This is like brexit all over again.

Its a simple question with a binary answer, which leads to a vast series of interlinked implications that no-one can be arsed working out in advance.

Personally I wouldn’t mourn a variety of people (many mentioned in this thread) if they were to die. But thats not the core of the question. I guess almost anyone can think of someone the world could do without.

For a referendum question I would propose a 2 or 3 parter:

a) Do you support the police and criminal justice system being given sufficient funding to reduce and endeavour to eliminate unsafe convictions?

b) Do you support the funding of prison education and rehabilitation efforts to reduce the rate of reoffending?

c) Do you want a return of the death penalty?

A negative answer to the first or second question disallows your answer to the third (and shows you up as the big poopy head you undoubtedly are).

Morally the death penalty can be justified, but practically, its the wrong answer to a badly formed question.

Pointless and insane waste of £11Bn.

Actual cost is about £420 per house (times 25million in the UK).

Its not free (you will pay through your bill).

More info here:  various articles from El Reg

‘I have always wished that my computer would be as easy to use as my telephone. My wish has come true. I no longer know how to use my telephone.’

Bjarne Stroustrup, inventor of the C++ programming language

That NASA pic reminds me of an anecdote from Adam Savage (ex-mythbusters). He has a youtube video where he talks about looking at the USS Intrepid museum in NY with Chris Hadfield.

He asked him how many of the aircraft on the flight deck he had flown and he said it might be quicker to tell him which ones he hadn’t.

Lucky bugger 🙂

Leaving aside the fact that the scenario you put forward is unlikely. (2014 was a perfect storm for the SNP of high oil price, toary govt, alignment of the stars etc. and still failed).

I’ve spent time on the ‘broken record’ of the deficit because people kept denying it without evidence.

But the shorthand added reasons for staying in the UK are:

Think of all the reasons its foolish and self defeating for the UK to leave the EU (closest neighbours, customers, market, putting up unnecessary barriers to trade etc. )

That’s why it’s foolish for Scotland to leave the UK.

I know someone will come along and say there would be no barriers and trade would be seamless, and that we would be in a partnership of equals and that nothing bad would happen. We’ll if that’s what you’re thinking then I have a Brexit I’d like to sell you (and we can all see how that’s working out).

We’re better off together. There may be downsides, and imperfections but devolution protects us from the worst and the rest of the UK is still a massive part of our economy and lives (is it 5x more trade than the EU? or more?). There is definitely more that unites us than divides us.

Even if it’s a marriage of convenience rather than love for many.

Look again at the EU. It was hard to describe as perfect in the face of brexiers shouting “freedumb!” and “muh own laws!” and “sovrin parlymunt! ” .

That’s because it’s not perfect, and never will be, because what political construct is?

But now looking at the hard realities are you wanting in or out?

Scottish independence is (in my opinion) the same (brexity) answer to a different union and could well strip the country of the very things we claim to value.

A social conscience is worth sweet FA if you can’t pay for it.

Indy would bring some things too. But you have to balance the pluses and minuses and the minuses are hard and real, and the pluses sound (to me) a lot like: “freedom!” and “our own laws!” and “sovereign parliament!”.

Not necessarily bad things, but sometimes badly prioritised.

The replies since I last put up my  graph seem to indicate that people  aren’t grasping the size of the deficit. look at the graph.. its about 50ish Bn total spending. knock off 13.

You don’t replace that with a tax on motorhomes.

You can grow out of it.

But look at the best and fastest growing economies in the world.

How fast and at what cost to their social fabric, and what happens to the poor in the meantime.

Add to that that the latest reasoning for suggesting this comes on the basis of a grievance about ‘stolen’ powers that Holyrood has never had.

Anyway its Monday. Time to move on. Weathers nice here 🙂 What’s it like where you are?

Gers is the starting point. Glad we’ve accepted that 🙂

Things can change. No problem with that.

I feel I’m repeating myself, but an independent Scotland would have to grow its economy and reduce the deficit by a huge amount to e. g. rejoin the EU. The snp say 10 years under their  favourable scenarios. Others say it might take 25 years.

Initially Scotland would have to raise taxes by 20% or reduce expenditure by 20% ish (or a bit of both).

That’s why I put up the graph of Scottish spending a few pages ago.

