The Dirty Independence Question

[eFestivals]

6 hours ago, LJS said:

In other news, i see the latest survation poll has the Indy vote at 51/49 against Indy.

And in continuing news, I've just read a piece on Scotland where the over-whelming opinions of those indy supporting snipppers were:-

1. "the oil is a bonus". Same as ever, people didn't even read the white paper.

2. "Scotland contributes as much as anywhere" without reference to it spending 20% extra. Same as ever, people are ignorant on Scotland's financial position..

3. "Scotland can have the UK's EU membership". I think some people need to read some EU treaties, don't you?

4. "if an indy Scotland joined the EU it wouldn't have to join the Euro,  just look at Sweden". I suggest they look at the date Sweden joined and the terms it was given then, and compare that with what the current treaties say and the entrance terms all newer joinees got.

5. "the EU would be desperate for an iScotland to join on special terms", as said by the same people who say there's no way the EU will bend over to accommodate Cameron's wants of special terms for a much more important European economy, that are lesser special terms than the SNP claimed they'd get in the white paper.

The best one tho was new to me, that claimed to address the currency issue. And that's that Scotland wouldn't create a new currency ... but would instead create three of them.
(yep, I really did see someone saying that, which only goes to show how widely Dundee cake gets eaten )

If all those supporters had a grasp of the facts all of those claims evaporate and so does much of the support, and if they don't grasp the facts much of Scotland's current decent lifestyle evaporates... but let's just pretend that's completely irrelevant for what actually happens, whether they grasp the facts or not.

 

Edited January 16, 2016 by eFestivals

[LJS]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

And in continuing news, I've just read a piece on Scotland where the over-whelming opinions of those indy supporting snipppers were:-

1. "the oil is a bonus". Same as ever, people didn't even read the white paper.

2. "Scotland contributes as much as anywhere" without reference to it spending 20% extra. Same as ever, people are ignorant on Scotland's financial position..

3. "Scotland can have the UK's EU membership". I think some people need to read some EU treaties, don't you?

4. "if an indy Scotland joined the EU it wouldn't have to join the Euro,  just look at Sweden". I suggest they look at the date Sweden joined and the terms it was given then, and compare that with what the current treaties say and the entrance terms all newer joinees got.

5. "the EU would be desperate for an iScotland to join on special terms", as said by the same people who say there's no way the EU will bend over to accommodate Cameron's wants of special terms for a much more important European economy, that are lesser special terms than the SNP claimed they'd get in the white paper.

The best one tho was new to me, that claimed to address the currency issue. And that's that Scotland wouldn't create a new currency ... but would instead create three of them.
(yep, I really did see someone saying that, which only goes to show how widely Dundee cake gets eaten )

If all those supporters had a grasp of the facts all of those claims evaporate and so does much of the support, and if they don't grasp the facts much of Scotland's current decent lifestyle evaporates... but let's just pretend that's completely irrelevant for what actually happens, whether they grasp the facts or not.

 

No link to this article?

[eFestivals]

10 minutes ago, LJS said:

No link to this article?

You won't find those comments in the article, you'll find them below the article, and which compared to the likes of WoS are the "intelligent" side of the indy debate from snippers.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/14/brexit-golden-opportunity-nicola-sturgeon-nightmare

Does their inability to reference facts shame the cause you support, or does it make you feel all nice and warm inside?

Edited January 16, 2016 by eFestivals

[LJS]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

You won't find those comments in the article, you'll find them below the article, and which compared to the likes of WoS are the "intelligent" side of the indy debate from snippers.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jan/14/brexit-golden-opportunity-nicola-sturgeon-nightmare

Does their inability to reference facts shame the cause you support, or does it make you feel all nice and warm inside?

Oh dear, you''ve been plumbing the BTL depths again, & oh what a surprise, you found some nutters. 

 

Well done. You have mastered one of the basic skills of modern journalism.

