If I agree to never again utter the phrase 'SNP bad' and promise to always say, 'You are attempting to deflect attention away from the question of whether Scotland should be an independent country by pointing out the failures of the SNP's record in government despite the fact the two are unrelated unless you are using it as an example of why Scots aren't capable of making good decisions in which case it is easier to just say you don't think Scots can make good decisions', can we stop talking about it?
Arguments against the current SNP goverment are relevant to the case for independence, in the same way that arguments about the state of the UK under tory rule are relevant to the case for independence.
Claiming "toriesbad" (I agree) but then refusing to use (or take) the powers you have to put it right NOW, and then claiming that "independence" will fix these things is at the very least dishonest.
If you’re going to put words in my mouth I’m going to have a hard time arguing against it. Please quote exactly where I said these things.
I said you ignore these things. You claim to want to talk about "whether an independent scotland can be successful", but you refuse to acknowledge (or try to refute) any of the current economic facts about barnett, the deficit, etc. etc. which might tell us whether that is actually true now or a unicorn we might catch in the future.
So either you agree with the facts and don't think they are important, or you see that the facts don't support your argumentm, and are ignoring them.
Which is it?
As you say, there are many countries the size of scotland that are successful. Whether all of them can support the same level of e.g. NHS provision we are used to (or would like) in Scotland on a similar sized economy never seems to come into your argument.
Why not?
The aim of the SNP in government was to show competence, to encourage people to see the possibilities independence.
They haven't.
They've degenerated into a sloganised westminster blaming machine (even with more money to spend than would be available under independence).
That doesn't speak to the competence of all scottish people but it does tell you a bit about good intentions and unicorn salesmen.
If you genuinely think that the competence of the SNP in power is completely detached from their believe-ability of their claims about a future independent scotland I have a unicorn I'd like to sell you.
You seem to be in the market and very uncritical.
Like it or not, there are people in Scotland who prefer the Tory way of thinking. They don’t believe Scots make good decisions and want to see more decisions taken by Westminster.
‘Scots are genetically incapable of making decisions’ is a direct quote from one of the Better Together leaders and is a handy shorthand for this view.
If you feel that Scots are capable of making good decisions about their future then we agree. I’m glad.
looking the number of prominent Scots in Parliament including recent Prime Ministers clearly shows that Scots are as capable as any of the UK nations, arguing anything else is just myopic rubbish
The argument is whether iS is a good decision, quite a few people think it's not, quite a few think it is. Both points of view have validity. Scots are more than capable of running Scotland in so far as they are good at running the UK @ Westminster/ Holyrood/ locally
The utopian view of a future iS as a land where everyone is cared for for, benefit rules have no negative outcomes and the Celtic Tiger/ oil/ EU/ green energy sale/ carbon credit sales/ massive immigration/ in NATO despite banning nukes/ etc will lift the economy into the powerhouse of European small nations is frankly a lot less credible. But there are plenty of people south of the border who believe in similar unicorns so it's not a Scottish thing
So either you agree with the facts and don’t think they are important, or you see that the facts don’t support your argumentm, and are ignoring them.
The 'facts' have been disputed endlessly on here and we can go for another round of 'look, I've shown my working this time' or we can avoid repeating all the same arguments over and over again. If you really want to you can go back to page 1 and start reading through. Every economic analysis is on here somewhere.
The problem is the only 'fact' is that we don't have all the facts. The way our economies are reported doesn't lend itself to what if scenarios which means that each side can present it's vision of utopia or economic desolation depending on their viewpoint.
IMO the answer lies somewhere in between. I would be very surprised if life didn't get worse for some people after independence. Maybe even the majority. However, I believe that in the longer term people would be able to elect governments that were accountable and representing their interests. Long term I don't see how life wouldn't end up being better for most people.
The democratic deficit is undeniable. If you have an argument against that I'd love to hear it.
looking the number of prominent Scots in Parliament including recent Prime Ministers clearly shows that Scots are as capable as any of the UK nations, arguing anything else is just myopic rubbish
That was then and this is now. Jo Swinson will be the last Scottish leader of a national party. What good is a PM if they can't guarantee they'll be able to hold their seat?
England has decided. It sees it's future as being Empire 2.0. Scotland just wants to be an ordinary European nation.
BruceWee
If you want to have a discussion on the SNP’s record in government then you should definitely start a thread on that.
And if you want to have that discussion, rather than simply repeating the propaganda of the Unionist media and the Westminster parties' attack dogs, can you make it comparative?
For example, instead of saying Scottish NHS waiting targets are bad, also show what they are in England under the competent and caring governance of a Tory govt.
Ditto for education and all the other SNPbaad propaganda.
There's a reason that's never done in the Unionist media.
And then perhaps consider what a Scottish govt could do if it had access to all the tax revenue raised in Scotland instead of the portion called a "grant".
The ‘facts’ have been disputed endlessly on here and we can go for another round of ‘look, I’ve shown my working this time’ or we can avoid repeating all the same arguments over and over again. If you really want to you can go back to page 1 and start reading through. Every economic analysis is on here somewhere.