If you’re going to have an honest discussion of the economic consequences of independence then (without handwaving) tell people what you think they can do without.

Here’s the graph again

Trident (as I recall SO I COULD BE WRONG!) is about £200Mn per year for Scotland. Defence could be zeroed, but may for a sensible govt be more.

What else? Find another 10Bn plus (5x tory austerity) or put up tax by 20%.

I my view that’s not an argument that will get much traction with the people of Scotland.

Fair enough, I just thought as you brought it up you could save me time.

I still fail to see a problem with being wrong and acknowledging it

Tho’ I can see that  “you’ve made two claims which were false” sounds better for you than “you’ve made two errors and acknowledged them” 🙂

Anyway while we’re on the subject of acknowledging error, have you had any second thoughts (or viable supporting references) on why you’re denying the accuracy of GERS?

You seem very determined to discredit my POV without bringing any verifiable facts of your own.

Are you having trouble finding support now that even Nicola and the SNP have moved on?

RE the original post? I’m not sure what you mean about me not addressing it? But if I haven’t been clear I’ll repeat using different words.

The original poster thinks that the walkout means the beginning of the end of the union.

I’m arguing that economic reality is a far greater barrier to Scottish independence.

Grievance and nationalist feeling (woad, tartan, whatever analog you choose) won’t do it.

I guess you probably agree with me or you wouldn’t be attacking me so much :oP

Hi again,

I found the reference that I was looking for.  It was wrong of me to to say (off the cuff, based on flawed recall, without checking) that the SNP campaigned against devolution. But they did withdraw from the constitutional convention that laid the groundwork for devolution as it now exists and their 1997 manifesto (the election which led to the vote on holyrood) contained the phrase “New Labour’s scheme for a Scottish Assembly [sic] is fatally flawed, and will deliver no real power”. Doesn’t sound like a ringing endorsement?

More details here https://notesfromnorthbritain.wordpress.com/2013/03/08/the-snp-and-devolution/

As to:

You’ve made one further claim based on a flawed measurement of the current situation and applied that to a possible future.

If you are talking about GERS and its provenance and accuracy I think I know who has provided the positive evidence to support their case in this thread. Explain why Nicola and the SG agree with me or get off your high horse.

When the next report comes out the deficit  figure might be better (which would be nice) or worse (which I would regret), but I’ll accept it and move on whether its good for the argument I’m making or not. Can you say the same?

TJ did offer to show me:

much academic and rigorous analysis independent of the SNP

But then didn’t, because apparently “my mind is closed” 🙂

I do hope it wasn’t Richard Murphy with backing from “Dick Murphy” (the only other economist who agrees with him, and lives in the same trousers).

What was the second “FALSE CLAIM” (sound of approaching hooves). I don’t recall?

I could get the feeling that you are spending more time here trying to discredit me in some way. Maybe in order to avoid answering questions or accepting facts that don’t fit with your pre-decided world view, but who knows?

With reference to the original post. We all know (even deep inside) that economics is more important than woad supplies when it comes to any possibility of Scottish independence (otherwise why the animosity directed towards me on this thread?).

Political stunts and membership numbers mighty make a good story, but they aren’t a sound basis for a country that can look after its own people better than they currently are.

What if the Scottish Government tried to build a better country (with better education and healthcare and social provision) NOW. Maybe the majority of people in Scotland would start to want more of the same?

Its what I recalled from the time (that the SNP was against devolution, seeing it as a poor mans independence and then changed their mind later) maybe I’m wrong?

In fact looking at your link (and obviously a bit of desperate googling of my own)  it looks like I’m wrong about that, could be a complete brainfart or maybe it was an earlier time?

So sorry about that and thanks for the correction. I should’a googled before I wrote 🙂

But Gordimhor

Why is the thing you’ve found that I’m wrong about “an attempt to obscure the real argument”?

What is the this “real argument” you speak of?

Does that mean everything else I’ve said and can back up (about GERS, Scotlands finances etc etc.), is unimportant and irrelevant.

Or that its well documented and accepted?

km79

Thanks for your input i guess?

epicyclo

Many detailed “new member” numbers flying about.

No official total number from the SNP though, only estimates! Wonder why?

And Sturgeon still can’t remember the set up costs from her own report.

