The Dirty Independence Question

[LJS]

11 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

Really? He wrote a budget but didn't allocate all the money?

But even if he did that, the initial unallocated money would still have had to come at the expense of something else, because there used to be no unallocated money.

 

the first part proves the second part wrong.

robbing Peter to pay Paul is not to society's overall benefit.

Which is precisely why I asked where the money had come from.

And rather than cheering something which you've clearly failed to understand, it would be much better if you put away mindless cheering and learnt how to scrutinise, rather than be a mindless mug who laps it up.

Get back to me when you know if your cheering has been stupidity or smart.

 

Before: Neil criticises SNP for cutting council funding.

After: Neil criticises SNP for increasing council funding.

[eFestivals]

34 minutes ago, LJS said:

Before: Neil criticises SNP for cutting council funding.

After: Neil criticises SNP for increasing council funding.

before: Neil criticises SNP for robbing Peter to pay Paul.

after: Neil criticises SNP for robbing Peter to pay Paul

Care to tell whether it's lack of brain or just pure lying-biased self-interest which you're demonstrating?

Either way, your manner isn't one which will help support for indy grow. It's the in-built denial of the indy-mentalists like that which has killed it off. 

[eFestivals]

Morrissey fans walk out of Glasgow show after singer insults Nicola Sturgeon

 

[LJS]

3 hours ago, eFestivals said:

Morrissey fans walk out of Glasgow show after singer insults Nicola Sturgeon

 

I saw that & it made me laugh.

There are many better reasons to walk out of a morrisey gig than him being rude about our Nic!

[eFestivals]

32 minutes ago, LJS said:

I saw that & it made me laugh.

There are many better reasons to walk out of a morrisey gig than him being rude about our Nic!

my thought was it's a bit like tuning into a TV programme that you know has loads of swearing, and then complaining about the swearing.

[eFestivals]

finally, the 'Growth Commission' has reported.

https://inews.co.uk/news/scotland/independent-scotland-new-denmark-snp-growth-commission/

And what it reports is that there's no growth for a generation under indy. In a generation's time Scotland might - just might - be back to where it is today.

And it lists a few countries Scotland can be like - including the mega-corporates of Hong Kong and Singapore, as well as the mega-taxes of Norway, and Sweden.

These are all choices to be made, to be accepted or not ... but if we take the Growth Commission's word as gospel, getting that growth means buying into at least some of those big changes for a maybe-reward in decades and a guaranteed loss in the short-term.

Edited May 24, 2018 by eFestivals

[LJS]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

finally, the 'Growth Commission' has reported.

https://inews.co.uk/news/scotland/independent-scotland-new-denmark-snp-growth-commission/

And what it reports is that there's no growth for a generation under indy. In a generation's time Scotland might - just might - be back to where it is today.

And it lists a few countries Scotland can be like - including the mega-corporates of Hong Kong and Singapore, as well as the mega-taxes of Norway, and Sweden.

These are all choices to be made, to be accepted or not ... but if we take the Growth Commission's word as gospel, getting that growth means buying into at least some of those big changes for a maybe-reward in decades and a guaranteed loss in the short-term.

You must have an advance copy of the report  - I'll have to wait until it is published tomorrow. 

?

 

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, LJS said:

You must have an advance copy of the report  - I'll have to wait until it is published tomorrow. 

?

 

oh c'mon ... surely you're smart enough to spot a selected-highlights-to-our-own-agenda-briefing when you see one?

 

[LJS]

3 hours ago, eFestivals said:

oh c'mon ... surely you're smart enough to spot a selected-highlights-to-our-own-agenda-briefing when you see one?

 

Indeed. I'm also smart enough to guess that the media will be applying their own spin. We have waited many months for this report. I'm perfectly happy to wait another day before responding to it.

I'm also smart enough to know that, whatever it says, you will dismiss it as magic money tree, fascist, money grabbing, racist nonsense.

