The Dirty Independence Question

[LJS]

17 minutes ago, LOCHLAND5 said:

 

 

The Sky Data survey of more than 2,000 people with registered addresses in Scotland put the Prime Minister's approval rating at six percentage points higher than Scotland's First Minister.

It did. Who selected the 2,000 people?  were they representative of the population of Scotland? were the results weighted to take account of previous voting?

YouGov which does all these things found Sturgeon with a rating 26 points better than May.

I have supplied YouGov's datasets.

I'll await you supplying Sky's datasets.

[LOCHLAND5]

25 minutes ago, LJS said:

It did. Who selected the 2,000 people?  were they representative of the population of Scotland? were the results weighted to take account of previous voting?

YouGov which does all these things found Sturgeon with a rating 26 points better than May.

I have supplied YouGov's datasets.

I'll await you supplying Sky's datasets.

Sky ,BBC and other news groups usually use Ipsos MORI and GFK NOP for their opinion poll stuff which is always the most credible and accurate.

i have no problem with Scottish people but always been a bit confused by square sausage ....... it's a square burger at best sausage comes in a skin! Thats about all I can say really.

[kaosmark2]

41 minutes ago, LJS said:

I'm not sure that you have any evidence that Stuart Campbell is doing that either. If he is, he is even madder than you think- why would he target you? I don't want to disappoint you, Kaos, but I don't think you are a major threat to the independence project.

I don't think I'm any threat at all. I think he deliberately provokes his followers into targeting any person or comment that criticises his beloved. I think he's a mental, hate-filled bully.

[LJS]

6 hours ago, LOCHLAND5 said:

Sky ,BBC and other news groups usually use Ipsos MORI and GFK NOP for their opinion poll stuff which is always the most credible and accurate.

i have no problem with Scottish people but always been a bit confused by square sausage ....... it's a square burger at best sausage comes in a skin! Thats about all I can say really.

Don't diss the square sossij: in a roll wi a fried tattie scone & a splash o broon sauce. Heaven.

[eFestivals]

9 hours ago, LJS said:

"It's our currency, it's a fully tradeable international currency; " and this had been widely reported.

Yep, her lie has been widely reported, and only shows her stupidity and that of those who believe her.

It's the UK's institution. Scotland would be leaving the UK and UK institutions. That's how indy works, as detailed in international law.

It'll be iScotland's currency as much as the dollar is iScotland's currency. You can use it, but you can't print it - and not being able to print it means a lot when your govt is spending 25% more than its revenues. Think Greece.

Deciding on a currency is merely the starting point from which the other massive problems Scotland faces can then start to be looked at.

[eFestivals]

9 hours ago, LJS said:

My reading of this, is that she isn't about to speculate about currency while her boffins are working on the masterplan.

but she's said iScotland is heading for the EU. That means there can be only one 'masterplan', which is *EXACTLY* as I said.

Scotland's own currency, followed by an absolute Scottish commitment to joining the Euro.

Who the fuck needs a commission for that? Only the brain dead.

[eFestivals]

9 hours ago, LJS said:

Most hardline  opponents of Indy don't think a plausible currency and economic plan is possible which makes one wonder why they are all so desperate to stop indyref 2.

Most soft and hardline opponents of indy do maths.

Most soft and hardline opponents think that the SNP's approach to maths needs exposing at all points, so that Scots who are GERS deniers wake up to what they're REALLY supporting.

A plausible currency only requires creating your own. The problem with that side of things is not with any opponents, it's with indy supporters who don't support the idea of a change of currency.

The problems are around paying the bills when spending is 25% more than revenues. What currency that's done in doesn't make much difference.

[eFestivals]

9 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

Neil can you perhaps put a rough estimate on the numbers or percentage of YES voters you believe are driven by anti English sentiment.

There's no doubt in my mind it's greater than 10%. Beyond that it's plucking a number from the air.

10% is not insignificant, when some are going around proclaiming there's only niceties in indy.

 

[eFestivals]

7 hours ago, LJS said:

However the world would be a better place without the RevStu's fanatical following.