Numbers are funny aren’t they 🙂

gordimhor

Things change, but SNP Campaigned against devolution in 1997.

They also used to have a different attitude to tory coalitions https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/labour-frozen-out-as-snp-buries-hatchet-with-conservatives-to-end-20-year-taboo-1-1427779

But they do love to bury the past unless its a grievance.

BoardinBob

And these are the bios of the people who think hes talking mince in the link I gave;

https://www.gla.ac.uk/schools/business/staff/ronaldmacdonald/

https://www.niesr.ac.uk/users/angus-armstrong

And these are some others who agree that GERS is good data:

Nicola Sturgeon

Alex Salmond

Scottish Government http://www.gov.scot/Topics/Statistics/Browse/Economy/GERS

So stop playing tig with the truth, or at least ask yourself why its so important to you to prove that GERS is crap when even the SNP have given up trying.

re: “sneering” Do you always have to assume bad faith/anger/resentment in anyone who disagrees with you?

Or is it that projection thing again.

re: “your credentials must be spectacular” – sounding a bit sneery there. Better have a nap.

PS. I can’t be a Russian bot because I’m against Scottish Independence :O)

… zooms off that way -> …….

BruceWee

I’m being obstreperous.

I understand that the average looks better for you so you want us to look at the average.

I also understand that the oil isn’t coming back so some of the conditions you want to return to (that helped create a smaller average) are not available.

We could grow the economy though? Why not concentrate on that for a couple of years, and make the deficit go away altogether. Imagine what that would do for the indy debate! (before you mention “brexit” it doesn’t seem to have slowed the rUK down as much as Scotland. Why? I wonder?)

BoardinBob

Yup, just someone elses opinion on Richard Murphy.

It does include the opinions of 3 professional economists on GERS, and their opinions of Richard Murphys analysis, and their defence of the civil service statisticians and a few other bits and pieces.

But they’re just experts and we know what we thinks of them around here!

Nothing to see here. Move along.

See the debates getting more highbrow already, and no-one is denying GERS anymore.

Have a good weekend everyone 🙂

re: the average is lower

Yup. Also my average height since I was 12 is a lower number than my height now?

Your point?

No, its theoretical because its not money we have to cut from social care etc. at the moment.

Its an estimate because, honestly, even outside the union it would also be an estimate because thats how economic statistics work.

On that note you haven’t read that link I put up have you? It has a lot to say about economics statistics and “estimates” etc. You should genuinely find it interesting if you read it.

I “went back to 2014” because you (rightly) said that the current report is different from what was said back then (which was very economical with the truth, but still being defended online in 2018!?).

Also to point out the importance of the economy to the discussion of independence. It continue to be an important part of any future discussion.

Just because the SNP have accepted the truth in the report doesn’t mean that they won’t obfuscate it (frankly they’ve lied about the contents already).

Honestly the reason many no voters like the growth report is because, though positively spun, it should hopefully prevent people talking rubbish about the only economic facts we have.

I see its not working yet.

Please read the link (I read the Richard Murphy one, again). .. hes the man who gave us corbynomics :O)

Some useful Richard Murphy analysis:

Richard Murphy GERS denier.

Nope .. its “theoretical” because we currently don’t have to pay it off. It gets given to us by the rest of the UK doing better economically.

It becomes real if we get independence. And then it happens every year until the economy grows out of it. Thats where the projections come in, where we become denmark (but not greece) over time, for reasons.

Most countries do run a deficit, but not of that scale (this is where I mention greece again and people get all offended and then check the numbers and go quiet)

I agree that the growth report is more reality based than the book of dreams (with very positive spin).

I disagree that reality makes independence more likely.

Remember the statistic right at the start of the indy debate that people would vote for independence if it made them £400 better off?

Why do you think that the SNP invested so much time and effort on the economic chicanery in 2014.

Why do you think they coined the phrase “too poor, too wee  too stupid” so that people could parrot it at anyone who expressed a negative opinion about the economy? (Still happening .. even today! if you can believe it)

The economy matters. No-one votes to make themselves poorer (unless they’re lied to, see brexit again, look at the bus!).

Indy is dead for a generation (hopefully a real one this time).

not knowing for sure =/= no idea

Its the starting position, Its the cutting of 13Bn from a 50 ish Bn budget on day 1 of independence.

