MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
Just to check, you know that Empire 2.0 isn't something I made up?
I wish it was but google it if you don't believe me.
brucewee,
First, I wholeheartedly reject the implication that being against independence means I have good feelings about the tories.
But brexit is a lesson in political promises. Brexit at heart is a "solution" to a series of problems that at best are unrelated to europe and will mostly become worse with brexit.
I see scottish independence in the same way.
The indy campaign wrote the book (quite literally) on economic lies and obfuscation and sloganising to avoid facing facts that has now been taken on and improved by boris and co.
Brexit is also about to become an object lesson in the fact that reality doesn't change based on the power of your positive thinking.
So, I don't trust people who offer "sunlit uplands" based on no evidence and wishful thinking, and neither should you.
The idea that you are prepared for yourself and others to experience hardship in order to achieve
your political aims should worry you (and make you evaluate whether your idea of hardship is real or romanticised).
I've visited countries, in old e. europe and africa, where the fabric of society is right on the edge of collapse and seen the conditions endured by the poor, sick and mentally ill when things go wrong and the money runs out. Good intentions count for nothing.
(To be clear, I am not claiming that an indy scotland would be a second/third world country, just pointing out that intentions are not a negotiable currency.)
So political intentions about the nhs and social care and the environment have zero value if the plan assumes that somehow they will get paid for (and be better) with less cash than we have now.
All that indy can offer at the moment is being out of europe _and_ out of the UK PLUS (for 25 years only) more austerity than you can shake a stick at.
Having said all that. If the UK does lurch very far to the right and the economic damage looks severe enough that independent scotland looks like a genuinely better economic prospect, maybe I could be convinced (if I genuinely thought that it could realistically improve the lot of the average person in scotland).
But we're a long way from that (I hope).
I'm already looking at having to pass through customs to visit my parents (in NI), possibly being a different nationality to them (if ireland unifies), and possibly being a different nationality (again) to the one I was born if scotland gets independence.
Interesting times.
Civil society is a thin veneer that is easily scratched away. I don't doubt the aims, intentions and sincerity of many independence supporters, but until their aims are even vaguely achievable, they are just more "sunlit uplands".
“sunlit uplands”.
Full of pesky biting midges mind.
Civil society is a thin veneer that is easily scratched away. I don’t doubt the aims, intentions and sincerity of many independence supporters, but until their aims are even vaguely achievable.
lets see your understanding of the sums?
But apart from that it got everything else right?
I doubt it, most of it relates to cherry picked articles and data which in most cases is quite old and relates to a period after 13+ years of labour government or it's immediate aftermath. There are real issues for the UK, but portraying Europe as the utopia he does undermines his case
and as I asked above why he wasn’t living in Scotland rather than the hell he portrays in the SE of England?
Lets play the stats game, I can pick really important one randomly: youth unemployment
https://www.statista.com/statistics/266228/youth-unemployment-rate-in-eu-countries/
could do better for the UK, we should be aiming at being at the head of the table, impacts of 3m+ EU nationals (you know, the "net contributors because they tend to be in employment) on the UK jobs market need to be understood (but not over egged, as with anything there will be pro's and con's)
but I'm sure you can turn it into a horror story to support your case
Epicyclo
Ah, if you set this theme to rhyme, it could be the chorus to the that well sung song “You can’t be independent because…”
You see, the problem you have, and the problem the snp has, is like it or not I'm exactly the type of person you need to get on board if you ever want to see independence.
It's all very well and good the hard-core marching down the road with their yes banners..but if you want a majority you need to convince the unconvinced.
I voted no last time round, I voted remain in the brexit poll, I'm totally against everything the Tories stand for, and I'm not entirely against independence and would vote for it if the argument is there. I'm exactly the type of person the snp need to be targeting.
Yet your response, slightly patronising, full of distain for my views, and completely lacking in any kind of relevant evidence to
Alleviate my concerns is exactly the type of response that puts me off voting for the cause you seem so passionate about.
Stating 'it worked for other countries' doesn't cut it I'm afraid. Not for me or many others like me. Either you and the Snp are too stupid to see that, or the economic argument just isn't there.
Either way all your posts on the subject, and there are many, only serve to hinder the independence effort. Keep it up and you will lose again.
Just to check, you know that Empire 2.0 isn’t something I made up?
but only you seem to be making something of a phrase used which seems to have escalated from a throwaway civil servant catchphrase for a trade strategy into some organic national movement that threatens world peace (if you read the left wing press hyperbole)
I hadn't heard it used, had to google it, so much for it's traction
more sensibly
First, I wholeheartedly reject the implication that being against independence means I have good feelings about the tories.
I didn't mean to imply that you like the Tories. If it came across that way I'm sorry.
But brexit is a lesson in political promises. Brexit at heart is a “solution” to a series of problems that at best are unrelated to europe and will mostly become worse with brexit.
I agree.
I see scottish independence in the same way.
I agree that the roots are the same. I keep going on about the democratic deficit because I believe the UK is fundamentally undemocratic. People's frustrations at this led to the first referendum and then to Brexit.
The key difference is that Scottish independence will address this democratic deficit directly. Brexit won't.
I don't see any sign at all that the UK is going to fix it's system, do you?
So political intentions about the nhs and social care and the environment have zero value if the plan assumes that somehow they will get paid for (and be better) with less cash than we have now.
I think we agree that things are going to get worse under the Tories though, don't we?
