Scotland's Sturgeon says: I can win an independence vote

[billd766]

26 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Well you sound like you write for it. 

 

As for UKIP, I never said you did - and it appears more and more people are connecting the dots and turning from them. My point still stands - UKIP offered nothing post Brexit .

 

How could UKIP offer anything post Brexit? It is not as if they were running the country.

 

AFAIR nobody offered anything post Brexit until after the referendum, and the only political party that can do so, is.

 

Most of the other political parties were too busy throwing roadblocks in the way to offer much constructive, and that includes many Tory MP's and the HoL.

[Grouse]

Can we get back to the topic please?

[transam]

4 minutes ago, Grouse said:

So my opinions are invalid because currently I have no business interests in the EU? I lived in mainland EU countries for many years, was employed there and had a subsidiary in Erlangen, Germany. Gawd indeed!

Hmmmmm, just something in my gray cells from another thread...

[RuamRudy]

2 minutes ago, billd766 said:

 

How could UKIP offer anything post Brexit? It is not as if they were running the country.

 

AFAIR nobody offered anything post Brexit until after the referendum, and the only political party that can do so, is.

 

Most of the other political parties were too busy throwing roadblocks in the way to offer much constructive, and that includes many Tory MP's and the HoL.

Indeed - the hypocrisy of all these people accusing of the SNP of offering nothing tangible is almost funny. With Brexit, we were constantly faced with a deluge of lies and fear mongering from all sides, remain and leave, but nobody offered anything to help us define what Brexit actually meant, let alone what it would look and feel like. And somehow, some see this fact as irrelevant. 

 

As for Scottish independence, I am sure that the SNP will have learnt many lessons from 2014, least of all the importance of presenting a cast iron vision for the future of Scotland post-UK. Now is the time to plant the seeds of that future - whilst the Tories have nothing but incompetence, stonewalling and fantasy to offer for the UK.

[mommysboy]

3 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

How would you calculate that debt, the substance of it being so intangible? 130% of GDP? Where do you get those figures? 

The funny thing is simple figures are not so easily obtainable.  I did find one analysis. I think it was the Telegraph that I used.  That it will be 100% is beyond dispute.  There are also hefty costs of the latest deficit and costs incurred in independence.  The Telegraph actually said 150% but I thought I would err on the cautious side.  Sorry I don't have a link.

[transam]

1 minute ago, RuamRudy said:

Indeed - the hypocrisy of all these people accusing of the SNP of offering nothing tangible is almost funny. With Brexit, we were constantly faced with a deluge of lies and fear mongering from all sides, remain and leave, but nobody offered anything to help us define what Brexit actually meant, let alone what it would look and feel like. And somehow, some see this fact as irrelevant. 

 

As for Scottish independence, I am sure that the SNP will have learnt many lessons from 2014, least of all the importance of presenting a cast iron vision for the future of Scotland post-UK. Now is the time to plant the seeds of that future - whilst the Tories have nothing but incompetence, stonewalling and fantasy to offer for the UK.

Cast iron vision..........

 

And you ignored my post why the UK voted to leave the EU because of decades of crap..A reason to leave...They were shown the reason by the incompetence and daft rulings thrust upon them from Brussels..

[RuamRudy]

2 minutes ago, transam said:

Cast iron vision..........

 

And you ignored my post why the UK voted to leave the EU because of decades of crap..A reason to leave...They were shown the reason by the incompetence and daft rulings thrust upon them from Brussels..

Well I didn't ignore in that I did read it, but I chose not to respond at the time because you are making the mistake of presenting subjective opinion as fact, and that becomes hard to reason with. 

[RuamRudy]

7 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

The funny thing is simple figures are not so easily obtainable.  I did find one analysis. I think it was the Telegraph that I used.  That it will be 100% is beyond dispute.  There are also hefty costs of the latest deficit and costs incurred in independence.  The Telegraph actually said 150% but I thought I would err on the cautious side.  Sorry I don't have a link.

The Telegraph is hardly the most objective of commentators here, but you are correct when you say that the figures are far from straightforward.

 

According to the Scottish Government's National Accounts for 2015:

 

Including a geographical share of all offshore activity occurring in Scottish adjacent waters, total Scottish GDP is estimated at £152 billion in total, or £28,400 per person.

 

Even the Telegraph, using the now discredited GERS data, stated last year that, "Official data released on Wednesday shows that Scotland is in the red to the tune of 9.5 per cent of its GDP".