Yes things will be different in the future (thats what its for), but the best people the SNP could find to write up a prospectus for indy have accepted those numbers and with the best will in the world (and probably a lot of people looking over their shoulder), couldn’t wish their way out of the defecit for at least 10 years (and that required growth figures some would call unreasonably positive so lets say 25 instead).

Stop banging your head off the facts we actually know (estimated or not).

Its beginning to look like you can’t decide if economics matters or not. It almost looks like positive things matter and negative ones should be ignored or obfuscated.

If all that you guys say about the scottish economy is true then it would be in the growth report, on the front of the nat onal, and on posters on every street in scotland.

Its not. QED

I’m not actually feeling attacked. Just pointing out that If i screwed up my eyes and looked really close I might be able to justify it more than those here who keep accusing me of insulting them.

I also don’t really see why I should feel anything about scottish independence (apart from wanting a reality based debate). Its the status quo. Its up to you to argue for change.

Before you say that thats a bad thing please note that it does give you a big advantage.

“More of the same!” was a burden for the no side in 2014 and also for the pro EU side in the brexit referendum.

Change always has the advantage, because the destination is not yet reality and can be all things to all men (as exploited by Cambridge Analytica and their facebook based individual marketing).

So someone has to keep you grounded in reality.

If no-one does that job, you’ll wake up and find yourself with brexit™ (0153) all over the carpet and people telling you its what you voted for.

Don’t think I said meaningless. I’m open to correction, but if forced I’d summarise my attitude to “best available” “gold standard” or “SG official statistic” or “Nicola’s magic number”. Estimate =/= meaningless

Your next paragraph is just hand waving. See Brexit for an education in hand waving vs reality.

I added a copyright symbol AFTER I was accused of using the phrase as an insult.

Hold down Alt and type 0169. (or Alt+0176 for a degree symbol .. now you can describe temperature, and direction!)

I didn’t say that you called me anything, (though you might have .. I’m not keeping score, just had a quick look to see what the grievance police were doing on their own time).

Personally I don’t think independence is a good idea for the same reasons that brexit is not a good idea (as described above).

Also all nationalisms tend towards small minded, petty, divisiveness, and will ultimately do or say anything to get their own way. Scottish Nationalism is no different.

If you think I’m wrong then why is Nicola tearing her clothes about the terrible slurs to devolution and Holyrood when the SNP campaigned <i>against</i> it ever being set up?

I’m not trying to say that independence can’t work or that scotland can’t handle independence. Just pointing out the cost. Traditionally you should now call me “project fear”. But before doing that consider brexit again where boris and chums used that phrase to good effect and where are we now?

I’m not here to change your mind, just try to stop you passing off opinion as fact in a race to the austerity bus. If you want independence, then fine, but don’t try to say you care about the poor people in Scotland and then plan to chop off 13 (ish) Bn of the money that supports them, every year until the unicorn farts a rainbow.

sbob,

You may think you are on my side (or that I’m on yours).

But based on what you’ve just written, I’m really really not.

BruceWee.

To answer your earlier points 13.5Bn deficit is the real figure  If you disagree why don’t you FOI the SG stats people about it (tho thats not necessary as they publish the data freely). If the deficit improves then great! and I’ll use the new number. (but why does the current one make you uncomfortable?)

Just saying “it isn’t” doesn’t work and makes Nicola or her staff (and the recent changes to GERS calculation her administration made) out to be incompetent.

Brexit squared is based on the following (I think I’ve said this already, but hey):

If leaving a union with you closest neighbours and business partners and introducing barriers to trade, while handing over (losing) large amounts of cash you don’t have to is crazy in the case of brexit, then doing the same on a smaller scale geographically but larger scale economically (%wise) is also crazy. Doing them both (leaving the UK single market on top of the EU single market, and having neither) is brexit squared QED.

You might not agree, but that is what I mean (and if you think you’ll continue to be in the EU or get accepted in immediately on independence then see the SNP growth report).

I never said or considered the words true believer to be an insult. I didn’t capitalise it and I kind of wonder why it seems to have touched a nerve for y’all?

As for what would make me support indy? Maybe for starters, not being called:

demeaning, superior, sneering, closed minded, patronising, unread, unsceptical, unlistening, a sock puppet and a troll.

