The Dirty Independence Question

[eFestivals]

7 hours ago, kaosmark2 said:

Bristol is more equipped for independence from GB than Scotland.

nah, it has bigger border problems.

But a more left wing electorate, a more EU-loving electorate, and better sense and understanding of civic ideals.

[LJS]

5 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

nah, it has bigger border problems.

But a more left wing electorate, a more EU-loving electorate, and better sense and understanding of civic ideals.

But it has a natural leader who surely has the knowledge & wisdom to surmount all obstacles.

I give you president Neil.

 

[eFestivals]

20 minutes ago, LJS said:

But it has a natural leader who surely has the knowledge & wisdom to surmount all obstacles.

I give you president Neil.

 

Nah, not me.

We know what left wing is here, and vote for it. We leave the pretence lies and self delusion to you.

PS: quick, move the convo elsewhere, to avoid the awkwardness of Sturgeon claiming Scotland as super special with rights over other humans.

Edited July 21, 2016 by eFestivals

[LJS]

Neil, I see our mutual friend Kevin has been ruminating again on Scottish independence particularly Scotland's aging population & the challenges that brings & the extent to which immigration can address these challenges. There is no way in which even the most blinkered snipper could present this as Kevin having a change if heart on Indy - indeed he repeats in passing some of his favourite anti- Indy arguments - However, it does  demonstrate a "softer" line & an acknowledgement that we are in a different place post Euref. 

Quote

This differential need for and perspective on migration is for me the strongest argument in favour of Scottish independence

http://chokkablog.blogspot.co.uk/

He references George Kerevan. Here is the article he refers to (in case you hadn't seen it)

http://www.cityam.com/245697/independent-scotland-inside-eu-would-economic-powerhouse

 

[LJS]

Just now, LJS said:

Neil, I see our mutual friend Kevin has been ruminating again on Scottish independence particularly Scotland's aging population & the challenges that brings & the extent to which immigration can address these challenges. There is no way in which even the most blinkered snipper could present this as Kevin having a change if heart on Indy - indeed he repeats in passing some of his favourite anti- Indy arguments - However, it does  demonstrate a "softer" line & an acknowledgement that we are in a different place post Euref. I owe him an apology as I would not have credited him with having such an open mind. 

http://chokkablog.blogspot.co.uk/

He references George Kerevan. Here is the article he refers to (in case you hadn't seen it)

http://www.cityam.com/245697/independent-scotland-inside-eu-would-economic-powerhouse

 

 

[eFestivals]

On 22/07/2016 at 11:27 PM, LJS said:

Neil, I see our mutual friend Kevin has been ruminating again on Scottish independence particularly Scotland's aging population & the challenges that brings & the extent to which immigration can address these challenges. There is no way in which even the most blinkered snipper could present this as Kevin having a change if heart on Indy - indeed he repeats in passing some of his favourite anti- Indy arguments - However, it does  demonstrate a "softer" line & an acknowledgement that we are in a different place post Euref. 

http://chokkablog.blogspot.co.uk/

He references George Kerevan. Here is the article he refers to (in case you hadn't seen it)

http://www.cityam.com/245697/independent-scotland-inside-eu-would-economic-powerhouse

 

but still nothing of replacing thast missing £10Bn

What do you think Sturgeon should abolish first to recoup the money?? Education, or the SNHS?

And again, those hated London bankers to be Scotland's salvation? The very sect that Scots claim are the ones who have undermined the union...? It's fantastic, and just shows that there's no u-turn snippers won't make to keep their dream alive.

I think you might have skipped over the words "post-independence fiscal consolidation should take only five years", cos that's him advocating 5 years of cuts - and quite wonderfully, with no hint of irony, says it'll only take one parliamentary term in perfect Gideon styleeee. When he fails at that 5 years, will you label him as the same failure as Osborne?

I love the mention of Finland without the inclusion of the word 'nokia' or reference to what's happened in Finland since it went tits up, too.

Hey LJS, can I sell you the new forth road bridge? I'll give you a cheap price.

Edited July 25, 2016 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

Hmmmm .... I see Sturgeon thinks it's reckless to hold a referendum the people want, and I see Sturgeon thinks it's reckless to hold a vote that could impoverish a country.

