Scotland Indyref 2

Viewing 40 posts - 4,361 through 4,400 (of 4,546 total)
  • Scotland Indyref 2
  • Premier Icon seosamh77
    Subscriber

    @seosamh77 – as I understand it, and I may be wrong, Westminster sends more money to Scotland than Scotland pays back in taxes (much like most other areas of Britain other than SE). Therefore, if Scotland were independent Westminster would have more net money.

    I guess you’ve not read a thing I’ve been posting. 😆

    Headline – It’s all fired on the credit card..

    ps there’s only 3 area of the uk that don’t run a deficit.

    London, South East, and East of England.

    But they get subsidised in other ways, ie 75% of private investment goes to their way. Which is government policy.

    So it’s a bit off to say they subsidise the rest of the uk when the system is rigged so they get the vast majority the private investment (considerably more than a population share.)..

    gordimhor
    Member

    @tom Zesty. Yes I understood that and considered not posting, however its the language used. If a person or group have a right, that right cannot be “given” or taken away by others..

    Anyway peace and goodwill to all.

    Premier Icon Northwind
    Subscriber

    big_n_daft

    Member

    I think it’s exceptionalist rubbish, Scotland more social, more internationalist etc

    Aye, there’s no evidence for that at all, I mean it’s not like we voted against brexit while every other part of the UK voted for, or anything, or voted once again for a left of centre party while everyone else votes for another Tory government which we haven’t voted for here since 1959.

    TBH I’m not convinced you even know what exceptionalist means. Which is weird, because it really does mean exactly what it sounds like- thinking that you are exceptional. And frankly most of the independence movement is about saying actually, we’re not at all exceptional, we just want the same perfectly normal things loads of other countries have.

    We’re not the ones talking about being “unshackled from the EU” “unleashing our potential”. Or thinking there’s something wrong with only being the 5th biggest economy in the world. Or for that matter, thinking that there’s something exceptionally bad about us that means we can’t compete with other similar economies and that we have to slash corporation taxes to attract investment. Or that we can’t run our own trains, but the Dutch, French, German and Italian governments should do it for us.

    piemonster
    Member

    Or that we can’t run our own trains, but the Dutch, French, German and Italian governments should do it for us.

    Turns out they’re **** at running them for us too 😉

    Some of you guys are misunderstanding this completely. The Scottish Parliament should be able to decide on a referendum. If they want to have one every year they should be able to do that.

    My point was Westminster should not be able to veto that. The Scots should be able to decide their own future.

    All this stuff about once in a generation and what do the people of northern England want is absolute bullshit.

    Premier Icon epicyclo
    Subscriber

    big_n_daft
    Depends on how many of the leading lights of the SNP are left in a year. Regardless of guilt it’s going to be messy

    Ah, you think the “leading lights” of the independence movement are the motivators behind independence, do you?

    Mow them down if you like, there’s plenty more where they came from.

    Premier Icon epicyclo
    Subscriber

    aberdeenlune
    Some of you guys are misunderstanding this completely. The Scottish Parliament should be able to decide on a referendum. If they want to have one every year they should be able to do that.

    My point was Westminster should not be able to veto that. The Scots should be able to decide their own future.

    That would never do, it sounds dangerously like actual democracy, not the pretendy version of Her Majesty’s “United Kingdom”.

    Ah, you think the “leading lights” of the independence movement are the motivators behind independence, do you?

    Mow them down if you like, there’s plenty more where they came from.

    Absolutely. As I told a lot of SNP haters in 2014, the only way to get rid of them is to vote yes.

    Scottish Labour would be as well changing tact too, Indy will happen sooner or later, unless they want left on the outside again as they are in Westminster.

    Or they could continue up here to be a complete irrelevance.

    Smith and Dewar must be turning in their graves.

    Tom Zesty
    Member

    @gordimhor – sorry, didn’t mean it to come across that way. I genuinely feel Scotland should have the choice and have the right to choose, and you should get your ref. I was just basically saying, I want Scotland to have it and make their choice so that we can move on either way.

