welshfarmer, have you considered the possibilities of bailing wire and snips? (or is that too bulky for edc)

PS. As soon as I saw this thread I knew the “Wahhhh stop liking things I don’t like!” brigade would be here.

Joyless, self righteous, knee-jerk critical of other peoples interests and obsessions where they differ from their own?

They’ll never know the joy of finding or inventing (or helping someone else find) a better tool or way of doing something, because of the certainty that they know everything already.

Did someone stand over you as a child and enforce the colours you were allowed to draw with and the things you were allowed to paint?

Poor child.

lock picking lawyer 😀

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRozAbaKs9M

seosamh .. OK
I’m going after this one …

oil revenue is in the graph I put on the previous page. I think those graphs from (“kevverages” blog) show all the oil revenue added to the scottish “non oil” revenue to show if the oil would get rid of the deficit. In the 80s oh yes, now, definitely not.
Overall black bit went to the UK, red bit came up to scotland, roughly equal areas (red beating black more as we go into the future).

Your comment about recovering from deficit. Two answers
a) thats the future so epi-nomics says we can’t possibly know.
b) thats the bit of the report that a lot of people have issues with. The rate of growth required is not impossible but very unlikely. It’s a trip back to the “celtic tiger” predictions, and failure to launch could have serious consequences for the finances of scotland, and more importantly its people.

That report has a lot of facts in it (for an SNP economic report meant to feed indy), but where exaggeration was possible, and benficial, it was used.
e.g. Nicola is fond of saying (repeatedly) that the economic guidance in there would have meant that scotland needed no austerity over the last X years. But it doesn’t. It suggests pinning spending to growth (as I recall) and that would have required austerity. But she’ll never ever say that.

Definitely off now.
Can I just say (because its christmas) that although we all get a bit heated now and again, that the tone and discussion here could teach other social media a lot.
Have a good one everyone.

seosamh,
You said;

Is rUK just going to give up on the £60bn on exports they send up here?

If you replace rUK with EU and you can’t see that that sentence is similar to arguments made by brexiters, then I can’t help you.

I realise you don’t see yourself as a brexiter and I certainly don’t see you as one, but you’ve just used a very similar argument (and one you could and would easily debunk yourself in an EU thread).

Have a Happy midwinter :O)

Welcome scotroutes,
I see you’re here to point out uncertainty (on the exact rules and future interpretation of EU policies on currency which may be unfavourable to your point of view),
But reluctant to deal with facts, on the deficit, the rate of growth required to avoid austerity in a future indy scotland, where the cuts would fall if required, and how long it would be before we could meet criteria to rejoin the EU?

Good job!

I’m probably away from this thread for the holidays unless I get bored.
Happy Solstice (and associated celebrations) everyone :O)
Do some of what makes you happy with the people who make you happy.
[coke/hookers]

seosamh,
Oh come on;
Can you genuinely not see the relationship between brexitters saying “They need us more than we need them”, and you saying “Is rUK just going to give up on the £60bn on exports they send up here?”

Really? :O)

Is that because we will be in such a strong position in the negotiations that the rUK will roll over and give us what we want?
Is it because worldwide trade restrictions and rules [wether we are in the EU or out of it] will bend to our very will?

Also, Do you have no comment on whether brexit would have got off the ground if EU supported UK to the tune of 140Bn out of 772Bn spending a year in free money?
I mean you DO claim that scexit will get off the ground with the UK supporting scotland to the tune of 14Bn out of 77Bn spending a year (ish?) in free money?

seosamh
Did you just say “They need us more than we need them” ..

Even I am surprised how quickly the flawless arguments of the brexit aficionados have taken root in scexit. ;o)

Give it 20 minutes and it’ll be all “Boris will only play hardball as long as it takes Tunnocks and Irn bru to arrange a meeting”.

seosamh,
I’m glad that you’ve accepted that scotland has a big deficit, but don’t try to minimise what that would mean for post indy scotland.

You describe it as “manageable”, but manageable, does not mean easy, or trivial, and managing a deficit means either growth or saving. So wheres the growth coming from (at the scale required), and where are the areas of social policy we are spending too much on at the moment?

Its not just current economics, but the future as well.
epi-nomics tells us that no-one knows how things might develop, and what the details might be. Fair enough.

However the rUK is a much bigger market for scotland (64% of “exports”) than the EU is for the UK (45%). Would having barriers to trade with rUK be an attractive prospect for scottish business?

On that basis, how can anyone be pro EU (for economic reason)s, and anti UK at the same time?

The SNP will probably tell us that there will never be a border between indy scotland and rUK, but thats the same thing that boris claimed about N&S Ireland, and brexit will now (shortly) lead to a border in the irish sea.

brexit is a shitshow, but in fighting it the SNP have said a lot of things that would come back and haunt them in a new indyref.

And thats not because fighting brexit was the wrong thing to do, but because they spoke the truth about brexit without thinking how the same good arguments mean that leaving the UK “single market” into which we are even more integrated, and on which we are even more reliant will be even more involved and potentially disastrous.

