriation of fishing control to holyrood. Getting what 20 odd % of the vote seen as a victory
Ukip - high point in the vote of just over 5% now effectivly zero.
Thats two huge differences politically to England
Bawbags on either side, lets move on from that. Agreed?
I'd agree there were/are bawbags on both sides. You have to admit there was a slight difference in the way the bawbags of each side were reported on, surely?.
Hence the fact eat_the_pudding seems to think it was only unionists politicians getting abuse.
As an example; How many of you were genuinely shocked by the rebirth of the tories in the last few elections? Was the shock because it doesn’t fit with your mental image of “Scottish people”? So whats wrong? Their nationality, or your mental image?
A third one could be suggesting you are making a link that doesn't hold up to any real scrutiny, unless the early 90's saw the formation of the Scottish identity.
A Tory bounce was in the LAST election, not the last few as you state. In 2015 they got their lowest ever %. They are currently on 28% of the turnout in 2017, it was higher in the 1970's and almost as high right up to the 90's. If a pro Indy supporter was to use figures like that to make a point, you would be all over them. Or does you crystal ball forecast a continued rise? Unlike in England, there is an obvious credible alternative vote. I suspect we have reached peak Tory in Scotland. Even at the time of the 70's ref the Tories had 31% of the vote which further undermines any point about a mental image of Scots.