Scottish Independance ahead in Poll
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-09-2014, 12:13 PM
RE: Scottish Independance ahead in Poll
I know of a Scot who receives government funding that he uses to pay for his University studies in France. Without that funding, he could not afford it. I'm assuming that a suddenly independent Scotland might not have enough money to honor an agreement made by what would then be a foreign government, and be under no obligation to do so, anyway. I can definitely understand why this guy designates 'national pride' as a little less important than his college career.

Of course I'm assuming that isn't the only type of economic problem that would arise from a separation, and that the new Scottish government wasn't exactly ready to 'hit the ground running', immediately!

If and when the new Gov is ready, go for it, but until then, don't be surprised to find a few citizens unwilling to put laying the foundation for their future (or any number of other things) on hold for however long it takes their new overseers to get their shite together, in exchange for a flag.

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheGulegon's post
21-09-2014, 12:58 PM (This post was last modified: 21-09-2014 01:21 PM by cjlr.)
RE: Scottish Independance ahead in Poll
(21-09-2014 10:11 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  
(21-09-2014 08:43 AM)cjlr Wrote:  That's what the 'lol conspiracy' crowd is going for?

The actual statements by the people in question are to be ignored (because reasons), and an anonymous third party at a biased source repeating Salmond's version of a conversation with Cameron is supposed to be reliable? Really?

Are you even trying to counter what I am posting or just coming up with phrases like " 'lol conspiracy' crowd", "feels" and "reasons", "ALL A SCAM WAKE UP SHEEPLE" ? Have I used language like that in this thread?

I have a tendency towards sarcasm.

I nonetheless find your statements extremely unsupported. If we might assume that UK politicians are not idiots, they are well aware that breaking their promises re: Scotland will only create further anger and resentment. If their goal is to maintain the union, that's a self-evidently terrible idea.

(21-09-2014 10:11 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  I've posted links from respectable news papers quoting high ranking politicians with power and what they have said. You respond by throwing words around to create an impression and strawmanning with allusions to vote rigging conspiracies (which I have never claimed by the way).

Yet this doesn't stop you from quoting Gordon Brown who is now nothing more than a back bencher with no real power.

What you posted does not say what you claim, nor would it support your claims even if it did.

(21-09-2014 10:11 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  I demonstrate how the Better Together campaign promises have already started to fall. You respond by saying that Better Together didn't speak for the Westminster parties even though the campaign was run by many Westminster MPs. Whatever pedentry you try to spin with this one you can't get around that people on the No side have been lying.

I link to broken election pledges from all the main parties and demonstrate that there is a culture of making rash promises in Westminster with no intention of keeping them and all you can do is strawman by accusing me of saying that all politicians always lie.

You really are clutching at straws now.

Said "broken pledges" don't exist. That seemed relevant to me. Your sample size is one and your data point is from 1979. That seemed relevant to me.

If there's a clear case of an explicit promise being broken, by all means let me know. As I've said, it seems only reasonable to me that we must wait and see before passing judgement.

(21-09-2014 10:20 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  
(21-09-2014 08:46 AM)cjlr Wrote:  That, and a currency. Those tend to be useful.

Westminster couldn't have stopped an independent Scotland using the pound despite what they claimed. Many countries use the dollar. So Better Together weren't offering a currency ... so there's that (as you like to say).

And unilaterally adopting a foreign currency is not sound economic policy. Are Ecuador and El Salvador the types of states you would wish an independent Scotland to emulate? The other examples are bilateral, and the UK government ruled out any formal currency union or arrangement. An independent Scotland would have, in using the pound, less control over their currency than at present within the UK, under all conceivable circumstances. That would seem to be contrary to the goal of independence.

(21-09-2014 10:30 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  You are assuming that Scotland would not be in the EU if they got independence. They already are in the EU. This is important for two reasons.

1) One of the main difficulties in joining the EU is that your laws have to be changed to comply with the laws of the EU. Scotland has its own legal system which already complies.

2) Scotland consists of 5 million EU citizens. They were not voting to leave the EU, they were voting to leave the United Kingdom. If it was a Yes vote then they are still EU citizens. That means for Scotland to no longer be part of the EU, those 5 million citizens would have to be ejected from the EU and there is no legal mechanism for that. Such a move would be open to considerable legal challenge.