Perhaps someone should buy her a mirror?
 

[LJS]

https://www.commonspace.scot/articles/8911/new-report-scottish-currency-options-post-brexit

Posted without comment. For information.

[eFestivals]

49 minutes ago, LJS said:

https://www.commonspace.scot/articles/8911/new-report-scottish-currency-options-post-brexit

Posted without comment. For information.

I'll have a butchers.

 

 

[eFestivals]

One-off costs of indy #1: £10Bn for a new currency.

(and while I don't claim to have a clue if that's realistic or not, I do have clue-enough to say that's the minimum anyone ever says would be necessary. It would probably need much more when the deficit is considered)

I don't think anyone thinks it's an unrealistic proposition in itself. Backed with enough reserves and pegged to Sterling it should work out well enough tho of course within the confines of the Scottish economy including that missing £10bn that would still need to be found.

The most difficult part of all would be convincing people to make the leap. It's all a bit different from when counties moved to the Euro, because the currency you'd be moving from isn't disappearing, giving people a reason to not change.

(I'm sure the one-off costs of indy list will get to grow quite a bit in the coming months. Nicola's got some costings for establishing new offices of state, I believe. Perhaps ask her what they are? )

Edited July 26, 2016 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

PS: you should read the following para, too ... where it talks about hocking Scotland up to the gills to make it all work.

And you, the guy who took the piss out of Osborne for being a failure, will back it.

 

[LJS]

2 hours ago, eFestivals said:

One-off costs of indy #1: £10Bn for a new currency.

 

According to Neil an independent Scotland will just be a really really posh version of Poundland, where instead of everything costing £1, everything will cost £10Bn.

 

 

 

Neil the £10Bn man

[LJS]

So, one of the things that pretty much everyone agrees on is that Scotland needs more people if it is to succeed particularly on its own. So how have we fared in this area in the past 40 years?

Not very well  - it's a constant downward graph until devolution when the trend started to reverse. Could it be that the more control we have the more attractive a place Scotland is to live? Could it be that with even more control it might be a more attractive place to live?

Could it be that a Scotland in the EU might even be a more attractive place than the rUK?

I don't know and I am quite sure there are other factors influencing things.

I know we'll never get the 10Bn immigrants we need, but maybe, just maybe we might get a few.

http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2013/02/3017/7

[eFestivals]

11 hours ago, LJS said:

According to Neil an independent Scotland will just be a really really posh version of Poundland, where instead of everything costing £1, everything will cost £10Bn.

 

 

 

Neil the £10Bn man

I just love how you post something "for information" that you want to think supports your dream, and then reject the information within it.

The £10Bn I just quoted is what that report says.

That's another £10bn that cannot be spent on making Scotland a better place, and will require sacrifices from Scots - including the poor ones, who you say should be protected at all costs - at the expense of their standard of living.

That £10bn costs of establishing a currency is more than the cost of a year's education for Scotland - and fuck me, LJS, you need that extra education.

Edited July 27, 2016 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

10 hours ago, LJS said:

So, one of the things that pretty much everyone agrees on is that Scotland needs more people if it is to succeed particularly on its own. So how have we fared in this area in the past 40 years?

Not very well  - it's a constant downward graph until devolution when the trend started to reverse. Could it be that the more control we have the more attractive a place Scotland is to live? Could it be that with even more control it might be a more attractive place to live?

Could it be that a Scotland in the EU might even be a more attractive place than the rUK?

I don't know and I am quite sure there are other factors influencing things.

I know we'll never get the 10Bn immigrants we need, but maybe, just maybe we might get a few.

http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2013/02/3017/7

Scotland is already in the EU, so why isn't Scotland somewhere people from the EU want to live, and why do you think they suddenly might do when nothing about Scotland would have changed?

Short of paying people to come and live in Scotland, what more can you do?

(but if you're paying people to live in Scotland, why not just pay Scots not to leave it in the first place? then you don't even need those EU migrants)

 

 

[russycarps]

4 hours ago, eFestivals said:

Scotland is already in the EU, so why isn't Scotland somewhere people from the EU want to live, and why do you think they suddenly might do when nothing about Scotland would have changed?

Short of paying people to come and live in Scotland, what more can you do?