 

[eFestivals]

6 minutes ago, LJS said:

I'm also smart enough to know that, whatever it says, you will dismiss it as magic money tree, fascist, money grabbing, racist nonsense.

Nope, sounds to me so far like it's going to be a bit too truthful.

The preview stuff talks about a generation to see a benefit, which suggests it's also going to outline the immediate pain.

Add in that Sturgeon isn't going to be grandstanding with it and doesn't want to talk about it, and I reckon it's easy to guess.

As i've always said, if Scotland chooses an honest offer I don't have a problem with it. It was the indy lies worthy of the brexit campaign I had issue with.

 

[eFestivals]

Just now, eFestivals said:

Nope, sounds to me so far like it's going to be a bit too truthful.

What do i expect it to say?

1. that iScotland would need to create its own currency.

2. that there might be benefits in the long term, but there's guaranteed pain in the short term (see brexit for comparison).

3. that it cherry picks the evidence it uses in suggesting the upside, by (for instance) ignoring the fact that Scotland (indy or otherwise) cannot be at the heart of Europe to make comparison with Holland, Belgium, Austria, etc anything meaningful, and that those are also small populations in small areas (unlike Scotland), and when comparing with Norway/Sweden won't mention the massive tax differences, and when comparing with Ireland/Hong Kong/Singapore won't mention the 'business friendly' set-ups, etc, etc.

I think the reality of brexit plus the oil price crash has wised up too many Scots for it to be a goer (which is why Sturgeon is hiding), and that Scotland's highest support & chances for indy probably come via the softest of brexits rather than the hardest.

[Comfy Bean]

6 hours ago, eFestivals said:

oh c'mon ... surely you're smart enough to spot a selected-highlights-to-our-own-agenda-briefing when you see one?

 

It will say stuff about increasing immigration and taxes so will chime with Sturgeon.

You won’t like it.

[eFestivals]

11 hours ago, Comfy Bean said:

It will say stuff about increasing immigration and taxes so will chime with Sturgeon.

There's open-door immigration to Scotland already. Scotland's problem is that few want to use that door.

The only way to increase it is to bribe people. 

How supportive do you think Scots would be about their taxes being used to give money to non-Scots at the expense of services to Scots?

You might think that Scots who are already complaining about not enough being spent on them will be happy with that. I don't. 

 

11 hours ago, Comfy Bean said:

You won’t like it.

If it's truthful I'll be loving it it, and it's you that will be hating it - for shitting on your dreams.

 

[eFestivals]

15 hours ago, eFestivals said:

What do i expect it to say?

1. that iScotland would need to create its own currency.

Not quite what I said, tho the aim is clearly towards that.

Commission says 'keep the pound for up to 10 years' - tho not as a currency union.

Which means no EU membership or starting to join for all of the while iScotland does that as it doesn't meet the Denmark criteria for membership (which requires a sovereign currency).

I'm glad to see the unicorns given up in favour of reality, although it also brings the deficit problem into full glare - and means govt spending cuts would be a certainty of indy.

Which leaves the indy proposition as "vote yourself poorer" which I can't see selling.

[eFestivals]

Ouch. The estimated cost of Scotland establishing it's own currency is from £30Bn to £300Bn - which means saving that amount instead of spending on current needs.

Yep, there's a share of UK reserves due to Scotland, but that's only about £20Bn.

One of those comparison countries - Denmark - holds about £50Bn as reserve, and that's as a stable and established currency, so a reasonable guess for iScotland at the point of creating its currency is probably £50Bn-£80Bn (rather than the £30Bn it gives as a low-end).

That's a big cost without any tangible benefits back, and without a guarantee of any of the better growth the commission talks about.

---

Btw, that higher growth ....

Think about how those comparison countries were 25 years ago compared to now. For the periphery states mentioned (Finland, Ireland) which have the greatest similarity to Scotland, they were (compared to the UK/western europe average of that time) economically backwards 25 years ago, and have come on strongly in the last 25 years as they've got much closer the average.