[eFestivals]

15 minutes ago, LJS said:

Oh dear, you''ve been plumbing the BTL depths again, & oh what a surprise, you found some nutters. 

Well done. You have mastered one of the basic skills of modern journalism.

What's so hard to find is a view that isn't from the nutters. Your denials here are just the same as them.

I've not been able to find one online, so perhaps you could point me at a source like that?

You know, where the huge size of the deficit is properly faced up to, and a plan (outline will do) for how it would be dealt with is given.

(PS: to save you a bit of time, I'll tell you that the SNP have admitted they don't have one, so you've no need to go searching there)

[eFestivals]

20 hours ago, eFestivals said:

What's so hard to find is a view that isn't from the nutters.

I've not been able to find one online, so perhaps you could point me at a source like that?

I'm glad we've cleared that up.

 

[eFestivals]

Remember all those claims about how rUK would *need* to have a currency union with iScotland, because without the oil money Sterling would be fucked because its balance of payments is propped up with the foreign exchange from Scotland's oil?

You must have seen some, they were pretty common - and even the esteemed and lauded Stiglitz said it - tho most of the noise came from the same people who say Gidiot doesn't have the first idea what he's doing.

Putting aside the stupidity of wanting a currency union with a currency that you think is so weak that it's about to die without your help, it should be noticed that right now there's no foreign exchange earnings from oil worth talking about, and Sterling continues to survive OK.

Which either means those people were talking out of their arses and Sterling can survive OK without the foreign exchange from oil, or Gidiot is doing an exceedingly good job of managing the economic in almost-impossible conditions. Take your pick.

It's just another thing where the snippers claims have been disproven by the facts, and so another line of supporting argument will need to be made for why rUK will do what it says it doesn't want to do for the glory of iScoltand next time around (if there is a next time).

And yet another of those things where no one in Scotland has a meaningful answer to the problems that defeated independence last time around, to add to the massive deficit and the huge cuts in public spending that would cause.

So that's two of the main indie claims put to bed, of the currency issue, and the self funding issue.

The one still not utterly demolished in many snippers minds are the EU claims*, and yet they were demolished even before the indyref but the "different politics" Scottish Govt decided to not mention the letters from the EU to Scotland by pretending they didn't exist (they've been public record for a long time tho)

(* that the EU couldn't kick an iScotland out [yet an iScotland wouldn't be 'in' in the first place to be kicked out], that the EU would be 'desperate' to have an iScotland as a member, and that the EU would bend over backwards and give iScotland more opt-outs than any current member has.

The claim that an iScotlamd already meets EU entry criteria was never a serious claim - I hope [are people really that stupid ] - so that part was always demolished)

Does anyone in Scotland have new answers to these things? Nope.

[eFestivals]

30 minutes ago, tonyblair said:

anyone stumbling in on this thread might be confused into thinking you're an outright racist towards Scotland (if Scots were a 'race')

Only if they're as stupid as you.

Anyone with a working brain can see I'm knocking down the lies that were made by the pro-indy side, that would have had a massive and hugely bad impact onto all Scots.

I'm happy for Scots to bring those consequences onto themselves if they consciously want them because they feel other advantages make it worthwhile, but the very fact that most pro-indy people won't even face up to those facts gets to prove that's not the case. Most people choose to believe - on the basis of nothing at all (as can be seen from the pro-indy posters in this thread) - those consequences can be avoided.

Those snippers say they don't like the cuts from Westminster. How do you think they might get on when they'd have the biggest deficit in Europe (as the Scottish govts own figures prove) - even bigger than Greece?

But hey, you're welcome to your tiny mind.

[eFestivals]

PS: i'll also point out that if you think I'm an anti-Scottish racist for pointing out the snippers lies, I guess that also makes approximately 50% of Scots to be anti-Scottish racists too for not believing them too.

But hey, when you can't deal with the message just attack the messenger instead, it's what all the smart people do.