    @seosamh77 – ‘ps there’s only 3 area of the uk that don’t run a deficit’ I know that, i said so in my last post? I’m not from the SE by the way, I wasn’t trying to say I’m rich and I subsidise you. Apologies if it came across that way, I meant no offence or disrespect. I have read your arguments, but I have also read other people’s. As usual in politics and economics, people spin figures to suit their argument. For example, you and eat the pudding are saying quite different things from genuine sources. It brings me back to my earlier point: have a referendum and your say and see how everyone else feels.

    Happy Christmas to all!!

    Premier Icon seosamh77
    Subscriber

    I wasn’t trying to say I’m rich and I subsidise you. Apologies if it came across that way, I meant no offence or disrespect

    I never took it that way so no worries. It’s just worth pointing out that there’s no subsidies in the uk, it’s just getting put on the credit for everyone. It’s even got £3.5bn allocated in GERS toward the interest payments.

    Which incidently.

    Given the uk debt for 17/18(the latest we get numbers for the uk) was £2564.4bn. Constisting of £2,013.8bn in assets, and £4,579.2bn in liabilities.

    For the same period, Scotlands interest payments were £3.688bn, according to gers.

    Which if you take a direct population share of all that basically means Scotland pays this roughly £3.5bn yearly to maintain an asset and liability balance of around.

    £165bn assets. £375.5bn in liabilities. So the net debt is about £210bn.

    So about a 1.7% yearly interest rate, to maintain Sotlands chunk of the interest. (The debt is never getting paid off!)

    So there is no subsidy, Scotland maintains it’s own debt. I’d imagine it’ll be similar for other regions.

    This is the state of Scotlands finances within the UK

    Tbh, I don’t particularly think me and ETP disagree on the figures all the much. Where we disagree is really just a case of what comes next. I think the UK hinders Scotland and he thinks it helps.

    Premier Icon seosamh77
    Subscriber

    And just to support my last statement… Comparing it to the 5 similar sized EU nations…

    big_n_daft
    Member

    I want Scotland to have it and make their choice so that we can move on either way.

    The independence campaign won’t stop until “yes”, the only question is how often the vote is done. “No” is only a postponement pending yet another vote.

    And that is the core logic behind the scenes. There isn’t a killer argument, there is the wearing down of opposition to tip the scales to 50%+1 vote

    Hopefully the iS campaign will be more “civic” than the last iteration.

    Premier Icon epicyclo
    Subscriber

    big_n_daft
    …Hopefully the iS campaign will be more “civic” than the last iteration.

    Yes, the behaviour of the Unionists was abominable.

    It would be nice if there was a balanced media too, instead of about 95% anti-independence.

    And no Magic Postal Votes…

    big_n_daft
    Member

    Yes, the behaviour of the Unionists was abominable.

    Dressing as snowmen?

    It would be nice if there was a balanced media too, instead of about 95% anti-independence

    Surely the fervent iS supporters are more than happy to buy multiple newspapers, magazines, and subscribe to other pro independence outlets? They must realise the need to sustain pro iS media buy actually buying it?

    Or does everyone rely on BBC and Channel 4 for everything?

    And no Magic Postal Votes…

    electoral fraud???

    I’m surprised that the establishment managed to get away with it, better start tAking your own pens in to mark the ballot paper

    Our man on the scene

    But still it’s better to keep the conspiracy theories going

    I agree the postal votes thing is just a conspiracy theory.

    Premier Icon epicyclo
    Subscriber

    aberdeenlune
    I agree the postal votes thing is just a conspiracy theory.

    I really do hope you’re right because we’re stuffed if not.

    Premier Icon seosamh77
    Subscriber

    epicyclo

    I really do hope you’re right because we’re stuffed if not.

    Paranoid nonsense, you should give the conspiracy stuff a wide berth, it’s not good for the argument. People like big and daft will just taunt you and the argument turns to shit.

    Premier Icon BoardinBob
    Subscriber

    GERS supporters, can you confirm, deny or explain this. It’s not a leading question, I’m genuinely interested.