Yes, yes, I accept that the facts don't support your argument, so it's definitely better (for you) if we go all postmodern and accept that we can never know anything for sure.
(I mean, am I even typing this or am I a squid with delusion?)
I'm equally sure that when all (but one I think) of the economists in the world said that brexit would be an economic disaster you spoke up and said "how can they be sure it won't just be all sunlit uplands like wot nigel says?"
I would be very surprised if life didn’t get worse for some people after independence. Maybe even the majority.
So glad you admit that. So can you please explain how scottish austerity^2 cuts as a result of independence are fluffier and more acceptable than tory austerity cuts that kill poor people?
And are you going to be up front with the people who will actually pay the price?
Cos' if you are you'll be the first brexiter/scexiter to do so.
Or should the people just believe the hype and wave their flags exuberantly, as if the cat got the sudocreme again?
PS you should definitely consider politics as a career. You seem to have all the attributes. A practical ability to ignore reality and a lack of care for the consequences (for others).
Yes, yes, I accept that the facts don’t support your argument, so it’s definitely better (for you) if we go all postmodern and accept that we can never know anything for sure.
Well, it seems out of the two of us I'm not the only one who only reads what he wants to read.
So glad you admit that. So can you please explain how scottish austerity^2 cuts as a result of independence are fluffier and more acceptable than tory austerity cuts that kill poor people?
Is there something wrong with your eyes that mean you can only read part of a paragraph? Or is this just yet another example of selective reading?
Like many I used to be against independence and now I'm for it. By reading entire paragraphs I was able to get an idea of the whole picture and eventually came to the conclusion that independence would be for the best.
I can only suggest you learn to read entire paragraphs and start to make up your own mind.
epicyclo,
I refer you to what I said above about facts. It is beyond doubt (although clearly not beyond argument) that scottish spending is far above scottish revenue.
No massaging of the [SG] figures or reality can change that. (unless you'd like to show me where the scottish gov or nicola have ever supported your point themselves?). (I'll wait but not hold my breath)
If the only argument you have is "that things in england are worse", you seem to;
a) lack ambition for what scotland can achieve with a current £1400 (ish) per person more than the rest of the UK (thanks to Barnett)
b) lack reality over what would happen if that went away overnight (independence)
c) Not have looked at the comparative education results between scotland and england/wales for a while.
I'm not arguing that the tories are good. They're not , and the current situation is the best reason for having a scottish legislature that can help insulate us from them.
If the facts make you look bad, it's not propaganda.
Accusations of "SNPbaaad" is just contentless propaganda, pulled out when the facts don't fit your world view.
brucewee
Is there something wrong with your eyes that mean you can only read part of a paragraph?
I can read full paragraphs. The bit I quoted is what I see as the important bit. (It highlights the [not uncommon these days] attitude that other peoples sacrifices are worth making for your political ends).
I'm really struggling to see where you are coming from. Do you think that things are going to get better under the Tories?
Or, at the very least, do you think things are going to stay the way they are now under the Tories?
I'm asking because I want to understand what set of circumstances would result in you supporting Scottish independence or, failing that, supporting a 2nd referendum.
At the moment it seems like there is absolutely no set of circumstances in which you would support either. If that's the case there's very little point in discussing this further because it's impossible to come to a consensus if one party is immovable in their views.
TJ what you gibbering about, no-one is doubting the benefit system in crap, just calling out your notion that the government is killing people 10s of thousands of people is a ridiculously sensationalist.
ETP is suffering from the worst case of Jockholm Syndrome that I've ever seen😂
England has decided. It sees it’s future as being Empire 2.0.
only in the fervent imagination of a Scots Nationalist
Scotland just wants to be an ordinary European nation.
It's only the fervent Scots Nationalists that think rUK isn't ordinary
So glad you admit that. So can you please explain how scottish austerity^2 cuts as a result of independence are fluffier and more acceptable than tory austerity cuts that kill poor people?
Lets have a gander at your sums for this?
I'm not doubting the case that scotland needs to improves it's finances. But you seem pretty certain it's an impossibility. So you must have the numbers handy?
only in the fervent imagination of a Scots Nationalist
And the UK government. You know, the ones with an 80 seat majority.
It’s only the fervent Scots Nationalists that think rUK isn’t ordinary
You don't speak to many Europeans do you?
And the UK government. You know, the ones with an 80 seat majority
I rest my case......
Written by a Scots Nationalist living "(I live in the South East at the moment)"
Can't think why he wasn't living in Scotland rather than the hell he portrays.
As for the article using 2010 data and statements for example "Apart from the Benelux countries and Cyprus, all of Europe's countries use more renewable energy than the UK, "
which in 2019 are rubbish, remind me which country uses brown coal power stations etc etc
as before
only in the fervent imagination of a Scots Nationalist
I rest my case……
You're making no sense. If you could maybe explain your case a bit better for us thickos in the back?
As for the article using 2010 data and statements for example “Apart from the Benelux countries and Cyprus, all of Europe’s countries use more renewable energy than the UK, ”
which in 2019 are rubbish, remind me which country uses brown coal power stations etc etc
But apart from that it got everything else right?
I love the tactic where if you can't deny the theme, pick a detail and attack it!
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