All that indy can offer at the moment is being out of europe _and_ out of the UK PLUS (for 25 years only) more austerity than you can shake a stick at.
I don't believe this is a given. There have been a lot of positive noises coming from the EU about Scotland remaining or rejoining.
Having said all that. If the UK does lurch very far to the right and the economic damage looks severe enough that independent scotland looks like a genuinely better economic prospect, maybe I could be convinced (if I genuinely thought that it could realistically improve the lot of the average person in scotland).
I guess the problem is that no one can prove to anyone else that they will be worse off in one scenario or the other. All we're doing is taking our best guess.
The democratic deficit is definitely not going away by staying in the union though.
Its not all guesswork and supposition. The economic argument is against it right now.
The Democratic deficit matters a lot less with the scottish parliament (and is better solution, used wisely, than the alternative, in my opinion).
The economic prospects under brexit are bad, but still not as bad as indy in the current situation (this may be controversial, but shouldn't be based on the best information we have).
European "noises" and positive thinking are exactly what they sound like. There are a lot of politicians in the EU at many different levels. Equating the views of e.g. bob, MEP from hannover, with the president of the EU is a mistake (not that it hasn't happened before 😉
I suppose the question is, can I see a time when scotland, maybe wales and a united ireland as members of the EU surround an independent brexited england?
Well maybe. But can supporters of indy see themselves selling the prospect of a time when travelling to Newcastle to see your gran would involve crossing a border?
(I'm facing that prospect right now with my folks in NI, and just thinking about what someone elses political wet dream has done (and could do) to my family hollows me out more than you can probably imagine, it really shouldn't matter so much but it really does.)
Theres a lot of stuff happening, and my guiding light is people before politics.
I suppose the question is, can I see a time when scotland, maybe wales and a united ireland as members of the EU surround an independent brexited england?
Wales voted for brexit in the same proportions as the English. Not to mention the big swing to Tories at the election (40% Tory vs 39% Labour).
(I’m facing that prospect right now with my folks in NI, and just thinking about what someone elses political wet dream has done (and could do) to my family hollows me out more than you can probably imagine, it really shouldn’t matter so much but it really does.)
Well, I'm not in exactly the same boat as you but my girlfriend and my kids are Italian. I'm not really looking forward to seeing what a hard Brexit is going to do to my family and the choices we might have to make about where to live.
I think we can at least agree it's a shitty situation for everyone right now.
eat_the_pudding
Member
Its not all guesswork and supposition. The economic argument is against it right now.
Lets see your understanding of the sums?
What is your picture of how IS will look on day 1?
Genuinely curious to see how you interpret things?
The point about economics is that the information we have now is a snapshot in the past. Following different policy will produce different results
UK wide austerity has badly damaged the economy. Investment in infrastructure will produce growth. Stopping tax avoidance will put more money into the economy.
Also the poor performance of Scotlands economy is Westminsters fault
tjagain
Member
The point about economics is that the information we have now is a snapshot in the past. Following different policy will produce different resultsUK wide austerity has badly damaged the economy. Investment in infrastructure will produce growth. Stopping tax avoidance will put more money into the economy.
Also the poor performance of Scotlands economy is Westminsters fault
Same question goes to you, lets see your projections and understanding.
Wales voted for brexit in the same proportions as the English. Not to mention the big swing to Tories at the election (40% Tory vs 39% Labour).
If Wales were ever to become independent it would have to campaign to join the EU or at least gain some kind of relationship purely from a pragmatic point of view. Also this from July 2016:
Where did we get the notion that it will take iScotland 25 years to rejoin the EU?
That seems like utter nonsense given Romania managed to go from a communist state to an EU member in 17 years.
richmtb
Subscriber
Where did we get the notion that it will take iScotland 25 years to rejoin the EU?
That seems like utter nonsense given Romania managed to go from a communist state to an EU member in 17 years.
Same place as the "queue" and "you will have to adopt the euro"- people who either know nothing or know they're lying.
Romania you say,
Money
Romania is increasingly a card economy. While a growing number of businesses do accept credit cards, it may be safer to use cash due to the risk of credit card fraud. There is now a large network of ATMs that accept standard international credit and debit cards. Check with your card provider whether you will be able to use these machines.US dollars and sterling are not always easy to exchange for local currency, especially outside Bucharest. You may have difficulties using travellers’ cheques. Scottish and Northern Irish bank notes may not be accepted in banks and bureaux de change.
https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/romania/money
but Scotland isn't Romania, importantly it has a Central Bank and controls it's own interest rates
I agree it's not in Euro and a recent EU member
but in 2024
https://www.romania-insider.com/romanian-pm-euro-adoption-deadline
There isn't an EU state that uses a currency with a third party Central Bank, so the rUK£ precludes EU membership, iS therefore would need to have the iS "Merks and Bawbees" or similar or the Euro
big_n_daft
Member
There isn’t an EU state that uses a currency with a third party Central Bank, so the rUK£ precludes EU membership, iS therefore would need to have the iS “Merks and Bawbees” or similar or the Euro
The first doesn't lead us to the last... Do you have anything to support the idea that an EU state <can't> use a currency with a 3rd party central bank? I've looked but every time you find that assertion it only ever seems to be "backed" with the observation that nobody's done it before.
Do you have anything to support the idea that an EU state <can’t> use a currency with a 3rd party central bank? I’ve looked but every time you find that assertion it only ever seems to be “backed” with the observation that nobody’s done it before
So do you agree it would make sense to establish whether we can or can't do that before bashing ahead with a vote?