    Saw something elsewhere about tax revenue from Scottish whisky, Vs the amount raised in RoI from whiskey. They do tax the arse out of booze in Ireland, but even accounting for that, Ireland makes much more in tax revenue from whiskey Vs Scotland’s revenue in GERS despite much, much less turnover

    The explanation was the GERS numbers are “reallocated”. For example, if Scottish whisky was ultimately exported from an English port etc, then that tax revenue would be allocated to England. They also mentioned Scotland produces a disproportionate amount of the world’s gin but again tax is handled in a similar way to whisky

    Is that true or false?

    Premier Icon seosamh77
    Subscriber

    The explanation was the GERS numbers are “reallocated”. For example, if Scottish whisky was ultimately exported from an English port etc, then that tax revenue would be allocated to England.

    Don’t really see how that could be the case, there’s no export duty, so a company will just get taxed on it’s profits surely same as any company?

    I don’t know, I’m guessing. I’d guess the ultimate decider is where a particularly companies head office is located for tax purposes on whether the tax revenue is allocated to scotland? Which isn’t any different for any company?

    Premier Icon seosamh77
    Subscriber

    Quick google would suggest there’s 2 sides to the argument.

    Internal sales and exports.

    On Exports, there’s no special tax, so the companies will just get taxed on their profits like a normal company, so I guess just depends on the head office location no doubt. (whisky exports are worth about £4.7bn for 17/18, but obviously government receipts are just a percentage of profits a company makes, I’ve no idea if that export number equates total yearly profits for the whisky industy, if it does corporation tax is 19%, so tax collected probably amounts to about £893m on those. )
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-47211794

    On the internal sales, it really just comes under the way theres extra tax put on domestic sales of alcohol as a whole. Similar to duty in cigarettes

    Quick google suggests:

    null

    So that’s worth about £10.5billion. So taking a straight geographical share, you’d imagine scotland’s share is about x .082, so about £861m.

    If Scotland was independent, it couldn’t claim the £9.6bn from the rUK, that would be a rUK tax and nothing to do with Scotland.

    big_n_daft
    Member

    I really do hope you’re right because we’re stuffed if not.

    I think you are alledging the ballots were stuffed not the people

    But say anything as long as you think it gets you closer to 50%+1

    Westminster has no incentive to agree to Indy ref2 if no-one can say when Indy ref3 or 4 or 5 will be. Agreeing to one on a sub 20 year timeline sets the precedent for repeating the pain every 4-6 years

    big_n_daft
    Member

    whisky exports are worth about £4.7bn for 17/18, but obviously government receipts are just a percentage of profits a company makes,

    A lot of the distilleries are foreign owned, I imagine they will be paying corporation tax abroad eg Louis Vuitton

    Premier Icon BoardinBob
    Subscriber

    Good points re foreign ownership

    Does GERS get that granular? Or does it simply say turnover x 19%?

    Premier Icon seosamh77
    Subscriber

    There will be tax over and above duty for alcohol sales btw, as the companies will still get tax on their profits.

    No idea how to figure that out.

    Premier Icon seosamh77
    Subscriber

    BoardinBob

    Subscriber
    Good points re foreign ownership

    Does GERS get that granular? Or does it simply say turnover x 19%?

    About as detailed as it gets.

    big_n_daft
    Member

    There will be tax over and above duty for alcohol sales btw, as the companies will still get tax on their profits.

    They do get taxed on profits but the large foreign owned companies tend to shift it to their head office jurisdiction using group overheads to move the profit to where they want it . Essentially the Starbucks/Amazon/Apple/Guardian Media Group problem. Higher tax rates increases the incentives to do this.

    Premier Icon epicyclo
    Subscriber

    big_n_daft
    Westminster has no incentive to agree to Indy ref2 if no-one can say when Indy ref3 or 4 or 5 will be. Agreeing to one on a sub 20 year timeline sets the precedent for repeating the pain every 4-6 years

    And the problem with that is?

    Premier Icon duckman
    Subscriber

    Premier Icon
    kennyp

    Subscriber
    No but a majority for no referendum for at least the next few years. If the next Scottish election sees a change then fair enough but for now the voters do not want one.

    So you are telling us that anybody who didn’t vote SNP was voting purely on preserving the union? Hahahaha

    big_n_daft
    Member

    And the problem with that is?