Its like the brexit argument, but in a situation where UK government spending (£772 Bn in 2014 from wikipedia)) relied on being given 140Bn a year by the EU.
(Based on scotlands 77.5Bn spending and a deficit of 14.1Bn 2018/19 from https://www.gov.scot/news/government-expenditure-revenue-scotland-2018-19/)

Manageable? Anyone?

seosamh, I don’t think thats what that says. The amount scotland get is decided by the barnett formula, and I think any changes to that would have been looked at very carefully by interested parties on both sides.

In “figuring out whether scotland is subsidised” or not thats a non question.

This graph is a history of scottish spending and deficit including and excluding oil revenue and shows that the only recent year that the oil revenue would have covered scottish spending was just before the 2014 ref (which was handy :O).

From the start of the oil boom the figures are more stark and obviously in scotlands favour but still show that the money that went south (in black) was similar to the money that came north (in red) over a longer period.

Jeebus,
I see that the economics of scotland are still in a wonderful state this morning, and that despite epi[nomics] admitting that;

The future is uncertain even for a country that is already independent.

We’re all sure that things will be better in the future, because of reasons.

I use the economic argument against independence because its the one the SNP neglects and obfuscates about (for good reason, and they do it well based on the stuff spouted here).

They told us in 2014 we’d be financially better off, that scotland supports the rest of the UK and that we’d get an extra £X,XXX per year per person under independence. But honestly, what would have happened?

People here seem to think that a government not having enough money to provide what its promised its own people is always just a choice!? You sound like the conservatives when they say to the poor “why don’t you just earn more money?”.

If only the poorer countries and people of the world were let in on this one secret .. maybe it was on an internet ad and they hadn’t paid their broadband bill?

At the risk of repeating myself, [and I’m tempted to capitalise this for epi-monics attention;]

No-one here is a saying that scotland can’t be independent, and that it would “fail” if it was, or that it could not potentially (over time) grow its economy to fulfil its promises.

But there is a massive credibility gap between the [current] reasons for doing it;
protect the [fully devolved] NHS,
improve services,
look after the poor,
basically have a better society all round etc etc.
And the reality of the effect of having less money on those very services (for a potentially extended period of time).

That gap is not covered by “We can’t know the future so it must be rosy .. right?.”

The people who would accept “hardship” for independence and drag their ball bags across broken glass for it are already going to vote for it.

You have to convince the rest of us.

Lying about economic reality isn’t doing it. Its brexit squared, and more brexshitting isn’t going to fix it.

And honestly, you should be ashamed to try and scooby the poor into painting their faces blue and voting for it against their own interests, even in the short term.

Anyway now that we’ve established that its sunlit uplands all around and back to the winchester for a pint, I’m off for now :O)

And when it was scotlands was 15%

seosamh
nice try :O) UK deficit is not 11%

Scotland’s notional deficit stood at £12.6bn or 7% of GDP, including North Sea oil revenues, compared with the UK’s total £23.5bn deficit, which includes Scotland’s figure. The UK deficit is equivalent to 1.1% of its GDP.

I just had a quick look and greeces deficit wobbled around 10% and peaked at 16% during the recent crisis.

At those levels austerity is not a choice.

Show me where ANYONE has said that;

an independent country similar to Scotland that has failed.

No-one is saying “failure”. I’m saying economic hardship, a bad time for the poor and disadvantaged, and not a lot to spend on the things that many indy supporters claim as the very reasons for their support.

Even with the best most positive economic growth figures nicola says that scotlands economy might take 25 years to recover from independence and qualify for the EU.

Even if all the positive growth predictions were true, then getting there (back to now plus back in the eu) would have consequences for social and health services in scotland in the interim period.

At no point during that process would scotland be described as a “failure”. It would be an independent country with all its own borders and everything.

But things might be a bit shit for some of the occupants.

But if anyone mentions that they’re talking scotland down, or saying that indy scotland would be a failure or [insert slogan here].

seosamh,
Yup just like Greece did …………….. I can see now I’ve been a fool all along :O)
BTW Its a BIG deficit.

epicyclo
You don’t know (or refuse to acknowledge) the difference between an estimate of current actual spending and revenue and potential future improvements in scotlands economy.

Will it help if i put it like this;
These GERS figures are close
Those sunlit uplands are faaaaar away.

any help?

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.

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)

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.

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?

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.

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!).

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.

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.

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.

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.

Traceability is a good thing for governments and a bad thing for people.
Same arguments for traceability of all transactions apply as to trace and intercept communications.

It starts as a way to catch pedos, terrorists and now big tax dodgers, and then results in negative consequences for protestors, environmental activists and plumbers (while the actual pedos, terrorists and bankers etc. can afford or develop methods to work around it).

Tracability works if you trust your government, trust that they value liberty and freedom of speech, thought and association, and trust that that will never ever change.

Hands up for that one?

Personally I think that the cashless society is like the paperless office .. anybody seen one yet?

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.

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”.

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).

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.

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).

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.

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?

Do I? Where?

By using the phrase “snpbad” which is a popular way to deflect any criticism of the SNP without actual argument. By using the phrase “perceived failures” where “failures” would have done.