Because that's the kind of thing, along with many other things, we surely deserve to know?
A majority of Scottish voters have voted for pro-union parties in every single election the UK has ever had. The majority is smaller now but still a majority. Scotland is free to vote anyway it likes, and so far has chosen to remain part of the UK.
That may change in the future, but we aren’t being held against our will, or “imprisoned” as the SNP said the other day.
I agree with this
You see, the problem you have, and the problem the snp has, is like it or not I’m exactly the type of person you need to get on board if you ever want to see independence.
It’s all very well and good the hard-core marching down the road with their yes banners..but if you want a majority you need to convince the unconvinced.
I voted no last time round, I voted remain in the brexit poll, I’m totally against everything the Tories stand for, and I’m not entirely against independence and would vote for it if the argument is there. I’m exactly the type of person the snp need to be targeting.
Yet your response, slightly patronising, full of distain for my views, and completely lacking in any kind of relevant evidence to
Alleviate my concerns is exactly the type of response that puts me off voting for the cause you seem so passionate about.Stating ‘it worked for other countries’ doesn’t cut it I’m afraid. Not for me or many others like me. Either you and the Snp are too stupid to see that, or the economic argument just isn’t there.
Either way all your posts on the subject, and there are many, only serve to hinder the independence effort. Keep it up and you will lose again.
I also agree and identify with this.
As much as I hate watching the tories run the country into the ground I am equally put off the Yes movement for the same reasons, people going on about what happened hundreds of years ago, the numerous anti-english comments on facebook posts about independence, even if they are shot down by many others. The last indy ref was pretty much the original 'fake news' political campaign, the fake stories about Cameron's secret trips to an oil rig west of Shetland and secret drilling rigs hiding untold riches on things like the yes caithness page were just ridiculous to anyone with half a clue of reality.
I was born and lived in Scotland my whole life but now live in a wonderful country about the same population as Scotland which is often used as a claim for what for an independent Scotland would be like, which I agree would be fantastic, but it would take hundreds and hundreds of years if not more of immense effort to achieve anything remotely like it, if at all. But maybe not impossible.
Drop the alba gu brath and project fear soundbites in response to any challenging question, drop the references to events of hundreds of years ago, drop the obsession with oil wealth lost, drop the Trumpian like idolisation and they can do no wrong defense of the SNP and a lot more people could be swung towards independence.
Yes we look to countries like Denmark and say - why can't we do it? there is no answer to this. One major difference when we look to those small countries with much higher standards of living is we see countries that are much less unequal in income distribution and much higher taxed.
What is unique about Scotland that it could not be a viable prosperous country? ~Especially given the advantages we have in energy reserves?
but it would take hundreds and hundreds of years if not more of immense effort to achieve anything remotely like it
Unless you live on a colony on Mars I think it should be manageable in less time.
How long did it take Germany and Japan to rebuild after the war? How long did it take China to become the world's factory after they decided to open up to the world?
I'm not saying these are models that Scotland should emulate but they do show how quickly things can change when a population has a common purpose and drive to achieve it.
big_n_daft
but Scotland isn’t Romania, importantly it has a Central Bank and controls it’s own interest rates
What makes it impossible for Scotland to set up a central bank?
tpbiker
On the performance of the scottish government - you have to remember that the have very little control over total budget ie tax raising powers are relatively new and very limited.;
So to increase spending in one area they have to reduce it in another while in the UK
Take halthcare - a subject very close to my heart. The SNP government took two big political decisions. first to remove the fake market - that saved approx 10% of the budget compared to england that is put into healthcare. Secondly they decided not to ringfence or separate out helathcare from other spending - so tory cuts to government spending meant a smaller over all budget ( in real terms) leaving the SNP with no choice but to not increase spending in real terms. If they had protected helthcare 100% it would have meant massive cuts elsewhere because healthcare spending is such a large part of the budget.
yes the SNP government has made errors but few huge blunders and IMO have sueed the very limited powers wisely to ameliorate the worst of the tory cuts. With no borrowing powers they simply can only spend the amount given to them by Westminster - if that means cuts then they have to cut.
You may think there are issues with healthcare in Scotand and with the welfare system in general - but they are much less than the issues in England
Also relevant to the banking conversation:
The Bank of England has revealed details of the emergency plan it would have put in place had Scotland voted 'Yes' for independence in last month's referendum.
The Bank was ready to pump millions of pounds into the financial system to ensure liquidity and had issued extra notes to cope with additional demand from Scottish deposit holders.
It was also prepared to stand by notes issued by Scottish banks in an attempt to reassure the public there would no immediate changes in an effort to prevent a potential deposit flight.
Unlike England and Wales, where all bank notes are issued by Threadneedle Street, Scotland has different types of bank notes issued by Scottish banks. These are guaranteed by deposits at the Bank of England.
"Under current arrangements, Scottish banknotes are backed fully by their issuers’ holdings of Bank of England notes, UK coin and deposits at the Bank of England. This would have been a key public message in the event of a Yes vote," the BoE said.
Had Scotland voted in favour of independence, the Bank said it would have issued a statement "reaffirming its responsibilities for financial stability, prudential regulation, banknotes and monetary policy in the entire United Kingdom, including Scotland" until independence came into force.
I'd have a guess that this is the case becasue the BoE knows would would have to back the Scottish Pound or it would need to buy Scotland out of the BoE.