 

Edited January 22, 2016 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

53 minutes ago, tonyblair said:

 

I'm criticising one particular political stance because of its obvious flaws.

It's as racist as it would be racist to criticise the tories and their supporters.

Yep, that's how stupid you are.

 

[eFestivals]

14 minutes ago, tonyblair said:

yea right. It's just one singular point you make against the Scots

The points I make are against snippers.

I see you've swallowed the myth that the SNP and Scotland are the same thing, too.

Keep it up tony.

 

[Comfy Bean]

10 hours ago, eFestivals said:

Remember all those claims about how rUK would *need* to have a currency union with iScotland, because without the oil money Sterling would be fucked because its balance of payments is propped up with the foreign exchange from Scotland's oil?

 Remember them ?

Go on then....one quote from anyone here saying anything like this.

[Comfy Bean]

9 hours ago, tonyblair said:

anyone stumbling in on this thread might be confused into thinking you're an outright racist towards Scotland (if Scots were a 'race')

Race ? According to some we are not even a Country !

Nice to see you popping in here Tony. I assume you have no horse to back here so as an efest neutral can I ask you a quick question just for fun ?

Have you ever read on here any posts from the NO side of our discussion that implied Scotland was either too wee, too poor or too stupid to be an independent Country ?

[Comfy Bean]

4 hours ago, eFestivals said:

I see you've swallowed the myth that the SNP and Scotland are the same thing, too.

Keep it up tony.

 

I`m glad to see you realise they are not the same thing. At last 

Could you explain why you continually refer to the SNP white paper ?

" Should Scotland be an Independent Country ? " 

A large number of Labour voters voted YES.

 

 

[Comfy Bean]

6 hours ago, eFestivals said:

 

It's as racist as it would be racist to criticise the tories and their supporters.

 

I agree. In the unlikely event of you criticising the Tories it would not be racist.

Better together with Dave etc........

When Scotland returns 1 ( one ) Tory MP it is obviously not racist, it`s just we want something different.

[eFestivals]

 

9 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Have you ever read on here any posts from the NO side of our discussion that implied Scotland was either too wee, too poor or too stupid to be an independent Country ?

It's only ever you that says that here.

Tho the party you support does have a similar view.

"For Scotland to accept fiscal autonomy without inbuilt UK-wide fiscal balancing would be tantamount to economic suicide."
George Kerevan, MP at Westminster for the SNP, in an article published in The National (the newspaper of an independent Scotland)

http://www.thenational.scot/news/george-kerevan-federalism-or-bust-snp-mandate-now-goes-far-beyond-smith-powers.2787

[eFestivals]

9 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

it`s just we want something different.

You do.

Unfortunately you can't have the 'different' you want without tackling the financial issues which make the different that you want unaffordable.

And unfortunately, no one has a plan which will address those financial issues, apart from the Salmond plan of crossing your fingers and waiting for 120 years, and if everything goes in Scotland's favour for all of that 120 years, you'll be sorted.

[eFestivals]

9 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Could you explain why you continually refer to the SNP white paper ?

Because it was full of lies, that NO-ers said at that the time, which you brushed off as lies and bluster.

Unfortunately for you, the situation has changed so fast the lies are now clearly exposed as lies, for everyone but those who are so wrapped in the flag that everything is obscured.

 

9 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

" Should Scotland be an Independent Country ? " 

A large number of Labour voters voted YES.

Yep, a large number of people who'd previously voted for all sorts of parties got blinded by the lies.

And mostly, they're still blinded by the lies.

When you'll accept that a self-funding Scotland would be 'economic suicide' for Scottish standards of living, get back to me.

[russycarps]

13 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Race ? According to some we are not even a Country !

Nice to see you popping in here Tony. I assume you have no horse to back here so as an efest neutral can I ask you a quick question just for fun ?

Have you ever read on here any posts from the NO side of our discussion that implied Scotland was either too wee, too poor or too stupid to be an independent Country ?

Of course it could be independent.