(but if you're paying people to live in Scotland, why not just pay Scots not to leave it in the first place? then you don't even need those EU migrants)

 

 

Even people fleeing from warzones hate it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/25/syrian-refugees-resettled-on-remote-scottish-island-of-bute-comp/

 

[eFestivals]

11 minutes ago, russycarps said:

Even people fleeing from warzones hate it.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/25/syrian-refugees-resettled-on-remote-scottish-island-of-bute-comp/

 

that's sad

I mean the whole situation for those refugees where the locals have acted with the best intention - well, apart from the bit where they say "we had to pay a lot of money to bring you here". That part is more than a little disgusting.

I've no idea what realistic solution there might be for both of those refugees and for Scotland's lack-of-immigration problem. The only way an iScotland could attract more immigrants would be to open it up to the rest of the world, but doing that would then put it outside Britain's Common Travel Area and see borders introduced - which is likely to cause a worse effect than the cure is meant to fix.

[LJS]

21 hours ago, eFestivals said:

One-off costs of indy #1: £10Bn for a new currency.

(and while I don't claim to have a clue if that's realistic or not, I do have clue-enough to say that's the minimum anyone ever says would be necessary. It would probably need much more when the deficit is considered)

I don't think anyone thinks it's an unrealistic proposition in itself. Backed with enough reserves and pegged to Sterling it should work out well enough tho of course within the confines of the Scottish economy including that missing £10bn that would still need to be found.

The most difficult part of all would be convincing people to make the leap. It's all a bit different from when counties moved to the Euro, because the currency you'd be moving from isn't disappearing, giving people a reason to not change.

(I'm sure the one-off costs of indy list will get to grow quite a bit in the coming months. Nicola's got some costings for establishing new offices of state, I believe. Perhaps ask her what they are? )

I believe this story originated in a mail on Sunday article. Apparently it may not  be entirely true.

[eFestivals]

26 minutes ago, LJS said:

I believe this story originated in a mail on Sunday article. Apparently it may not  be entirely true.

eh? which 'story'?

The first part is a comment on the currency doc you linked to, that says it'll cost £10Bn.

The 2nd is a comment on a person who claims to know what's best for you and Scotland, who's presumably done the sums to be making grand statements about what's best. If she hasn't, what the feck does she waste her time on instead and she's talking bollocks, and if she has - why won't she tell you about them?

For a party that claims to know what's best for you, they're very reluctant to talk about what they've got planned for you. Have you ever stopped and wondered why?

[Comfy Bean]

4 hours ago, eFestivals said:

eh? which 'story'?

The first part is a comment on the currency doc you linked to, that says it'll cost £10Bn.

The 2nd is a comment on a person who claims to know what's best for you and Scotland, who's presumably done the sums to be making grand statements about what's best. If she hasn't, what the feck does she waste her time on instead and she's talking bollocks, and if she has - why won't she tell you about them?

For a party that claims to know what's best for you, they're very reluctant to talk about what they've got planned for you. Have you ever stopped and wondered why?

Patience :-)

[LJS]

5 hours ago, eFestivals said:

eh? which 'story'?

The first part is a comment on the currency doc you linked to, that says it'll cost £10Bn.

The 2nd is a comment on a person who claims to know what's best for you and Scotland, who's presumably done the sums to be making grand statements about what's best. If she hasn't, what the feck does she waste her time on instead and she's talking bollocks, and if she has - why won't she tell you about them?

For a party that claims to know what's best for you, they're very reluctant to talk about what they've got planned for you. Have you ever stopped and wondered why?

I was referring to the Telegraph story that russy linked to the Syrian refugees on Bute. Apologies for appearing to reply to a completely different post - maybe my fault maybe your crazzy quote retention system. 

Anyway...

Syrian refugees share their love of Bute

ttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-36904315

EDIT: here's dome more stuff

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10210046087648386&id=1222422319

 

Bute is lovely by the way, although i guess its not everyone's cup of tea and it does have a fair few auld yins. Not a million miles from Comfy, which can only be a good thing.

Ininteresting fact - the main town on the island is called Rothesay. This is the Duke of Rothesay.

 

Here's a song about Rothesay

 

 

Edited July 27, 2016 by LJS

[LJS]

12 hours ago, eFestivals said:

I just love how you post something "for information" that you want to think supports your dream, and then reject the information within it.