The bank of England is the UK's bank, not Englands.
So initially, we could use the pound, the bank of England would continue backing it. But the longer term goal would be to get bought out and set up a central bank of scotland.
Going to take a wee break from this thread for a while. I just got offered a job on a secret semi-sub that is going to be drilling on Loch Lomond.
Edit: I may have said too much.
😆
tpbiker
Member
So do you agree it would make sense to establish whether we can or can’t do that before bashing ahead with a vote?
Absolutely- but tbh the absence of any evidence presented, and the fact that it didn't come up at all in 2014, is pretty indicative. Considering all the imaginary arguments about EU membership it'd be bizarre for the No campaign to not use a factual one.
Onus is on the person making the claims of course but that's a bit of a lawyer's response so I've had a decent look and like I say, every time it comes up the only supporting facts are "nobody does it at the moment". So I went to the source and I can't find a single word about central banks other than the ECB in TEU or in Article 49. The economic requirement is essentially that you must be a functioning market economy and the ability to cope with the pressures and demands of being part of the EU economy, and this would be no barrier to any of that. I'm not going to claim to be an authority, of course, but if this rule does exist it's well hidden- and why would it be?
It definitely would be an issue for euro convergence, but then that's why there's a convergence process and why it's separate from accession.
Is it not possible to come up with some sort of staged independence plan? Starting up the institutions bit by bit?
molgrips
Subscriber
Is it not possible to come up with some sort of staged independence plan? Starting up the institutions bit by bit?
Completely sensible, and would have the majority support in Scotland. And it would probably happen that way post an indy yes vote. Problem is until after the yes vote the No argument is nup, we're no playing, it's oor baw.
I'd also suggest that independence doesn't and won't mean isolation, so it would be perfectly feasible to have cross border initiatives if to the benefit of all.
Thanks northwind. If it's possible then great, let's get that confirmed and the SNP can then stick it in the manifesto saying it's been confirmed and tick that one off the list. If they want me to vote for independence then the emphasis is well and truly on them to evidence these kind of things ..not on the person asking the question to prove otherwise
Tj- I'm not saying scotland couldn't be successful. It could well be, it could also be a total disaster. At the moment I've not been given enough detail and evidence to sway me from the status quo. All im hearing is things are bad at the moment but they'll be better if we were independent.. more money for benefits, social reform, better health care etc etc
This seems to fly in face of what all the impartial economic experts told us in 2014. Im not expecting you or anyone else on here to provide evidence or justify it btw. What I want to see is the SNP document their economic argument, tell us how it'll work, and exactly how we'll be so much better off independent. And then I want the impartial experts to confirm it's logical, not pie in sky thinking, the numbers add up, and that scotland could be more prosperous under their proposals.
I don't think that's all that much to ask. If they can do that I'd vote for independence. If not I won't.
Anyone else think that maybe it'd be a good idea to have a quick, simple, non-binding inyrefref?
"Should there be a second Scottish Independence Referendum in the next westminster parliamentary term"
No need for months of debates or campaigning and the ensuing division and fatigue, no risk of it becoming a proxy for a real ref due to the difference in intent- because there's plenty of people that don't believe in independence but do believe it's a democratic right to ask the question... Not to mention No campaigners and voters who have confidence in winning and would like to properly settle the question just as with brexit. And of course there's Yes voters who don't agree with an accelerated re-ref, or who're afraid it'll fail if it's this soon... SNP voters who don't want a referendum, tactical voters for other parties.
When people say "this is/isn't the will of the people", well that's not something we have to guess, so why guess?
tpbiker
Member
Thanks northwind. If it’s possible then great, let’s get that confirmed and the SNP can then stick it in the manifesto saying it’s been confirmed and tick that one off the list. If they want me to vote for independence then the emphasis is well and truly on them to evidence these kind of things ..not on the person asking the question to prove otherwise
That's just unrealistic. With real, known challenges and concerns, sure, it's sensible to cover those and basically overcome objections before they arise, and as you say it'll help win them support. And in fact, they do that already. It's like costing your own manifesto.
But you can't do that for every possible challenge, least of all completely unevidenced ones like this. You can't even predict them all, let alone refute them all, and if you try, you'll end up with a million page manifesto and when someone comes up with one daft question that you didn't see coming the response will be "why didn't you answer THAT one in your manifesto with its supposedly exhaustive list of questions and answers eh? Hiding something?"
And would anyone accept it if they did? "well of course you'd say that"
So yes, the responsibility for substantiating a claim falls on the person making it. That's just the only way it works. And it does work- it helps stop spurious claims and makes people take responsibility for false and vexatious ones, and it means that the legwork gets done by someone who has a vested interest in proving the point rather than an interest in not.
In this case, if this claim has any substance then it would be straightforward to show it. It's not just that there's no evidence, it's also that any evidence would be easy to find- if it's an EU rule, they are all enshrined in treaty and in policy. I've looked in the places it should be and it's not there. You can do the same. But would you accept that answer? Like, if the Scottish Government case for independence says
Q) Would Scotland be able to join the EU without its own central bank
A) Yes- the requirements for a new member state to join the EU are set out in the Treaty On European Union 2012. There is no requirement or expectation that any new member should have its own central bank.
How would you respond?
