The Dirty Independence Question

[eFestivals]

4 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Where did I say your a tory cause your against indy? 

Is this a deflection tactic from your 100 year twaddle earlier? 

Genuinely confused here.

Sorry, I guess I misunderstood. I read your words like you were saying the tories &/or what we have now is the only alternative to indy.

Don't let that deflect you from addressing the fact that the 100+ years "twaddle" is the best (only!) data-driven answer to the question "when will Scotland be rich enough again to match today's economic position?"

Edited November 23, 2015 by eFestivals

[Comfy Bean]

Live in a cave lol.

I would expect we would bench mark against similar sized countries - yes.

England and Scotland are different politically and in size as we know. I'm sure some would become obsessed with Scotland England comparisons, same as it ever was ;-)

[eFestivals]

8 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Live in a cave lol.

I would expect we would bench mark against similar sized countries - yes.

England and Scotland are different politically and in size as we know. I'm sure some would become obsessed with Scotland England comparisons, same as it ever was ;-)

It's the most obvious comparison to make. It's rather stupid to pretend that won't be the natural measure for most people for indy's success or not.

Nothing about that stops you placing a value on 'decisions for Scotland being made in Scotland' and having that outweigh (say) the greater public services for the poorest in rUK. You're more than welcome to value indy in any way you like.

But there does become a point in hypothetical where the financial consequences of indy are so poor you'd have to live in a cave. Is indy still worth it for you then? Or might you think there might be better alternatives? How committed to the cause are you, really?

In seriousness, you're either ones of those who'd be happy to live in a cave, or your take on things is more reasoned and nuanced, and in some circumstances indy isn't worth it. All you need to do now is work out where your own "isn't worth it" point is, and whether Scotland's true financial position can out-perform that isn't-worth-it point.

Edited November 23, 2015 by eFestivals

[Comfy Bean]

3 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

No she hasn`t dismissed it out of hand. If you were able to read what NS has said without your blinkers you would see that she is responding quite sensibly and with respect to Dave and whatever plan he puts together as PM.

History shows us though that the SNP don`t back illegal wars ( Iraq ). I know you don`t either Neil so this is not some point scoring exercise that you always insist on turning everything into.

What you are saying about Sturgeon is accurate at the moment and she may well back Dave`s plan. I don`t think she will though without the full eu resolution which ain`t happening. We will soon find out and I will stand corrected if the SNP vote in support of bombing Syria.

It`s rubbish that the press are setting things up for us to join in the bombing. Reading the papers today, you could forget that loads of bombs are already being dropped whether we join in or not. Again, I know your views on this and Iraq. There is nothing wrong with agreeing with the SNP. Especially if they are backing something that you support 

 

 

This post seemed to have slipped through amongst our predictions of me living in a cave in 100 years. 

Looks like Dave will try and get the numbers on Thursday. Any views on the Scottish slant ?

In other news, I just heard that I am currently being stalked by a Russian submarine off our coast. Is there a Trident debate due or something 

[Comfy Bean]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

It's the most obvious comparison to make. It's rather stupid to pretend that won't be the natural measure for most people for indy's success or not.

 

I take your point mate. I`m not pretending no-one will compare Scotland / England. Plenty will, you for a start 

I also stand by my own point that comparing Scotland with a more rural Country similar in population size would be more informative.

We sit on a huge % of Europe`s natural resources ( I don`t just mean oil ). Our future lies in this and not the casino stuff.

[LJS]

13 hours ago, eFestivals said:

Hey LJS...

You know you love to say that small countries get better growth, and so Scotland will be able to grow itself out of its deficit and not have to make massive tax increases &//or massive spending cuts?

i've just become aware of what the white paper said about that. The SNP's own words say it would take 120 years to grow by enough to cover that gap, tho that doesn't address the financial shortfall in the meantime.

So that's that bit of vain hope blown away, too ... and the only thing left for snippers now is to face up to the deficit and what it really means for Scotland.

Even WoS is doing it now, so I wonder who is going to be last snipper howling at the moon and claiming an iScotland would be better?

I did post a Deutsche Bank report indicating that generally small countries perform better than big ones.

I have never given any estimate as to how long it might or might not take Scotland to grow out of whayever deficit (if any) it has at the time of Independence - in which context the historical estimates provided by the GERS figures you adore are irrelevant because there is no immediate prospect of independence for Scotland.