The £10Bn I just quoted is what that report says.

That's another £10bn that cannot be spent on making Scotland a better place, and will require sacrifices from Scots - including the poor ones, who you say should be protected at all costs - at the expense of their standard of living.

That £10bn costs of establishing a currency is more than the cost of a year's education for Scotland - and fuck me, LJS, you need that extra education.

At the time I posted that, I had only read the summary so you may have a half hearted  mealy mouthed apology for me overdoing the £10Bn stuff. But it does seem to be your magic number & even without the currency bit, you drop it into every thread you can possibly fit it into.

I linked to the article because I thought it made a useful contribution to the debate. You may remember (although you probably choose not to as you think I slavishly followed every word in the famous White Paper) that I often questioned Big Eck's fanatical determination to consider any currency alternatives. 

Every option will have costs and benefits. You focus on the costs... well of course you do. All I know is other countries have done it & survived. 

It's good to see that there is some serious thought going into how we can make an independent Scotland work.

 

 

[LJS]

12 hours ago, eFestivals said:

Scotland is already in the EU, so why isn't Scotland somewhere people from the EU want to live, and why do you think they suddenly might do when nothing about Scotland would have changed?

Short of paying people to come and live in Scotland, what more can you do?

(but if you're paying people to live in Scotland, why not just pay Scots not to leave it in the first place? then you don't even need those EU migrants)

 

 

When Scotland had control of nothing the population declined steadily.

When Scotland got a wee bit of control over some things the trend reversed & population started to rise.

Imagine if we had control of everything.

[eFestivals]

10 hours ago, LJS said:

I was referring to the Telegraph story that russy linked to the Syrian refugees on Bute.

wherever it originated, presumably the unhappy quotes of the Syrians are true?

Bute may be lovely, but that doesn't mean that people used to city life will be happy there - and the vast majority of Syrians are used to city life. It's great that places like Bute are willing to take refugees, but that doesn't mean it's necessarily great for the Syrians who get sent to Bute.

The only thing of relevance here is that it helps outline how much more difficult it is for Scotland to be attractive to immigrants, because it has fewer places where they might settle where those immigrants might establish the sort of new life they imagined. The attraction of 'the west' to immigrants (from within the EU or out of it) tends to be the modernity of the cities and not the rural backwaters (where Scotland has proportionally many more than the rest of the UK, due to its geographic position and its natural geography).

[eFestivals]

10 hours ago, LJS said:

At the time I posted that, I had only read the summary so you may have a half hearted  mealy mouthed apology for me overdoing the £10Bn stuff. But it does seem to be your magic number & even without the currency bit, you drop it into every thread you can possibly fit it into.

There's the £10Bn that the Scottish Govt say that I repeat.
There's the £10bn from that doc you linked to that I repeat.

Both these truths are Scottish truths - you know, Scotland run by Scots for the Scots, and from the mouths of Scots - but apparently they're both the lie of an Englishman.

FFS. Scotland is doomed, doomed I say - whether indy or not - if it's populated with brains like yours.

 

10 hours ago, LJS said:

I linked to the article because I thought it made a useful contribution to the debate. You may remember (although you probably choose not to as you think I slavishly followed every word in the famous White Paper) that I often questioned Big Eck's fanatical determination to consider any currency alternatives. 

And I don't disagree.

One of the things to be debated is the *£10bn cost of a new currency, which is £10Bn that cannot be spent on making the lives of Scots better, and will in fact make the lives of Scots £10bn poorer.

(* and of course it need to be kept in mind that the cost could be a lot lot more than £10bn, but is unlikely to be anything less).

 

10 hours ago, LJS said:

Every option will have costs and benefits. You focus on the costs... well of course you do. All I know is other countries have done it & survived. 

A man who is stabbed often survives - but that doesn't mean that man welcomes the avoidable pain of being stabbed.

 

10 hours ago, LJS said:

It's good to see that there is some serious thought going into how we can make an independent Scotland work.

It would be even better if you joined in the serious thought instead of sticking rigidly to the laughable.

Like when you say that money works differently in a sovereign state, and can create resources by magic.

If you want to be taken seriously and as a working brain, make your brain work.