    Ok t devalues a “no” vote, if every time you vote no you get asked again within a short period, but if 50%+1 vote “yes” once that is it forever. Which vote is worth more, “no” or “yes”?

    I suppose the argument would be it’s preparation for future EU membership where referendums are repeated until the “right” answer is achieved.

    Premier Icon epicyclo
    Subscriber

    big_n_daft
    if every time you vote no you get asked again within a short period, but if 50%+1 vote “yes” once that is it forever. Which vote is worth more, “no” or “yes”?

    Democracy is so inconvenient isn’t it?

    You are assuming the Unionists would be denied their democratic right to organise for a referendum to engage in a treaty with the UK.

    big_n_daft
    Member

    Democracy is so inconvenient isn’t it?

    This response to a nuanced issue (equivilence of yes and no votes and the repetition of referenda) shows the real strategy, keep asking until you get what you want then batten down the hatches and shout “democratic will of the people”

    Premier Icon epicyclo
    Subscriber

    big_n_daft
    …, keep asking until you get what you want then batten down the hatches and shout “democratic will of the people”

    Really?
    What evidence do you have that an independent Scotland would remove the right of its citizens to pursue democracy?

    scotroutes
    Member

    I’m not in favour of a neverendum but if the electorate keep voting for a party with a referendum in its manifesto then that really is democracy in action.

    Exactly, those arguing against a referendum are the anti democracy ones. If the Scottish parliaments votes for a referendum then we should have one. If it’s a no in a 2020 referendum then surely the pro union parties will do well in the 2021 Scottish parliamentary elections and that will be it for a while.

    Use your vote and have an influence on it.

    Premier Icon seosamh77
    Subscriber

    big_n_daft

    Would you agree to one of it was written into the section 30 order that it’s not to be asked again for another 25 years?

    scotroutes
    Member

    A parliament cannot bind its successors.

    In any case the whole Section 30 order question needs to be put to bed. It should not be for any UK government to subvert the will of the Scottish people. If there is a mandate in Scotland for a referendum then a referendum should be held.

    “This House endorses the principles of the Claim of Right for Scotland, agreed by the Scottish Constitutional Convention in 1989 and by the Scottish Parliament in 2012, and therefore acknowledges the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of government best suited to their needs.”

    House of Commons, 4th July 2018.

    Premier Icon seosamh77
    Subscriber

    Ye, but the the 1989 claim of right has no force in law. Despite commons endorsement.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claim_of_Right_1989

    Legal significance
    The Claim of Right has never had or claimed any legal force. On 4 July 2018, the House of Commons officially endorsed the principles of the Claim of Right, agreeing that the people of Scotland are sovereign and that they have the right to determine the best form of government for Scotland’s needs. However this was a non-binding endorsement and did not create any legal recognition of the Claim of Right.[4]

    It’s obviously SNP policy to give it legal force, it’s half their argument at the minute, don’t fancy their chances though.

    gauss1777
    Member

    In any case the whole Section 30 order question needs to be put to bed. It should not be for any UK government to subvert the will of the Scottish people. If there is a mandate in Scotland for a referendum then a referendum should be held.

    we did have a vote recently mind. Surely you can see big_n_daft’s point about holding frequent referenda until 50%+1 is achieved. The last referendum was so acrimonious, it’s not something I’d be keen to go through again. However, maybe sufficient change has taken place to warrant another – I’d sooner wait until we’ve seen what can be learned from Brexit.

    Really?
    What evidence do you have that an independent Scotland would remove the right of its citizens to pursue democracy?

    Seriously, do you think the people arguing for another referendum, will be as keen to have a referendum looking to rejoin rUK in 5 years time? I for one cannot see it!

    Premier Icon seosamh77
    Subscriber

    acrimonious

    It really wasn’t.

    athgray
    Member

    Seriously, do you think the people arguing for another referendum, will be as keen to have a referendum looking to rejoin rUK in 5 years time?

    If Scotland leaves the UK, then rejoining it at a future date will not be Scotlands decision alone to make.

Viewing 40 posts - 4,361 through 4,400 (of 4,546 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.