Scotland wouldn't have the same 'backwards' starting point, meaning it's unlikely to see growth beyond the Western European average, particularly if it has no special factor (like Ireland's low taxes, or Finland's mobile phone boom) to trigger it.

[eFestivals]

that evil mainstream media, publishing lies about the evils of indy...

Talk about desperately playing it up with BIG feckin' lies

The boost of that amount is in GDP per-person, not "for every Scot" ... and the likes of Ireland shows that high GDP doesn't necessarily equate to high personal spending power.

[LJS]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

Because

I though I'd reply to  this here so as not to annoy the rest of the punters on the general news forum.

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

a left-leaning Scotland

Oh, we're left-leaning are we? What happened to the blood & soil? ... & the ME ME ME? 

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

can be rightfully compared with Singapore and HK?

It can rightfully be compared to anywhere.

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

They're only included to bump up the numbers to then make claims that iScotland would have exceptional economic performance.

So says Kevin.

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

Because that morally pure Scotland thinks it doesn't have to pay any of the UK's national debt (© Growth Commission)?

"The commission is clear that while an independent Scotland would not start out with any debt of its own, it would honour its "historic" commitment to the UK's existing national debt.

This would happen via an "Annual Solidarity Payment" of £5bn a year, to go towards previous UK debt and shared commitments such as international aid"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-44237956

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

These things (and much more) are the equivalent of "£350M for the NHS". Billy-big-bollocks, designed to sucker the stupid into believing that splitting from the nasty foreigners is a guaranteed financial gain and not the opposite.

Perhaps try having an independent opinion of your own & cease being a spokesman for Kevin (the weather forecast proves an independent Scotland is fucked & here's a graph to prove ir) Hague.

I am amused that back in January Kevin published a piece entitled "Bonds of Union: Part I" (http://chokkablog.blogspot.com/2018/01/bonds-of-union-part-i.html) It didn't say much other than that those who support the union need to make a positive case for the benefits of the union rather than endlessly banging on about the negative impacts of independence. Sounds to me as if he is predominantly addressing himself there!!!

Anyway he promised that " we need to get right back to basics and take a holistic view of what makes a union work  - and that, my weary reader, is what we'll focus on in Part II"

 

I guess he must be struggling to find that "holistic" view as over 5 months have passed and no part 2 to be seen.

He has managed 9 (yes nine) pieces rubbishing the growth commission report. and 0 (yes zero) pieces on the upturn in the oil industry & recent figures showing the Scottish economy growing slightly faster than the UK economy (although both are very weak growth rates indeed) Nor has he anything to say about recent polling date showing more people support the Scottish government's desire for increased immigration than oppose it. Funnily enough neither have you. Guess it doesn't suit either of  your narratives.

.

[feral chile]

57 minutes ago, LJS said:

I though I'd reply to  this here so as not to annoy the rest of the punters on the general news forum.

Oh, we're left-leaning are we? What happened to the blood & soil? ... & the ME ME ME? 

It can rightfully be compared to anywhere.

So says Kevin.

"The commission is clear that while an independent Scotland would not start out with any debt of its own, it would honour its "historic" commitment to the UK's existing national debt.

This would happen via an "Annual Solidarity Payment" of £5bn a year, to go towards previous UK debt and shared commitments such as international aid"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-44237956

Perhaps try having an independent opinion of your own & cease being a spokesman for Kevin (the weather forecast proves an independent Scotland is fucked & here's a graph to prove ir) Hague.

I am amused that back in January Kevin published a piece entitled "Bonds of Union: Part I" (http://chokkablog.blogspot.com/2018/01/bonds-of-union-part-i.html) It didn't say much other than that those who support the union need to make a positive case for the benefits of the union rather than endlessly banging on about the negative impacts of independence. Sounds to me as if he is predominantly addressing himself there!!!