Tpbiker - remember with economics its voodoo by and large. Ask half a dozen economists the same question you will not get two answers the same. Impartial economists actually were split but those whose conclusions favoured the yes side were sidelined
What I have done is looked at all the data for Scotland, the UK and comparable countries and come to a judgement., My judgement is that an independent Scotland would be a better place to live than a Scotland remaining in the UK. Yes taxes would be higher. But to me that is a price worth paying for a country that looks after the poor, the disabled and the vulnerable
there can be no certainty
Also remember an independent scotland would not be necessarily have an SNP government - indeed in the time post independence I would expect a realignment of scottish politics with the SNP splitting as it is a broader church than most parties and the glue holding it together would be gone
so not wanting to vote for independence because you do not like the snp is like not buying a house because you do not like the curtains
Northwind
Subscriber
Anyone else think that maybe it’d be a good idea to have a quick, simple, non-binding inyrefref?
Would probly be a very low turnout and most likely skewed to one side or the other I'd think, and it'd likel have zero effect of the uk govs stance..
tjagain
But to me that is a price worth paying for a country that looks after the poor, the disabled and the vulnerable
You should chill out on the bleeding heart propaganda. 😆 It's irritating, and an IS isn't going to be a welfare state nirvana.
Thats my view. I look to countries like Holland and sweden and see no reason why we cannot emulate them. I mean FFS holland is a swamp in the mouth of two huge rivers - It doesn't even have any rocks to play with let along oil!
Yet somehow ( higher taxation) it manages to have a decent welfare system. People do not have to resort to foodbanks, the old the sick and the vulnerable are well looked after. The government does not let tens of thousands die preventable deaths from austerity
seosamh77
Subscriber
Would probly be a very low turnout and most likely skewed to one side or the other I’d think,
Why would that be?
Northwind
Subscriber
seosamh77Why would that be?
If you are advertising it as non-binding. Likely to only be the indy side that particularly care about it. The no side will be safe in the knowledge that boris will just dingy it.
Best letting the scottish elections mount pressure for it.
I mean FFS holland is a swamp in the mouth of two huge rivers – It doesn’t even have any rocks to play with let along oil!
It does have a lot of gas though. Not to mention renewables.
Somehow they can maximize their natural resources, but we're too wee, too poor and too stupid to do the same according to many
The one good thing you can say about the Empire's anti-independentistas is they are great recyclers, yet they get it wrong - every time.
[url= https://live.staticflickr.com/4475/24187092258_ab576846ae_o.jp g" target="_blank">https://live.staticflickr.com/4475/24187092258_ab576846ae_o.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
How would you respond?
I'd ask what the EU thinks about that for a starter. I don't see why you need to have entered negotiations to get answers to fairly fundamental questions..
So if they followed up '
'There is no requirement or expectation that any new member should have its own central bank, with..
'The eu have confirmed this to us'
Then I'd be happy.
The brexiteers got ripped apart on here for their unicorns. I'm not sure why the snp's claims, when unsubstantiated, should be treated any differently.
tpbiker
Member
I’d ask what the EU thinks about that for a starter. I don’t see why you need to have entered negotiations to get answers to fairly fundamental questions..
Seriously? We know what the EU thinks about that, they wrote a treaty about it. That's kind of what treaties do.
Besides, now we have the scottish government second guessing every possible question and answering them all. But you don't trust their answers, so what's the point? And you don't accept EU treaties as sufficient evidence of what the EU treaties say, how far should that go? Council? President? When do you stop saying "No, not good enough, I want it from someone else" despite saying "Yes I will consider this an important enough question to consume government and EU time, despite nobody attempting to support it with evidence"
The EU is legally prohibited from any discussions on a formal basis with the scottish government. during the referendum campaign Westminster refused to ask the questions of the EU that the Scottish government wanted answers to and the Scottish government could not ask these questions directly
just in here again ..
I see the unicorns are breeding :O)
WRT the economic position, GERS (I know that phrase makes some of you start venting out your ears) is the best we have and is COMPILED AND BACKED BY THE SCOTTISH GOVERNMENT (i.e. nicola herself).
The reason it makes (some of) you vent is because of all the balls that has been spouted about it in an attempt to discredit it, some of which is sticking but none of which is statistically valid (or it would be in the figures).
Day 1 of independence = 14Bn/yr in cuts (as opposed to "murderous austerity" which was 2Bn/yr (top of my head .. can't be arsed googling).
"No trident" saves us 0.6Bn/yr and NO-ONE here or in the SNP has ever said what else they would cut.
Thats why the economics didn't and doesn't add up.
An independent scotland may be something you want (for a variety of righteous or unrighteous reasons) and the level of economic damage (or societal damage) you are prepared to sustain in the process may be huge, but mine isn't. So don't blow smoke up our arses telling us it will make us rich or even keep us at the same level.
On day 1, it won't, and the "25 years to qualify for the EU economically" figure came from the SGs own report that I referenced earlier, and was based on what were widely seen as unreasonable levels of growth.
TL;DR
Facts exist, not all predictions are based on the zodiac and people who claim "you can't know anything for sure" probably don't have either facts or competent predictions on their side.
You have had explained to you numerous times the issues with Gers and why it does not show what you think it does and also that the reaction to deficit to a sovereign nation does not mean immediate cuts of the size of the deficit. You can reduce a deficit by cuts ( which as we know from tory austerity does not work as it reduces economic activity) you can borrow or you can increase taxes.
Anyway even if what yo say is true then its hardly a glowing endorsement of the economic policies of the UK is it?