 

So your figure of 100% - really?

[citybiker]

@RR

Ref: post #668

The SNP & Sturgeon do not represent the will of the 'whole of Scotland'.

Lastly, I hope the SNP have learnt lesson's however we do agree that a the HoP does indeed require a strong credible opposition, unfortunately IMO I'm not seeing much tangible evidence of this to date from either parties.

Which is disappointing.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[mommysboy]

1 minute ago, RuamRudy said:

The Telegraph is hardly the most objective of commentators here, but you are correct when you say that the figures are far from straightforward.

 

According to the Scottish Government's National Accounts for 2015:

 

Including a geographical share of all offshore activity occurring in Scottish adjacent waters, total Scottish GDP is estimated at £152 billion in total, or £28,400 per person.

 

Even the Telegraph, using the now discredited GERS data, stated last year that, "Official data released on Wednesday shows that Scotland is in the red to the tune of 9.5 per cent of its GDP".

 

So your figure of 100% - really?

Yes. UK as a whole is teetering around 95% of GDP.  I can't see that not rising to 100.  So we can reasonably assume Scotland's will be around that as a basic starting point.

 

The figure you quoted is the yearly budget deficit, ie, how much it overspent last year.  In fairness, much of that was caused by the dramatic collapse in oil revenue.  9.5% is a heck of an overspend.  EU regulations require a member state to stay within 3%.  And there are fines for not doing so, although these seem to have not been applied during the ongoing crisis years.

[transam]

29 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Well I didn't ignore in that I did read it, but I chose not to respond at the time because you are making the mistake of presenting subjective opinion as fact, and that becomes hard to reason with. 

And you're not..........

[mommysboy]

I think I remember now.  Yes, I'd reckoned around 150 billion GDP.  And then since UK debt is being touted as 1.7 trillion, I simply took 10% of that as Scotland's share, ie, 170 billion.

 

At the time of the final (once in a generation) referendum 140 billion was being touted.  I guess Tory austerity wasn't all it's cracked up to be.

[RuamRudy]

4 minutes ago, citybiker said:

@RR

Ref: post #668

The SNP & Sturgeon do not represent the will of the 'whole of Scotland'.

Lastly, I hope the SNP have learnt lesson's however we do agree that a the HoP does indeed require a strong credible opposition, unfortunately IMO I'm not seeing much tangible evidence of this to date from either parties.

Which is disappointing.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Then you need to consider how governments are formed and how they function. 

The Conservatives got 36.9% of the votes in 2015. Do they represent the will of the whole of the UK?

[RuamRudy]

22 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

Yes. UK as a whole is teetering around 95% of GDP.  I can't see that not rising to 100.  So we can reasonably assume Scotland's will be around that as a basic starting point.

 

The figure you quoted is the yearly budget deficit, ie, how much it overspent last year.  In fairness, much of that was caused by the dramatic collapse in oil revenue.  9.5% is a heck of an overspend.  EU regulations require a member state to stay within 3%.  And there are fines for not doing so, although these seem to have not been applied during the ongoing crisis years.

Hence the importance of credible data. 

[mommysboy]

57 minutes ago, RuamRudy said:

Hence the importance of credible data. 

This year's budget overspend was not unauthorised. This is because it is reasonable given the circumstances.

 

Eu wouldn't see it that way.  It would insist on cuts or there would be penalties.

[transam]

2 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

This year's budget overspend was not unauthorised. This is because it is reasonable given the circumstances.

 

Eu wouldn't see it that way.  It would insist on cuts or there would be penalties.

Yep, you Brits retire at 70 while we do sod all............

[RuamRudy]

3 minutes ago, mommysboy said:

This year's budget overspend was not unauthorised. This is because it is reasonable given the circumstances.

 

Eu wouldn't see it that way.  It would insist on cuts or there would be penalties.

There is no overspend. How can there be? Who lends the SG the money to overspend?

They receive an allocation of spending from Westminster which they spend - as simple as that. 

The question is 'what is the difference between the income and the expenditure?'. Like every capitalist country, there is no doubt that they spend more than generated - but the uncertainty lies in the gap. The current method for determining the gap has been found to be wanting. 

[7by7]

5 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

Deeks wrote that Scotland had 'great resources and can go it alone easily' to which you pithily replied, 'what resources..?'