And what the Bishop of Bath is doing is nothing to what you (the Archbishop of Bristol?) say  - he is pointing out the flaws in the financial arrangements of the Scotland Bill. 

12 hours ago, russycarps said:

why would ljs care? He's already admitted the financial implications are "irrelevant" to him. You cant argue finances with people who dont care about them.

Ideology over reality, the raving nationalist mantra.

 

 

I have flown back especially from my winter retreat in the Seychelles to point out that you are again completely misquoting me - despite the fact that this has been pointed out to you clearly before.

 

Has Neil been teaching you?

[Comfy Bean]

Ljs, I salute your dedication to our discussion sir :-)

Flying back in to do it yourself when you have a perfectly good butler who could of posted on you're behalf ;-)

The Seychelles to a cave is going to be quite a come down!!! 

[eFestivals]

12 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

 

This post seemed to have slipped through amongst our predictions of me living in a cave in 100 years. 

Looks like Dave will try and get the numbers on Thursday. Any views on the Scottish slant ?

In other news, I just heard that I am currently being stalked by a Russian submarine off our coast. Is there a Trident debate due or something 

PMSL at you making the SNP = Scotland. ;lol: .... you really are the myth sheet in action.

The SNP slant is one I agree with. The SNP - just as with the tories - are able to get some things right.

Meanwhile I'm seeing far few snippers saying they could fund an iScotland by not being involved in wars. How odd. :P

 

[eFestivals]

12 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

I take your point mate. I`m not pretending no-one will compare Scotland / England. Plenty will, you for a start 

I also stand by my own point that comparing Scotland with a more rural Country similar in population size would be more informative.

We sit on a huge % of Europe`s natural resources ( I don`t just mean oil ). Our future lies in this and not the casino stuff.

Is that you making an admission that an iScotland will be poorer? It certainly looks like it.

It's progress, I guess.

Meanwhile, Scotland sits on no greater a proportion of Europe's natural resources than anywhere else. In all places the natural resources are the land and what it can offer up.

 

[eFestivals]

10 hours ago, LJS said:

I did post a Deutsche Bank report indicating that generally small countries perform better than big ones.

Which are presumably the numbers Salmond has used, which are so tiny that "extra permormance" would take over 100 years to bridge the gap.

Or did Salmond choose 'bad' numbers making it SNP baaad? It doesn't seem likely he'd have understated things when he talked bollocks about everything else, does it?

 

Quote

I have never given any estimate as to how long it might or might not take Scotland to grow out of whayever deficit (if any) it has at the time of Independence - in which context the historical estimates provided by the GERS figures you adore are irrelevant because there is no immediate prospect of independence for Scotland.

Just because you might not have made that estimate doesn't mean others can't.

The only estimate anyone is aware of is Salmond's own - which puts that time-frame at 120 years.

That's 120 years of something worse for Scotland, the flight of its youth and everything else, before Scotland has a chance of getting back to what it has now.

You might consider it worth it, but it's a hell of a price to pay. And I do hope you're telling other snippers of just how much of their lives you're prepared to sacrifice for your dogma?

Perhaps the next indyref might be fought with truth and not lies. You know, "vote indy, lose Scottish public services, be much poorer"?

If it were fought on the truth, how much of the current 45% do you think might hold up?

 

Quote

And what the Bishop of Bath is doing is nothing to what you (the Archbishop of Bristol?) say  - he is pointing out the flaws in the financial arrangements of the Scotland Bill. 

He's also admitting that he's spent the last two years publishing lies, and that 'the unionists' were right about the money.

Did you miss that bit?

 

Edited November 24, 2015 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

10 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Ljs, I salute your dedication to our discussion sir :-)

Flying back in to do it yourself when you have a perfectly good butler who could of posted on you're behalf ;-)

The Seychelles to a cave is going to be quite a come down!!! 

In all seriousness, what is your answer to the 'cave' thing?

Would you still support indy if it meant all of Scotland had to live in caves, and that no circumstances would diminish your support for indy?

Or do you have a reasoned view, where indy has to have a pay-off of some kind to make it worth your support?

It's an easy question for you. Dogma or reason?

Edited November 24, 2015 by eFestivals

[gary1979666]

So, if the comparison is better between countries of a similar size, which countries are the best fit.  How does Scotland compare at the moment; as initially it'll be the difference between now and whenever indy happens.

[russycarps]

12 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

I take your point mate. I`m not pretending no-one will compare Scotland / England. Plenty will, you for a start 

I also stand by my own point that comparing Scotland with a more rural Country similar in population size would be more informative.