Fair dos, I do agree that gers is an issue. I've been saying for long enough I don't think the middle ground tips till those look better. It seems to me on the face of simplistic. But still they exist and I don't argue their veracity. The gap is and has been reducing though. It mostly why I'd been suggest 2030.
I am still reading though the SGC report you mention. Will take me a while to get through the 300/400 pages.
It seems fairly scathing of the current UK position so far mind.
But I can't particularly argue over that report yet. But I will at some point. 😉
I am actually looking to gear myself up with a lot more info this time. I think that's a challenge the no side will face more and more this time. Last time there was a lack, I do agree.
The other thing with GERS is the deficit under those numbers per head of population in Scotland is less than the loses per head to the UK from brexit so far! Just to put it in perspective
Unless I got my numbers badly wrong but I think it works out around £2500 per person whereas brexit is over £3000 per person in the last year alone
Scotland would go into independence with a deficit yes. a large deficit. However it would have the economic tools to deal with it. the deficit as a % of GDP would be similar to that the UK has had many times. Ie around 8%
Here's one view...
But the fact is no one can accurately predict what will happen after independence.
All we can do is guess.
We know the British State has a history of lying to us and uses deceit to prevent independence, eg Mc Crone Report.
So why should we believe they are telling the truth now?
But what I'd like to know from the prognosticators of doom is:
Why is Scotland unique amongst all the countries that have sought independence?
Why is it alone destined to fail despite having more resources than most of them and despite having a highly educated population?
Is this the exceptionalism of which some speak?
tj and seosamh,
I know gers is not perfect, but its the best indicator we have (and when it looked good because of oil prices at the time of "the book of dreams" approaching 2014 every major indy-peddlar was on the record using it as a "gold plated" example of the future scotland could afford.
I also know that for many people the economics of indy is just a side issue. Which is fair enough (but also disallows claims to care about the poor and disadvantaged in society).
But if you can't win the vote without lying and obfuscating about economic realty, then your on a fast train to brexitnomics.
Can you honestly say that you would want to win a close indy vote by proglumating lies (which would later became obvious)?
edit: P.S. if different policies would produce different results to a sufficient extent, why not tell us what the policies might be, and then war game them with some economists and see what pops out? Less talk about needing "levers", and more about what you'd actually do with them.
Why is Scotland unique amongst all the countries that have sought independence?
The all important question that the yoons can't answer.
but its the best indicator we have
Of the status quo. It indicates nothing more than that
The one good thing you can say about the Empire’s anti-independentistas is they are great recyclers, yet they get it wrong – every time.
Hah. Not only is that cartoon historically and economically illiterate, it's inaccurate and embarrassingly one-eyed and emotive. A pretty breathtaking sweep of shitness and yet it's the one you posted epicyclo!
No-one with a brain thinks you're too poor, too small or too stupid. The main issue is that you're not currently set up to be independent in the modern world and that's going to be a huge problem for you for a long time.
eat_the_pudding
Member
tj and seosamh,
I know gers is not perfect, but its the best indicator we have (and when it looked good because of oil prices at the time of “the book of dreams” approaching 2014 every major indy-peddlar was on the record using it as a “gold plated” example of the future scotland could afford.I also know that for many people the economics of indy is just a side issue. Which is fair enough (but also disallows claims to care about the poor and disadvantaged in society).
But if you can’t win the vote without lying and obfuscating about economic realty, then your on a fast train to brexitnomics.
Can you honestly say that you would want to win a close indy vote by proglumating lies (which would later became obvious)?
edit: P.S. if different policies would produce different results to a sufficient extent, why not tell us what the policies might be, and then war game them with some economists and see what pops out? Less talk about needing “levers”, and more about what you’d actually do with them.
Fair do's like I say, I'm re-assessing the numbers.
You seem a little skewed yourself tbh, you completely dismiss any criticism the Scottish government has on uk prospects or on their opinion on Scotlands ability to grow, while at the same time, relying on GERS the ultimate standard. If the figures provided by the Scottish gov, GERS, are the gold standard, why do you dismiss what they say on other things?
So a bit of give needed on your side too. Seems a bit disingenuous to me...
epicyclo
Why is nicola conspiring to hide scotlands true wealth.
Makes you think eh?
How deep does this rabbithole go!
Why is Scotland unique amongst all the countries that have sought independence?
Why is it alone destined to fail despite having more resources than most of them and despite having a highly educated population?
NOONE is saying that, except you. The only people (non ironically) say scotland is "too wee too poor and too stupid" are independence supporters.
But saying that an indy scotland would have a massive deficit and a need for massive austerity (and thus a lower ability to look after the health and welfare of its citizens than now), isn't really a political statement.
It's the best economic statement of where we'd be right now with only our own taxes to pay for our own stuff (without the benefit of pooling and sharing across the UK).
Incidentally, ALL areas of the UK benefit positively from that to a greater or lesser extent except SE england.
Try your "economics" on NI for example. the equivalent of GERS figures says that the deficit in NI is as follows
Does that mean that a newly independent NI would (lets say tomorrow) be able to sustain current levels of spending on health and social services?
If not, then what would make NI unique among all other nations!?
Would people claiming that NI would suffer economic damage without pooling and sharing be called "prognosticators of doom?"
Do you see the flaw in your argument yet?
Do you see how having less money to spend on stuff you value is a real thing with real effects and not just a political opinion?