It would also have to impose massive tax rises or massive cuts to public spending.

I wonder how many of the yes voters were aware of this?

[Comfy Bean]

7 hours ago, eFestivals said:

 

It's only ever you that says that here.

Tho the party you support does have a similar view.

"For Scotland to accept fiscal autonomy without inbuilt UK-wide fiscal balancing would be tantamount to economic suicide."
George Kerevan, MP at Westminster for the SNP, in an article published in The National (the newspaper of an independent Scotland)

http://www.thenational.scot/news/george-kerevan-federalism-or-bust-snp-mandate-now-goes-far-beyond-smith-powers.2787

I didn`t interpret his comments as being " too poor ". Especially when you read what he said and not just lift one line from the middle ofit 

 

The historic Rubicon of May 7 extends beyond revolutionising the Westminster system. Scotland voted SNP as a reaction to being told, after voting No in September, that it should be seen but not heard. This patronising attitude was crystalised in Ed Miliband’s refusal to countenance any working agreement with the SNP, as fellow progressive parties, to lock the Tories out of Downing Street. All Miliband succeeded in doing was boosting SNP support among No-voters, guaranteeing Thursday’s landslide.

It is now inconceivable that David Cameron can reject Scottish demands for greater home rule, given that all three mainstream Westminster parties – Tory, Labour and Lib Dem alike – have minimal legitimate authority in Scotland in the wake of May 7. The general election was not a mandate for a second referendum – a point reiterated time after time by Nicola Sturgeon, whatever contrary hares are set running by the battered and bruised Westminster establishment. Nevertheless, the SNP’s electoral success is undoubtedly a mandate for going far beyond the hastily conceived ragbag of new powers contained in the Smith Commission documents.

Put another way, May 7 will go down in the constitutional history books as the moment that the UK was launched on an irrevocable trajectory towards federalism – or bust. If the Westminster system fumbles that move to a federal union of equal British nations, Scotland can legitimately claim it has no recourse but to seek a second referendum.

The constitutional ball is well and truly in David Cameron’s end of the field. Cameron’s opening gambit may well be to offer Scotland fiscal autonomy, in return for termination of the Barnett Formula (a mechanism that matches per capita spending changes across the UK constituent nations). We all know that in present UK economic circumstances a fiscally autonomous Scotland would face a significant budget deficit.

For Scotland to accept fiscal autonomy without inbuilt UK-wide fiscal balancing would be tantamount to economic suicide. However, all federal systems have mechanisms for cross subsidising regions in economic need by regions in surplus. To deny that to Scotland suggests a disingenuous Mr Cameron is hoping to derail any move to Scottish Hole Rule within the UK. Either way, May 7 is a forking of the constitutional road.

BUT we speak only of Scotland. Unexpectedly, May 7 has detonated a political hydrogen bomb under Labour in England as well. Months of glacial opinion polls had pointed to a hung parliament - but with the sporting prospect that a progressive alliance between Labour and a midwife SNP would put Miliband into Downing Street. Instead we have witnessed Miliband and Ed Balls defenestrated and Labour plunged into total – and possibly existential – crisis. Like our apocryphal duchess in the Savoy, the people will never stand for it!

 

 

Miliband was quick to blame the SNP for Labour’s defeat, citing a mysterious “upsurge in nationalism” since the No vote last September – in whose absence Labour would have tiptoed into Downing Street.

Of course, this is arithmetic nonsense. Even if all 56 SNP seats had ended up in the Labour column, David Cameron would still have his tiny majority. The real story of the May 7 upset is that Labour was unable to win target seats in its English northern heartlands because working class voters preferred the sleezy, immigrant-bashing populism of Ukip. Rather than take on Farage and his bierkeller candidates, Miliband famously unveiled his own political tombstone. It read: “Controls on immigration”.