We sit on a huge % of Europe`s natural resources ( I don`t just mean oil ). Our future lies in this and not the casino stuff.

So your future wealth will be built on minerals now that oil has collapsed. What has scotland got? a bit of iron, a bit of zinc? Some coal?

I presume you are fully informed how the price of those commodities are doing at the moment...

And basing an economy on coal, the filthiest of fossil fuels, just as the rest of the world is closing down their coal fired power stations?

Dear oh dear.

edit: surely you dont think you are going to get the required level of growth from renewable energy, do you? Surely not.

 

Edited November 24, 2015 by russycarps

[eFestivals]

9 minutes ago, gary1979666 said:

So, if the comparison is better between countries of a similar size, which countries are the best fit.  How does Scotland compare at the moment; as initially it'll be the difference between now and whenever indy happens.

Salmond used to bang on about "the arc of prosperity", and compare Scotland with Ireland and Iceland. Then those two countries were junk.

So then Salmond picked on Norway, and drops in Sweden now and then too. Unfortunately both of those countries are heading strongly to the right, so they'll have to give those up soon too.
(and anyway, the Norway thing is about promoting grievance, and not about any real comparison).

At the end of the day, such comparisons are meaningless anyway. Why aren't they picking (say) Albania? It's also a small country dominated by those around it.

The countries that get picked for comparison are about giving a false impression, to try and divert from the facts of Scotland.

And the facts of Scotland are exceedingly clear. iScotland would need to make massive public spending cuts (or massive tax rises) to be able to self-fund.

That's of course only the starting position, and it might be able to grow itself out of that - but Salmond's own estimate says it would take 120+ years to grow out of that.

It's beyond doubt: vote indy, be MUCH poorer.

Edited November 24, 2015 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

11 hours ago, LJS said:

I have flown back especially from my winter retreat in the Seychelles

I'm glad to see you're properly offended at how Scotland's poor are being shat on, and are doing your bit to help them. :P

[Comfy Bean]

13 hours ago, eFestivals said:

PMSL at you making the SNP = Scotland. ;lol: .... you really are the myth sheet in action.

The SNP slant is one I agree with. The SNP - just as with the tories - are able to get some things right.

Meanwhile I'm seeing far few snippers saying they could fund an iScotland by not being involved in wars. How odd. :P

 

Laugh away sir but at no point did I suggest SNP = Scotland. I take great care not to say that.

56 out of 59 seats they may have but they do not represent everyone in Scotland......as you know.

[Comfy Bean]

On 23/11/2015, 19:44:23, comfortablynumb1910 said:

I take your point mate. I`m not pretending no-one will compare Scotland / England. Plenty will, you for a start 

I also stand by my own point that comparing Scotland with a more rural Country similar in population size would be more informative.

We sit on a huge % of Europe`s natural resources ( I don`t just mean oil ). Our future lies in this and not the casino stuff.

 

13 hours ago, eFestivals said:

Is that you making an admission that an iScotland will be poorer? It certainly looks like it.

It's progress, I guess.

 

 

Eh ?

[Comfy Bean]

13 hours ago, eFestivals said:

In all seriousness, what is your answer to the 'cave' thing?

Would you still support indy if it meant all of Scotland had to live in caves, and that no circumstances would diminish your support for indy?

Or do you have a reasoned view, where indy has to have a pay-off of some kind to make it worth your support?

It's an easy question for you. Dogma or reason?

In a word NO. If I thought voting in a certain way would result in the good folks of Scotland living in caves then I would not vote for it. I`m brushing over your use of the word serious anywhere near this latest cave business of yours.

Meanwhile back in the real world, some of my countrymen live on the street with no money, home or cave. They are not better together - clearly.

[Comfy Bean]

13 hours ago, russycarps said:

So your future wealth will be built on minerals now that oil has collapsed. What has scotland got? a bit of iron, a bit of zinc? Some coal?

I presume you are fully informed how the price of those commodities are doing at the moment...

And basing an economy on coal, the filthiest of fossil fuels, just as the rest of the world is closing down their coal fired power stations?

Dear oh dear.

 

Evening Russy.

Lets take this one bit at a time.

I never mentioned coal. You mentioned it when you said " Some coal ". It was the first time coal had been mentioned. I have no idea why you mentioned it.

You then said " basing an economy on coal " in the same post ( see above ) I`m not sure why ?