PS for seosamh, GERS is a (statistical) measurement. Predictions of growth are more difficult, but can be seen in the context of other countries trying to do the same thing. The SG predictions of growth are a very ambitious in that context.
But saying that an indy scotland would have a massive deficit and a need for massive austerity (and thus a lower ability to look after the health and welfare of its citizens than now), isn’t really a political statement.
Yes it is as there are other ways to deal with deficit than cuts
The only people (non ironically) say scotland is “too wee too poor and too stupid” are independence supporters.
Wrong - its exactly what most of the unionists say and what you are saying here
Now why can scotland not be a prosperous independent country like Holland, Sweden, Finland etc.
PS for seosamh, GERS is a (statistical) measurement. Predictions of growth are more difficult, but can be seen in the context of other countries trying to do the same thing. The SG predictions of growth are a very ambitious in that context.
Agreed predictions are more diffucult, but the context isn't really like for like, comparing to other countries, given Scotlands limited control and potential for more control.
One example, like an IS's ability to increase immigration and the population size, given it's stunted population growth(which isn't changing under the uk), say that Scotland has the potential to grow differently from other nations who've had that control all along. There's one stat, in the SGC, that says if scotlands population had grown at the same rate as the uk it would be sitting at 6.1million just now. An extra 600 thousand people is quite a boost to the economic potential of a country.
You say, tell us what you'll do with the extra power, then you just dismiss their conclusions and projection out of hand.
How can you argue against that?
PS with reference to my previous statements on NI's economy.
I fully accept that the secret oilfields (codename Rathlin) might change things dramatically.
You should also be aware that the value of sheep, igneous rock formations and titanic museums can go up as well as down.
If someday, like no other nation on earth, NI decided to charge taxes or "duty" on exports (like indy supporters think happens to whisky) than that could change things as well.
I'm not saying that scotland can't be a country.
I'm not saying that scotland can't be a prosperous country (at some point in the future).
I'm just saying that tomorrow, independent, we couldn't afford to spend as much money on the things we claim to value (NHS, social services etc.).
And getting back to where we are now spending wise would not be easy and not be a good time for the poor and disadvantaged.
If you find that controversial, then how do you feel about what I said about NI above?
Also, our economy would disallow us from joining the EU until things change dramatically (and nicola is on the record saying that scotland could deal with the deficit "in the same way that other countries deal with it" i.e. austerity).
All of this is true based on NOW, I'm not saying that things can't or won't change, but you'll have to start by accepting that facts exist. And sometimes predictions are just wrong
I'm old enough to remember when we could have been the new celtic tiger, and part of the "arc of prosperity" (heady times!).
Irelands GDPPC currently drawfs the uks.
seosamh,
Counting the money I got paid and the money I spent over the last year .. not hard.
Predicting the value of sterling a year from now, the value of services and goods sold over the next year, the productivity and output of the average scottish worker, and how all of that might be affected by global trends and the global economy .. hard.
Also I was talking about northern ireland, because it has a deficit within the UK as scotland does, just a less controversial and politically charged one, for now.
What would I do as TJ king of independent Scotland to deal with the poorly performing economy and the deficit?
1) Invest in infrastructure especially renewables and renewable tech - keeps money in the country and provides export opportunities
2) scrap the military ( bar perhaps a small standing army and some gunboats and a few hekilopters.)
3) legalise cannabis Nice new tax revenue stream plus all those cannabis tourists from down south
4) redistibutive income tax and a huge clampdown on tax avoidence. make starbucks / amazon pay their share
4) bring natural monoplies like rail and electricity back into state control. Let the state have the profits
So there we have a growing economy with increased tax receipts, decreased costs and bingo - loadsamoney!
“in the same way that other countries deal with it” i.e. austerity).
Ermmm - apart from the unfortunate fact that most other countries did not implement austerity in the way the tories did because they know it does no good
eat_the_pudding
Member
seosamh,
Counting the money I got paid and the money I spent over the last year .. not hard.Predicting the value of sterling a year from now, the value of services and goods sold over the next year, the productivity and output of the average scottish worker, and how all of that might be affected by global trends and the global economy .. hard.
Also I was talking about northern ireland, because it has a deficit within the UK as scotland does, just a less controversial and politically charged one, for now.
So basically you are saying you can never be convinced? It's too difficult?
BTW, everywhere with in the uk has a deficit outside of london and the SE.
Over investment in London and the SE is a large part of that problem.
tj,
Now thats a manifesto i can get behind 🙂
My point is that honesty is better than lies. Some things are facts, some things are opinions and some things are imagination.
The lesson of 2014 was that lies can almost win referendums. (and how may people even today still argue that "scotland supports the economy of the rest of the UK", and that "the [non existent] whisky export duty is stolen down south")
The lesson of 2016 was that they can.
Is that what you want?
eat_the_pudding
NOONE is saying that, except you.
No, you are. Stop gaslighting.
You are the one making predictions of economic doom.
I want to know the answer to two very simple questions.
Why is Scotland going to fail? You claim to know what will happen in advance based on the current set of figures.
What factor amongst those will make Scotland fail as an independent nation?
Perhaps you could give examples of other similar nations in similar circumstances that have failed after independence to help us avoid our awful fate.
I'm still trying to work out what uniqueness you see in Scotland that will make us failures.
Actually the lesson of 2014 is that lies do win referendums - they side with the biggest lies won!
Better together my arse
6) Lease Faslane to rUK for £5bn a year.