As we have proved in Scotland, the way to keep Ukip’s nasty populism in its political box is to fight it every step of the way. But nice Mr Miliband, the son of an immigrant Jewish Marxist, told English working class voters he would “control immigration”. He thereby legitimised blaming immigrants for low wages and pressures on the NHS. Little wonder that those voters decided to vote for the real Ukip populists rather than a Labour Party so scared of Daily Mail and Daily Express headlines that it sold its political soul for votes that never materialised.

[Comfy Bean]

3 hours ago, russycarps said:

Of course it could be independent.

It would also have to impose massive tax rises or massive cuts to public spending.

I wonder how many of the yes voters were aware of this?

I am pretty certain that the folk in Scotland on both sides of the Indy debate are very much aware of the Tory cuts and have been for years.

I am in favour of a more progressive tax system. " Robbing the rich " as Neil puts it !

[Comfy Bean]

17 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

I`m glad to see you realise they are not the same thing. At last 

Could you explain why you continually refer to the SNP white paper ?

" Should Scotland be an Independent Country ? " 

A large number of Labour voters voted YES.

 

 

 

Neil, you do realise that we weren`t voting on the SNP white paper ?

 

[micawber]

50 minutes ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

I am pretty certain that the folk in Scotland on both sides of the Indy debate are very much aware of the Tory cuts and have been for years.

I am in favour of a more progressive tax system. " Robbing the rich " as Neil puts it !

The progressive taxation approach is quite laudable but there is a limit to which it can be deployed before returns fall off the cliff. That incremental tax take is highly unlikely to head off deep cuts. For Ref2 the pro-indy parties will need to be honest about what is and isn't possible. Get independence if the Scots wish it, but get it honestly.

[Comfy Bean]

4 hours ago, micawber said:

The progressive taxation approach is quite laudable but there is a limit to which it can be deployed before returns fall off the cliff. That incremental tax take is highly unlikely to head off deep cuts. For Ref2 the pro-indy parties will need to be honest about what is and isn't possible. Get independence if the Scots wish it, but get it honestly.

Fair points well made I think micawber. An Indy Scotland would be governed by a Labour or SNP Government and a different path on tax would be a sure thing in my opinion. As would be a different foreign policy and a different view on nuclear weapons. We know about the cuts and the shrinking of the state at the hands of the Tories but what is always forgotten by the unionist types on here is that at some point down the line our finances and policies would be different to what we have today. We would be on a different path with different priorities than what we see under the Tories. With over half of England voting Tory or UKIP ( as they are entitled to do ) the maths / geography means we are tied in even though we returned one Tory only.

We ALL agreed that the way the referendum engaged the yoof was a good thing and we now know that a huge % of the younger generation prefer going our own way. Leaving a side the history of Scotland over the centuries, imagine we were starting a fresh from today. Why would Scotland with it`s own Parliament etc not want to take decisions for itself. Why be led by another Country`s Govt when the politics of the people in both Countries are so different. It`s a no brainer 

Everyone on here seems to agree that Scotland is perfectly capable of running it`s own affairs. Unfortunately the unionist`s will continue to talk about the current mess of the cash ( under Gideon ) and the white paper predictions of one Scottish party as a deflection tactic to what we are actually talking about here....... Oh and the oil price.

 

 

[Comfy Bean]

Following on from the many posts about the job losses in Aberdeen........news this week that even taking this into account....

Employment in Scotland reached a record level between September and November, according to official figures.

The Office for National Statistics said 21,000 more Scots were in work, compared with the previous quarter, bringing the total to 2,631,000.

Scotland now has the highest employment rate out of the four UK nations, and is outperforming the UK as a whole.

For the first time, employment in Scotland is now higher than it was before the recession.

The rate north of the border reached 74.9% over the quarter - above the level of 74.6% recorded prior to the economic crisis.

Meanwhile, Scottish unemployment fell by 11,000 and now stands at 152,000.

The unemployment rate was down by 0.7% to 5.4% - the largest quarterly fall since the summer of 2014.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-35357497