 

I was merely pointing out, your (Transam) lack of knowledge, while sad, is not a reflection on the reality of the Scottish economy. 

Then instead of pointing out his, and others, lack of knowledge, why don't you educate him?

[7by7]

1 hour ago, RuamRudy said:

Hence the importance of credible data. 

Do you consider the Scottish government to be a credible source?

 

Government Expenditure & Revenue Scotland 2015-16 (Obviously 2016-17 figures are not yet available; but how much will things have changed?).)

Quote

Total Public Sector Revenue 2015-16

 

• Scotland’s public sector revenue is equivalent to £10,000 per person, £400 less than the UK average, regardless of the inclusion of North Sea revenue.........

 

Total Public Sector Expenditure 2015-16

 

• Total expenditure for the benefit of Scotland by the Scottish Government, UK Government, and all other parts of the public sector was £68.6 billion. This is equivalent to 9.1 per cent of total UK public sector expenditure, and £12,800 per person, which is £1,200 per person greater than the UK average.

 

So the Scottish people paid £400 less per person and received £1200 more per person; a total of £1600 per person.

 

How would an independent Scotland replace this?

 

Raise taxes say some. An average tax (direct and indirect) rise of £1600 p.a.? Would the Scottish people really accept that?

 

But those who are saying raise taxes are also saying

22 hours ago, Grouse said:

Tax rises with increased benefits, tax allowances would be the way to go.

So the burden on those who pay tax would actually, if this 'way to go' were implemented, be even greater!

 

As for the deficit in Scotland; from the same source

Quote

Current Budget Balance 2015-16

This is the difference between total revenue and current expenditure (i.e. excluding capital investment). The current budget balance:

 

• Excluding North Sea revenue, was a deficit of £12.7 billion (8.6 per cent of GDP).
• Including an illustrative geographic share of North Sea revenue, was a deficit of £12.6 billion (8.1 per cent of GDP).
• For the UK, was a deficit of £41.5 billion (2.2 per cent of GDP)

 

Net Fiscal Balance 2015-16

This is the difference between total revenue and total public sector expenditure including capital investment. The net fiscal balance:

 

• Excluding North Sea revenue, was a deficit of £14.9 billion (10.1 per cent of GDP).
• Including an illustrative geographic share of North Sea revenue, was a deficit of £14.8 billion (9.5 per cent of GDP).
• For the UK, was a deficit of £75.3 billion (4.0 per cent of GDP).

 

Now the SNP like to say that there are valid reasons why public spending in Scotland is higher than the UK average; and some of those reasons, such as lower population density in many areas, are, indeed, valid.

 

But those reasons will not go away if Scotland becomes independent!

 

The government of an independent Scotland will be faced with a stark choice between the lesser of three evils; increase taxes dramatically, cut public services severely or both.

 

 

[7by7]

3 hours ago, Grouse said:

If there was any doubt about the definition of Numpty, this is a great exemplar 

 Well it certainly fits your definition of numpty; "anyone who disagrees with me!"

[7by7]

3 hours ago, RuamRudy said:

Indeed - the hypocrisy of all these people accusing of the SNP of offering nothing tangible is almost funny.

 

You constantly make statements such as the above; yet when asked to provide tangible evidence of the SNP's post independence plans refuse to provide it!

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, 7by7 said:

Do you consider the Scottish government to be a credible source?

 

Government Expenditure & Revenue Scotland 2015-16 (Obviously 2016-17 figures are not yet available; but how much will things have changed?).)

 

So the Scottish people paid £400 less per person and received £1200 more per person; a total of £1600 per person.

 

How would an independent Scotland replace this?

 

Raise taxes say some. An average tax (direct and indirect) rise of £1600 p.a.? Would the Scottish people really accept that?

 

But those who are saying raise taxes are also saying

So the burden on those who pay tax would actually, if this 'way to go' were implemented, be even greater!

 

As for the deficit in Scotland; from the same source

 

Now the SNP like to say that there are valid reasons why public spending in Scotland is higher than the UK average; and some of those reasons, such as lower population density in many areas, are, indeed, valid.

 

But those reasons will not go away if Scotland becomes independent!

 

The government of an independent Scotland will be faced with a stark choice between the lesser of three evils; increase taxes dramatically, cut public services severely or both.

 

 

So how are other small EU Northern European countries able to manage?

 

I believe Scotland should adopt a dramatically different model from Westminster.