For having a grasp of economic reality and writing down my opinion.

I’m honestly not feeling courted here.

Like I said, have a word with Nicola.

If these sources you describe were relevant or positive would they not have been asked to write a chapter in the SNP report?

So I’m sorry to bang on about it, but the SNPs acceptance of the size and extent of the economic reality speaks louder than your refusal.

As does the SG statistics department.

I’m not trying to convince you, I’m just providing a counterpoint to you talking up independence using a false prospectus of a “few years” of austerity

With that level of discourse, you might as well write it on the side of a bus.

Side question; Will this be the kind of austerity that kills disabled people and causes food banks or some sort of unicorn powered rainbow austerity?

PS  A quick look up sees me described as; demeaning, superior, sneering, closed minded, patronising, unread, unsceptical, unlistening, a sock puppet and a troll.

Does that beat “true believer” on the personal poke front? Asking for a friend, answers on a postcard.

PS. I’ve been trying to practice sneering for the last minute or two.

I honestly don’t think I can carry it off without giggling, but I can raise a single eyebrow if that would help?

Hi epicyclo (waves)

I thought TJ was the only one reading my posts looking for something to take personally (Like calling a woman called Nicola Nicola with malice aforethought!) so that he could disregard any further points I made.

But it looks like you got in too.. Yay for you!

For what its worth I don’t think “true believer” is an insult when applied in this context.

What else would you call those who continue to deny uncomfortable economic facts which have now been (quietly) accepted even by the SNP?

People who insist that economics is mince and GERS is an estimate (the horror), but spent 2014 arguing that we could be one of the top (?) richest countries in the world based on what Salmond called the gold plated GERS statistics?

People who get all het up and emotional about the poor and disadvantaged people of Scotland, but think that the costs of independence and the austerity involved would be a price worth [them] paying for a generation (or 5 depending on the length of a Scottish Standard Generation these days).

Brexit is idiotic and destructive, but Independence is worse, for the very same reasons (squared).

If you see one but not the other .. it may be because you are a true believer©.

TJ

Still no explanation of how Nicola (RU for real?) has fallen for this obvious chicanery then?

Still nothing on how her best and brightest failed to spot the things that are so obvious to you and so many other true believers?

I put forward two possible explanations:

1) Theresa (!) has compromat of her spilling irn bru on a hotel mattress.

2) You genuinely know more than Nicola does about the Scottish economy.

As for all this stuff about things fitting “my own narrative” I think that’s called projection.

TJ you can have your own opinions but not your own facts. Read the (SNP) report.

Its facts don’t fit your narrative (tho’ it’s put forward in a very positive way), but then maybe we can have a reasonable discussion over whether squaring the effects of brexit might be too much for Scotlands poor.

TTFN

PS the misread ‘insult’ of using Nicola’s name reads like a warning that you don’t like what I say so you’re veering towards attacking me instead. Nice.

Jebus Cribst. You do know (because I’ve told you several times) that GERS is produced by the Scottish Government, by Nicola’s own statisticians. You’ve never explained why she supports this  Westminster trickery. Or why the moves to improve these stats a few years ago (overseen by SG and the aforementioned statisticians)  were apparently less insightful about the Scottish economy than….   you.

Just you.

There was even an FOI to the SG statistics dept. asking  what information was being withheld by Westminster. Guess the answer?

Spoiler….. none.

Everyone has been treated badly by this brexit luvin government. But Independence is not the cure.

“few years”

Still haven’t read Nicola’s report eh?

All the stuff you’ve been denying is in there; massive austerity for 10 years (that’s the good scenario powered by dreams) and out of Europe until economy / deficit improves.

I’m retiring until you read the report and I don’t have to make Sturgeons arguments for her.

Brexit is bad. Independence is brexit squared.

“economists opinions differ”

“independence would be different”

blah blah

You sound like climate change deniers with their “some scientists say” broken record.

Be in favour of independence by all means, but lying about the, let’s say, “challenges” of the Scottish economy will do you no favours.

You might be prepared to face 10 or 20 years of austerity max (Westminster austerity was, for comparison, about 1or 2 billion in cuts for a few years followed by rises.  See graph above) but at least be honest about with yourself about what 13 Bn (ish) of austerity will do to the the poor and vulnerable in Scotland.