Anyway he promised that " we need to get right back to basics and take a holistic view of what makes a union work  - and that, my weary reader, is what we'll focus on in Part II"

 

I guess he must be struggling to find that "holistic" view as over 5 months have passed and no part 2 to be seen.

He has managed 9 (yes nine) pieces rubbishing the growth commission report. and 0 (yes zero) pieces on the upturn in the oil industry & recent figures showing the Scottish economy growing slightly faster than the UK economy (although both are very weak growth rates indeed) Nor has he anything to say about recent polling date showing more people support the Scottish government's desire for increased immigration than oppose it. Funnily enough neither have you. Guess it doesn't suit either of  your narratives.

.

You might need to signpost this on the other thread.

[LJS]

2 hours ago, feral chile said:

You might need to signpost this on the other thread.

I don't think many folk are particularly interested ...those that are will find it here.

[eFestivals]

15 hours ago, LJS said:

Oh, we're left-leaning are we? What happened to the blood & soil? ... & the ME ME ME? 

Nope, SNP supporters are not left leaning - as the happiness with Scotland being compared with HK and Singapore gets to prove. 

It *IS* about "me me me", as the lies designed to push the 'me' agenda prove.

That only changes when you and other Nats reject the me-agenda.

[eFestivals]

15 hours ago, LJS said:

So says Kevin.

So what do you say? Nothing at all, because you know it's lies but can't bring yourself to say it.

But if it's not lies, you'll be able to refute the analysis by Kev with real facts, won't you? Yet it never happens.

[eFestivals]

15 hours ago, LJS said:

This would happen via an "Annual Solidarity Payment" of £5bn a year, to go towards previous UK debt and shared commitments such as international aid"

So "independence" means the hated UK taking on Scotland's responsibilities for foreign aid (without a contribution)?  

Meanwhile, Growth Commission report page 38:
"The UK Treasury confirmed in 2014 that existing UK debt instruments remain the responsibility of the continuing UK government. The UK’s debt will therefore remain the responsibility of the UK Government after Scotland becomes independent. By definition, an independent Scotland will start with zero debt. The strength of that position should not be underestimated. However, an independent Scotland could choose to agree to contribute to the servicing costs of a fair and reasonable share of UK debt (net of a share of assets)."

That's a rejection of Scotland's responsibility for its share.

The 2014 statement by the UK is merely saying that the UK won't welch on it if Scotland does - and that statement makes clear that SNPcotland does welch on it!

 

Edited July 5, 2018 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

15 hours ago, LJS said:

Perhaps try having an independent opinion of your own & cease being a spokesman for Kevin

Kev took a while to write his stuff.

I'd noticed the inclusion of HK and Singapore on the day of publication - and knew Scotland is nothing like them (and nats claim it would never be like them).

So why the strange inclusion of two high-performing countries that are nothing like Scotland? To fiddle the figures.

Cos without including those two countries, guess what? There's no exceptional performance by small countries at all - making the whole basis of the whole report one very big whopper.

 

Edited July 5, 2018 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

15 hours ago, LJS said:

He has managed 9 (yes nine) pieces rubbishing the growth commission report.

because the report is the rubbish he points out.

Get back to us all when you have something to support indy which isn't a big lie by the SNP treating the Scottish population as stupid.

It's far worse than anything Farage, Gove, or Boris lied about to further brexit.

[eFestivals]

15 hours ago, LJS said:

Nor has he anything to say about recent polling date showing more people support the Scottish government's desire for increased immigration than oppose it. Funnily enough neither have you. Guess it doesn't suit either of  your narratives.

all of the UK was happy with immigration until immigration was happening at a massive rate.

Scotland has yet to have immigration that's anywhere near similar, and when an indy Scotland is promising immigrants a better deal than Scots themselves would get with indy that support for immigration won't hold.