Still in the same post you went on to point out ( to yourself ) that " the rest of the world is closing down their coal fired power stations "

Before a finale of " Dear oh Dear ".

I think we can all agree with the last bit  

[Comfy Bean]

13 hours ago, eFestivals said:

I'm glad to see you're properly offended at how Scotland's poor are being shat on, and are doing your bit to help them. :P

Neil, I could be wrong but I think LJS may have been joking about flying back from the Seychelles. I doubt he even has a butler, not a full time one anyway.

He is playing along with you and Russy`s little game that has us all as selfish, greedy, rich or whatever. In reality you have no idea what drives the vast majority of people who think Scotland should be an independent country.....well you have an idea, you just struggle to understand it 

[russycarps]

10 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Evening Russy.

Lets take this one bit at a time.

I never mentioned coal. You mentioned it when you said " Some coal ". It was the first time coal had been mentioned. I have no idea why you mentioned it.

You then said " basing an economy on coal " in the same post ( see above ) I`m not sure why ?

Still in the same post you went on to point out ( to yourself ) that " the rest of the world is closing down their coal fired power stations "

Before a finale of " Dear oh Dear ".

I think we can all agree with the last bit  

What are the natural resources that are going to cover the immense spending shortfall then?

[Comfy Bean]

13 hours ago, gary1979666 said:

So, if the comparison is better between countries of a similar size, which countries are the best fit.  How does Scotland compare at the moment; as initially it'll be the difference between now and whenever indy happens.

Good question Gary. What we normally have around here is the GERS debate. Neil refuses to acknowledge that Scotland is even a Country............ I know.

Anywayz, lets go with that for  a minute. How does Scotland compare with say the North east region of England ?

What is the average tax take per head ?

If that region is not comparable by size with Scotland pick another one.

My point is that why would we compare Scotland ( rural small population ) with England when it included London.

To try and measure any relative success or otherwise then London would surely be an outlier making any comparison useless.

Difficult NOW to compare Scotland with Norway etc as WE pissed the oil revenues into the wind for decades. As we all know they didn`t.

To be clear, by WE I really mean WE. It`s water under the bridge now. 

[Comfy Bean]

1 minute ago, russycarps said:

What are the natural resources that are going to cover the immense spending shortfall then?

It`s not coal mate that`s for sure and probably why I didn`t mention it ( coal ). 

I`ll get back to you 

[Comfy Bean]

On 23/11/2015, 19:44:23, comfortablynumb1910 said:

We sit on a huge % of Europe`s natural resources ( I don`t just mean oil ). Our future lies in this and not the casino stuff.

 

31 minutes ago, russycarps said:

What are the natural resources that are going to cover the immense spending shortfall then?

I`m not sure I mentioned spending shortfalls but in the spirit of your question :

25% of Europe`s tidal power

10% of Europe`s wave power

25% of Europe`s off shore wind resource.

* Source Friends of the Earth.

For such a small Country these are huge numbers that open up opportunities / jobs / science / research plus the heavy work around taking down/ re-cycling the oil fields.

Not from friends of the earth : Since the 70`s over 40Billion barrells have been extracted. If we adjust for inflation that`s over £300Billion in UK Govt direct tax revenue. £300billion.

By 2020 the Scottish Govt has a target of generating 100% of our leccy consumption from renewable sources.

Add to that we would like to banish nuclear weapons from our shores and lets not forget the shit the casino banking has got us all into.

Edited November 24, 2015 by comfortablynumb1910

[russycarps]

45 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

It`s not coal mate that`s for sure and probably why I didn`t mention it ( coal ). 

I`ll get back to you 

I'll save you the trouble. Zinc, iron ore and....coal.

18 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

 

I`m not sure I mentioned spending shortfalls but in the spirit of your question :

25% of Europe`s tidal power

10% of Europe`s wave power

25% of Europe`s off shore wind resource.

* Source Friends of the Earth.

For such a small Country these are huge numbers that open up opportunities / jobs / science / research plus the heavy work around taking down/ re-cycling the oil fields.

Not from friends of the earth : Since the 70`s over 40Billion barrells have been extracted. If we adjust for inflation that`s over £300Billion in UK Govt direct tax revenue. £300billion.

By 2020 the Scottish Govt has a target of generating 100% of our leccy consumption from renewable sources.

Add to that we would like to banish nuclear weapons from our shores and lets not forget the shit the casino banking has got us all into.

100% electricity from renewables will see bills increase. So the poor will be even poorer.

Great.