Which only proves my point.

Remember those webstats I provided yesterday, about how WoS is the leading website of indy?

[LJS]

2 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

There's no doubt in my mind it's greater than 10%. Beyond that it's plucking a number from the air.

10% is not insignificant, when some are going around proclaiming there's only niceties in indy.

 

How is 10% not plucking a number from the air?

[eFestivals]

7 hours ago, LJS said:

It did. Who selected the 2,000 people?  were they representative of the population of Scotland? were the results weighted to take account of previous voting?

YouGov which does all these things found Sturgeon with a rating 26 points better than May.

I have supplied YouGov's datasets.

I'll await you supplying Sky's datasets.

I've gotta laugh at your defence of yougov.

The normal snipper line is "only idiots believe the polls" and "the polls are a unionist plot" with lots of references to yougov matey's ties to both labour and the tories.

While you big them up, even while they're returning the worst numbers showing indy support.

[LJS]

Just now, eFestivals said:

Which only proves my point.

Remember those webstats I provided yesterday, about how WoS IS the leading website of indy?

So lots of people but WoS. I'd happily bet that a significant proportion are anti-Indy. Otherwise, how are so many NOers so very well informed of his views and activities? 

[eFestivals]

2 minutes ago, LJS said:

How is 10% not plucking a number from the air?

it's based on evidence, while my comment for beyond 10% would be an opinion about that evidence.

I know you have problems with evidence, even when I make clear I'm not prepared to over-speculate around it. 

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, LJS said:

So lots of people but WoS. I'd happily bet that a significant proportion are anti-Indy. Otherwise, how are so many NOers so very well informed of his views and activities? 

I visit WoS less than once every three months (it's probably less than once every nine months, in fact).

Yet I know about anything they publish that makes some waves within a day of publication. I know what the claims are and I know what the flaws are.

I guess that's because what i read BTL is a waste of time, right?

[LJS]

7 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I've gotta laugh at your defence of yougov.

The normal snipper line is "only idiots believe the polls" and "the polls are a unionist plot" with lots of references to yougov matey's ties to both labour and the tories.

While you big them up, even while they're returning the worst numbers showing indy support.

I'm suspicious of all polls. However I am less suspicious of ones where we know who carried out the polling & how. Unless I missed it, Sky failed to do that.

[LJS]

6 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I visit WoS less than once every three months (it's probably less than once every nine months, in fact).

Yet I know about anything they publish that makes some waves within a day of publication. I know what the claims are and I know what the flaws are.

I guess that's because what i read BTL is a waste of time, right?

& where are your BTL cronies getting their info?

[eFestivals]

9 minutes ago, LJS said:

& where are your BTL cronies getting their info?

those nutty indy supporters that are talking about WoS are getting their info from... can you guess where?

FFS. :lol:

It's very largely snippers who read WoS, and fund it too. Is that really news to you?

Trying to suggest that WoS's readership is really mostly angry unionists is about the lowest claim you've made yet, and shows just how much you'll deny anything inconvenient.

Now, back to GERS, and how spending 25% more than revenues is a problem that cannot be wished away as 'meaningless' as you you often try to do.

What's today's solution, LJS? Are you still claiming addition and subtraction works differently after indy?

[LJS]

7 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

those nutty indy supporters that are talking about WoS are getting their info from... can you guess where?

FFS.

It's very largely snippers who read WoS, and fund it too. Is that really news to you?

Trying to suggest that WoS's readership is really mostly angry unionists is about the lowest claim you've made yet, and shows just how much you'll deny anything inconvenient.

Neil, please read what I said. It certainly wasn't anything about wings readers being mostly angry unionists. I have no doubt some of its hits are not from Indy supporters. Hard to put a % on it ...I'm sure it's at least 10%. Any higher would be plucking figures out of the air.

7 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Now, back to GERS, and how spending 25% more than revenues is a problem that cannot be wished away as 'meaningless' as you you often try to do.

What's today's solution, LJS? Are you still claiming addition and subtraction works differently after indy?