On nuclear I have principles but they aren't worth billions
Jings Folks; where were YOU at 2.15PM on December 18th 2019 when TJ came up with a better set of policies than any party in the UK had during the GE? Broken clock etc...
richmtb
Subscriber
6) Lease Faslane to rUK for £5bn a year.On nuclear I have principles but they aren’t worth billions
tbh, i'm for that, couldn't give a hoot about nukes. 😆
seosamh
BTW, everywhere with in the uk has a deficit outside of london and the SE.
I know.. I told you that :O)
I'm ambivalent on the future of scotlands economy, could be bad could be good. And theres no definitive reason I can see why it can't be good TBH, but it would take TIME to get back to where we are now, and TIME to rejoin the EU.
But I'm a bit unforgiving of people who refuse to accept that the bit in between now and the sunlit uplands might be a shitshow for the people that indy promised to help and take care of. (and you can't deny that the rhetoric of "NHS under threat" despite local control is a driver here).
TJs economic miracle described above (which I shall call "the celtic drugbowl" in honour of I.M. Banks) is longer and more plausible description of the future than I've seen discussed in SG circles.
Whatever indy is about (and its been about many things over the years) it has to be (even more after brexshit) about telling the truth about what you're offering.
If you do that, and people vote for it, then fine.
If you improve the economy right now, and make the rhetoric true and get 60% of people to vote for it, better.
molgrips
Not only is that cartoon historically and economically illiterate, it’s inaccurate and embarrassingly one-eyed and emotive. A pretty breathtaking sweep of shitness and yet it’s the one you posted epicyclo!
No-one with a brain thinks you’re too poor, too small or too stupid. The main issue is that you’re not currently set up to be independent in the modern world and that’s going to be a huge problem for you for a long time.
Humour deficit there, molgrips. It's a cartoon and it's illustrating a theme. (I expected one of you to jump on the Sweden/Norway reference)
But I notice you didn't address my actual statement so I'll repeat it to save you looking for it.
The one good thing you can say about the Empire’s anti-independentistas is they are great recyclers, yet they get it wrong – every time.
Oh, and to keep it fresh here's another example of doom-mongering by one of the Empire's placemen
[url= https://live.staticflickr.com/4888/31021919847_e1db5c6bf7_o.jp g" target="_blank">https://live.staticflickr.com/4888/31021919847_e1db5c6bf7_o.jp g"/> [/img][/url]
Here's a challenge for you.
Find a prediction of doom prior to the independence of a country (similar to Scotland) that has turned out to be true.
It shouldn't be hard, should it? After all there's hundreds of independent countries out there, and I know there's a similar amount of forecasts of calamity.
Surely you must be able to find at least one that turned out to be true.
Why is Scotland unique amongst all the countries that have sought independence?
How much do you know about the context and aftermath of independence for all these post-independent countries?
eat_the_pudding
Member
seosamhBTW, everywhere with in the uk has a deficit outside of london and the SE.
I know.. I told you that :O)
I’m ambivalent on the future of scotlands economy, could be bad could be good. And theres no definitive reason I can see why it can’t be good TBH, but it would take TIME to get back to where we are now, and TIME to rejoin the EU.
But I’m a bit unforgiving of people who refuse to accept that the bit in between now and the sunlit uplands might be a shitshow for the people that indy promised to help and take care of. (and you can’t deny that the rhetoric of “NHS under threat” despite local control is a driver here).
TJs economic miracle described above (which I shall call “the celtic drugbowl” in honour of I.M. Banks) is longer and more plausible description of the future than I’ve seen discussed in SG circles.
Whatever indy is about (and its been about many things over the years) it has to be (even more after brexshit) about telling the truth about what you’re offering.
If you do that, and people vote for it, then fine.
If you improve the economy right now, and make the rhetoric true and get 60% of people to vote for it, better.
The deficit has been reducing significantly as % of gdp, from 16.3% in 09/10, to 8.5% now excluding the oil.
epicyclo
No You!
I'm predicting eff all.
I'm saying that the CURRENT FIGURES show that we have a deficit, and that wishing it away without paying for it somehow (austerity?) won't wash.
Of course scotland can be a country, but are you saying that we could afford (tomorrow, independent) the social services and NHS provision we currently have?
If you are then you are the indy equivalent of the worst kind of brexshitter.
To put it more simply;
I'm not going to believe you about the projections of sunlit uplands while you are shovelling shit in my ears.
You can (and no doubt will) argue about the reasons for scotlands relative economic position, but closing your eyes and promising that everything will get better because of "X" is for children.
By the way you still haven't used your epignomic insights to explain why NI's deficit is a thing of the imagination and would have no negative effect if the extra money went away suddenly.
When you've finished with NI, you can do the same for the rest of the UK region by region until we're all rich beyond our wildest dreams! :O)
molgrips
How much do you know about the context and aftermath of independence for all these post-independent countries?
I'm not the one making predictions of doom so I'm relying on your claimed expertise in this matter.
So reveal the list of failures to us, we're waiting with bated breath for enlightenment.
You may even save us from our dire fate!
seosamh,
good .. lets keep it up and see what happens when rhetoric meets reality :O)
I might (still) not be in favour of indy, but I'd be less bothered if I lost to people who were telling the truth.
if the extra money went away suddenly.
Why does the money go away suddenly? Does Scotland have an inability to borrow to cover the shortfall while it grows it's economy?