 

Foreign Direct Investment would surely rise. A different industrial strategy (a la Germany) to get long term investment in plant, robotics, AI. Get rid of business shorttermism and the holy grail of shareholder value.

 

Totally different tax system - I cited Denmark as a superior system.

 

I suggest they adopt the Scottish Pound, initially pegged to the Euro but with scope to adjust over time as new systems bed in.

 

The Scots would have to be able to control the English flooding in!

[transam]

1 minute ago, Grouse said:

So how are other small EU Northern European countries able to manage?

 

I believe Scotland should adopt a dramatically different model from Westminster.

 

Foreign Direct Investment would surely rise. A different industrial strategy (a la Germany) to get long term investment in plant, robotics, AI. Get rid of business shorttermism and the holy grail of shareholder value.

 

Totally different tax system - I cited Denmark as a superior system.

 

I suggest they adopt the Scottish Pound, initially pegged to the Euro but with scope to adjust over time as new systems bed in.

 

The Scots would have to be able to control the English flooding in!

And the Scots flooding out....?

 

But you can still have the Eastern Europeans flooding in...You seem to have it sorted....Yabadaba doooooo...

[Grouse]

1 hour ago, 7by7 said:

 Well it certainly fits your definition of numpty; "anyone who disagrees with me!"

That's quite unfair.

 

Numpty is a Scottish expression. You can look it up.

 

A Numpty is a person who takes a view without doing adequate research in to the pros and cons.

 

There are a couple on TV, loads in the U.K., USA and obviously Turkey

 

There are many with views diametrically opposed to mine. Some see financial gain out of crashing out. Some really value absolute independence over everything. Some are racists. And some are numpties. Clear with that?

 

Now you are not a Numpty though you disagree with me sometimes. Pedant, maybe; Numpty, never! ?

[Grouse]

10 minutes ago, transam said:

And the Scots flooding out....?

 

But you can still have the Eastern Europeans flooding in...You seem to have it sorted....Yabadaba doooooo...

The issue of how to manage freedom of movement is indeed a problem but not intractable I believe. I think you will see some changes in the EU if only to avoid brittle fracture. This is only one of several issues that need to be and will be addressed.

 

I can't see Scots flooding into a low tax, low benefit, low rent 51st State. But maybe I'm wrong!

[transam]

4 minutes ago, Grouse said:

The issue of how to manage freedom of movement is indeed a problem but not intractable I believe. I think you will see some changes in the EU if only to avoid brittle fracture. This is only one of several issues that need to be and will be addressed.

 

I can't see Scots flooding into a low tax, low benefit, low rent 51st State. But maybe I'm wrong!

The issues after many years have not been addressed, hence Brexit, but hey, you reckon the SNP has all the fixes.............Must say you are either trolling chap or don't know what's gone on....

[Grouse]

15 minutes ago, transam said:

The issues after many years have not been addressed, hence Brexit, but hey, you reckon the SNP has all the fixes.............Must say you are either trolling chap or don't know what's gone on....

I am certainly not a troll. I believe exactly what I write (except when I am being ironic)

 

I think I am reasonably well informed and do indeed know what has happened in the past.

 

I think Brexit may well act as spur to force some change in the EU. However, I contend that it is the increasingly obscene inequality in the U.K. that was the underlying reason. Plenty of excuses bolted on to that.

 

I do not think the SNP has all the fixes but I am pro EU and pro Scottish independence 

 

I hope Scotland escapes and begins a whole new era!

[wakeupplease]

This woman would fit in well in lieland, wish she would take ups TATs retirement offer, so lets start a crowd fund raising event to get rid of her only 60k needed. UK is the member not Scotland who drain the UK (England) big time, if they applied to join the EU they would not get in as they are just after handouts or she is. Born in the same mold as a certain PM I can think of, full of Bulls rear end stuff

[Maestro]

Removed an off-topic post and the replies to it.

[Grouse]

13 minutes ago, wakeupplease said:

This woman would fit in well in lieland, wish she would take ups TATs retirement offer, so lets start a crowd fund raising event to get rid of her only 60k needed. UK is the member not Scotland who drain the UK (England) big time, if they applied to join the EU they would not get in as they are just after handouts or she is. Born in the same mold as a certain PM I can think of, full of Bulls rear end stuff

If you feel Scotland is such a drain on England, presumably you welcome independence? If not, why not?