Kevin's graphs £1bn+ per year deficit reduction. Indy unlikely for 5 years. Let's see how things are looking then.

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, LJS said:

Neil, please read what I said. It certainly wasn't anything about wings readers being mostly angry unionists. I have no doubt some of its hits are not from Indy supporters. Hard to put a % on it ...I'm sure it's at least 10%. Any higher would be plucking figures out of the air.

I form my opinions from engagement, you form your opinions from rejection.

What was it you've said about how indy is a right-minded campaign, again?

[eFestivals]

4 minutes ago, LJS said:

Kevin's graphs £1bn+ per year deficit reduction. Indy unlikely for 5 years. Let's see how things are looking then.

Kevin's graphs of tory cuts.

Tory cuts that you now endorse.

Tory cuts that have about ended.

So let's see how it looks even this august, while Scottish growth continues to lag behind rUK ... and can you guess why...?

For all the while you're steaming ahead with uncertainty, there's a certainty that Scotland will fall further behind.

Edited March 21, 2017 by eFestivals

[LJS]

7 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I form my opinions from engagement, you form your opinions from rejection.

What was it you've said about how indy is a right-minded campaign, again?

No idea, Neil. You tell me. It's what you usually do.

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, LJS said:

No idea, Neil. You tell me. It's what you usually do.

like so many of your posts, that's one's only bullshit too.

Still, anything to avoid a discussion on the facts, eh?

 

Edited March 21, 2017 by eFestivals

[LJS]

7 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Kevin's graphs of tory cuts.

No.

7 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Tory cuts that you now endorse.

No.

7 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Tory cuts that have about ended.

Really?

7 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

So let's see how it looks even this august,

Let's.

7 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

while Scottish growth continues to lag behind rUK ... and can you guess why...?

I think it may have something to do with oil, myself.

7 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

For all the while you're steaming ahead with uncertainty, there's a certainty that Scotland will fall further behind.

There are no certainties Neil. It's kind of how the future works.

[LJS]

3 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

like so many of your posts, that's one's only bullshit too.

Still, anything to avoid a discussion on the facts, eh?

 

OK, Neil what the "fact" that more than 10% of yes supporters are motivated by anti-English hatred.

So you're talking at least 160,000 folk maybe as high as 200,000.

Your "evidence" for this? A couple of hundred nutters crouched behind their keyboards.

Is this one of your opinions "formed from engagement?"

[eFestivals]

25 minutes ago, LJS said:

Kevin's graphs £1bn+ per year deficit reduction. Indy unlikely for 5 years. Let's see how things are looking then.

 

That's UK deficit (blue, sourced from where i found them all on one page) and Scottish deficit (orange, from GERS).

Can you notice how the UK deficit will (perhaps) reach zero in a few years, and that the scottish deficit will still be approx 6.5%?

Have you noticed that UK deficit reduction - also called 'spending cuts' - is due to end when it does reach zero, and that will leave Scotland with a 6.5% deficit that WILL NOT REDUCE???

And finally, can you tell me what the effect of the Barnett supplement has on those figures, which ensures that the Scottish deficit will never reach zero?

(and just in case you want to go the idiot "we'll that only shows how westminster is fucking Scotland", I refer you to your FM's words about how scotland costs more to run because of its geography. I don't think the indy campaign intends to change the geography of Scotland).

Given that modern economic theory reckons that a sovereign state should aim for a deficit of 2% or less, iScotland will need to introduce a minimum 4% of GDP of cuts (which equates to about 9% of public spending, don't forget!).

You might say "iScotland can borrow the money till the economy grows", but the lenders who might lend will laugh and refer iScotland to modern economic theory on the basis that they'll want their money back.

But even if the money was borrow-able while the economy expanded, that would still require a spending freeze - which is really cuts when the price of everything is inflating.

Salmond was able to find about 1% of savings in the 2014 white paper. Finding 9% will require cuts onto 'nice' spending priorities, no differently to how cuts for whole-UK have required cuts to nice things.