Glad to see that people have pretty much given up arguing that we’d be financially better off in an independent Scotland. But the idea that there are lots of figures and you “just don’t know” is pish.

Next time someone says the economy is going badly in brexit UK, and you mentally make a note because it reinforces your biases, how do you think they come by those figures? Do you disregarded them because they are from the past? Do you tell yourself that they are just bad because brexit hasn’t happened fully yet? (Would you laugh at someone who made those arguments?)

The UK has a deficit, but %wise its better than the Scottish one. The deficit isn’t real though.  Its theoretical because we benefit from pooling and sharing and without 13 Bn to replace that and no economic argument Scottish independence is toast.

edited for crap spelling

tjagain

Nope it is not. Scotland is given a fixed pot of money to spend ( ignoring the piddly amounts it is allowed to raise on its own behalf) NHS is something like half the budget. The scottish government simply cannot put significantly more money into the NHS – it has no way of raising it without huge cuts elsewhere.

It is given proportionately the same as England spends on the NHS as part of that.

It has chosen to give the NHS a smaller % increase.

I know you don’t like it,

But its true.

This might help http://theoatmeal.com/comics/believe

PS and if it was independent it would have 13Bn less to spend (approximately the cost of the NHS). You never did say which bits of society you would cut off to cover the deficit if it becomes a reality?

13Bn is an even bigger chunk of the total spend than I recalled!

(edit for wrong graph)

gordimhor,

3 not 4 .. OK 🙂

My main pojnt is that they claim to want powers devolved for the benefit of Scotlands people because the current system is cruel.

Then they decide they can’t handle them and defer the chance to make any changes for at least 3 years (which is what “DWP administration” means).

There may be good practical reasons for that deferral, but they all look a bit weak in the face of previous claims from the same people that they could build the infrastructure for a whole country in 2 years for £400M.

Whatever way you look at it its not an ideal case to encourage further devolution of powers.

tjagain,

“less than the tax raised in scotland”

Wow …

Did you miss the SNP growth report acceptance of GERS and confirmation that an independent Scotland would have a 13Bn (ish) deficit wrt spending vs tax raised?

It was authored by the SNP (despite their best efforts not to release it) and hopefully will be enough to change your mind.

We can wait here while you have a read.

cchris2lou

No, more. For good reasons and to the benefit of everyone living in Scotland google Barnett formula.

PS trolling? really? Is the Scottish definition of trolling “not drinking the coolaid”?

If so then maybe.

Boarding bob

No this is actually my real name. .  .  not an alias at all?

kelvin

The SNP asked for more devolution, and despite going on at length about how the DWP benefits system is a disaster for the people of the UK (particularly the disabled), they have passed up on the ability to improve it for the people of Scotland.

Their rhetoric says that people are dying because of the DWP (which I believe) but they can’t deal with the powers for a few years extra and thats “Irrelevant”?

Your dictionary is broken between Iridescent and Irritable.

Please note that I also said that the SNP claimed a few years before that they could set up a whole nation in two years for a few hundred million quid. I think that point is very relevant.

There also seems to be a lot of deflection here based around the fact that pointing out something bad about the SNP should not reflect on the cause of independence itself.

Somehow the fact that the SNPs long thought out economic arguments are mince, and their actions (on education the NHS, local government, child benefit, WASPI women and benefits overall) defy their rhetoric, should not be included in a decision about independence which would involve either more or less radical people with “different” ideas.

This feels (from my point of view) exactly equivalent to the premise that brexit could be a success if only those “remoaners would shut up”, or if it was being handled “better” by TM and the tories, or “if only nigel, boris or putin or [insert numpty here] was in charge!”.

Its all mince. All the time.

Some ideas are so bad that theres no way they can be put right by a change of party, personality, or left/right leaning.

Nationalism sucks. As I said earlier, the SNP and Tories are two balls in the same nutsack.

Scotland  could be independent. but it would be poorer for it and that means less money for the NHS, schools and civil society. The list goes on, and includes pretty much everything that independence supporters seem to value when they are threatened by the tories.

So whats the cure?

Shut up about burning bridges and try to build a better society now.

Independence may come someday, or not, but what if we created a better society regardless?