I was quoting Johann Lamont.

Lovely why should I care? But you definitely implied that I was making that argument buy quoting it in a reply to me (Or what was the point of quoting it at all?)

Again, you’re going to have to point out where I’m calling you racist.

You accused me of implying that a group of people are “genetically incapable of making decisions”. Is that not racist where you come from?

I only said that derek mackay was the offspring of lala and bungle, not all scottish people.

And yet again, you’re going to have to point out exactly where I’m promising unicorns.

By ignoring any economic facts about the scottish economy and/or critcism of the SNP by replying with slogans instead of facts (or even your own interpretation of facts). By refusing to acknowledge even the most obvious financial downsides to independence under any circumstances.

brucewee,
So you defend the snp (by accusing other people of using “snpbaad”) but then when I list a few areas they could improve in you move the goalposts to;

Would Scotland be a successful independent country

Well it might. But it would initially be poorer and have 5-10x austerity level cuts until the economy caught up with our current spending which the SNP growth report says might take 25 years with unicorn levels of growth.

All this while claiming that westminster cuts are killing people (I don’t disagree that they are, but, apparently unlike you, I don’t see how further cuts will improve the situation).

Your argument doesn’t make sense.

Why don’t you tell me how we’ll save 13Bn a year by getting rid of trident which the SNP say only costs us 0.6Bn :O)

Why don’t you tell me about the other massive savings which will be made via independence, and not cause any negative effects for the poor (I’ve seen a lot of snp pols on telly and, like you guys here, trident is all they ever mention .. no other downsides at all, weird eh?.)

Its flegs all the way down.
Brexshit and Scexshit.
Nationalisnm squared.

PS I just love the fact that you seen to genuinely think that criticising the political aims of alex nicola and derek means I think that all scottish people are genetically deficient.

Have you considered the olympic conclusion jumping championships?

For clarity, no-one (that I can see) is saying that scotland can’t be independent and relatively successful.

I’m only pointing out some economic facts and its pissing you off so much that you have to defend yourself by calling me a wee bit racist, and assuming I’m making generalisations about all scottish people.

Why not instead ask yourself why arguing for your political ends seems to require lying to your countrymen, ignoring well known facts, and promising brexit sized unicorns.

And then tell me again why you are so different from the brexshitters.

For anyone who doesn’t know who derek mackay is, hes currently scotlands finance secretary.

Illegitimate product of a drunken tryst between lala the telly tubby and bungle from rainbow.

Voted scottish man most likely not to find his arse with both hands, even while his hands were superglued to his arse.

Dunning-kruger made flesh.

But at least he thinks hes funny.

BruceWee
Sometimes SNP are bad.
Education, falling standards, and withdrawal from surveys that measure and publicise falling standards. (brought to us by nicola “judge me on my record on education” sturgeon).
NHS, hospital disasters.
Spending 10x more on setting up a benefits agency than they claimed it would take to set up a whole independent country. and then;
Failing to take control of social care and benefits (leaving scottish people at the mercy of the “murderous tories”).
Making more severe cuts to council funding than the tories have in england (and then blaming “westminster austerity” despite having a few grand per person more to spend up here because of Barnett.

It goes on and on but we can’t mention it because we’re “talking scotland down” or “SNP baaaaad”.

If you can’t actually see that sorting at least some of this is more immediate and important than independence and take it into account in your political decision making then you are no better than the unicorn farming brexshitters.

Deep withing the SNP they don’t want to do the best with what they have (including £12/14Bn free extra money on top of Scottish taxes) because if people see that we actually have a competent relatively well funded legislature that makes the lives of Scottish people better, and protects us from the worst of the tories, then why have independence?

Its all “jam tmorrow” from nationalists of all kinds. Brought to you using the magic incantation “It’ll just be better, look at the width of my soundbite, ignore the details”.

FML

PS if things weren’t dark enough for scotland already, apparently word on the street has it that derek mackay is being lined up to replace nicola in case she gets dragged down by the result in the new years scottish court cases. #MeTae

Competence? Who needs it!

TJ,

eat the pudding – scottish and english nationalism are diametrically opposite. One is blood nd soil, the other civic.

Really? Despite Siol nan Gaidheal having a benner at the front of the march for independence in glasgow?

How would you react if you saw a pro brexit march with a bnp (or equivalent) logo at the front?

You keep using the word nationalism. I do not think it means what you think it means.

seosamh
Exceptionalism works alongside nationalism.

It leads people to say things like:

I don’t think you grasp the political divergence between England and Scotland

I won’t go further in looking for examples, because I’ve spent a bit of time on here trying to point out the correlations between brexit and scexit in the form and style of the arguments deployed, and the undercurrent of “heres us and whos like us” that pervedes both english and scottish nationalism.

If you can’t see it by now you never will.

In support of molgrips, there is an air of scottish exceptionalism here, and its as obvious (and annoying) as the english nationalism that pervades other social media (particularly when talking about brexit).

Just because there is a change of a few % points in attitudes that makes a massive difference in a FPTP electoral system does not mean that a country and its people are either angels or demons.