A de novo state cannot be party to existing agreements, and an independent state must apply to join the EU. I am not aware of any opinion to the contrary, from EU officials themselves or from representatives of other EU states. Both the president and vice-president of the EC stated that re-admission would be necessary. Scotland's legal system is also not fully compliant with EU law, as it is party to the UK's existing constitutional opt-outs, all of which would necessarily require re-negotiation. When Finland joined the EU it was likewise already compliant with the vast majority of requirements. The accession process took 3 years anyway.

There does exist some legal precedent in Greenland, which withdrew from the EEC in 1985.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-09-2014, 01:06 PM
RE: Scottish Independance ahead in Poll
(21-09-2014 08:43 AM)cjlr Wrote:  ...
(21-09-2014 04:50 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  ... and now Jack Straw is calling to diminish the democratic voice of the people.

Straw: Make Union forever

The 1707 act already says that the union of England and Scotland is to last forever after.

So it's a Jack Strawman argument? Laughat

I confess I would have liked to have seen a devolution... just as a proof of concept.

I was involved in a local discussion about whether it's ever OK for one state to interfere in the internal affairs of another and the subject of China's increasing bicep flexing came up... and whether the ASEAN countries are united enough to counter this.

I pondered upon a long, long term solution wrt bullies might be as is done with corporate monopolies i.e. break them down into smaller entities.

Come to think of it, maybe we have an example already with the former USSR.

That seems to have turned out OK. No more conflicts in that neck of the woods.

Unsure

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-09-2014, 01:17 PM
RE: Scottish Independance ahead in Poll
(21-09-2014 10:32 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  
(21-09-2014 09:59 AM)cjlr Wrote:  The problems facing Scotland wouldn't magically disappear on independence; they'd get worse.

Vague statement not backed up by evidence.

As I said, you're not even trying now.

Scotland's finances are sustained by transfers from the rest of the UK. That's a plain fact.

Independent Scotland would have to either increase revenue or decrease spending.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-09-2014, 04:30 PM
RE: Scottish Independance ahead in Poll
(21-09-2014 01:17 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Scotland's finances are sustained by transfers from the rest of the UK. That's a plain fact.

Wrong.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-09-2014, 04:31 PM
RE: Scottish Independance ahead in Poll
(21-09-2014 01:17 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Scotland's finances are sustained by transfers from the rest of the UK. That's a plain fact.

Independent Scotland would have to either increase revenue or decrease spending.

Evidence please.

Hate the belief, love the believer.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
21-09-2014, 05:25 PM
RE: Scottish Independance ahead in Poll
(21-09-2014 04:30 PM)Mathilda Wrote:  
(21-09-2014 01:17 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Scotland's finances are sustained by transfers from the rest of the UK. That's a plain fact.

Wrong.

(21-09-2014 04:31 PM)Elder Cunningham Wrote:  
(21-09-2014 01:17 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Scotland's finances are sustained by transfers from the rest of the UK. That's a plain fact.

Independent Scotland would have to either increase revenue or decrease spending.

Evidence please.

Do you have any sources to the contrary? I've certainly not heard any.

None other than the Scottish government will tell you that Scotland spends more than it earns. That's hardly unusual for modern states, of course, but it's undeniably true. At present those debts are against the UK; independence would necessarily alter Scotland's credit and financial situation (and it seems to me a capital flight would be more likely than not - there's a reason the Bank of Montreal is headquartered in Toronto today, should one wish to search for similar situations). Even including the entirety of oil revenues (whereas "only" about 90% would fall within Scottish territorial waters) Scotland's deficit is at best the same as the UK as a whole (without, it's substantially larger as a percentage). Though, the prospect of becoming a petrostate in light of sharply declining reserves and production seems less than well-advised...

If one wishes to make an emotional case for independence, one is free to do so. I wouldn't particularly care, being an ocean away. Having examined the empirical claims put forward by the nationalists, I find them seriously lacking. And that does bother me, having lived my life with family and connections in Quebec, whose nationalists dance the same dance.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
22-09-2014, 04:00 AM
RE: Scottish Independance ahead in Poll
I was saying "Wrong" to the assertion that it is a plain fact. Many of Scotland's businesses have their headquarters in London and therefore many of Scotland's industries are counted as contributing to London's economic productivity despite all the natural resources being in Scotland.

GDP is a highly distorted figure that is constantly fiddled by successive governments over time looking to boast about how they have improved the economy in their short term in office. And many of the figured from Westminster regarding Scotland are fiddled even more because of the Barnett formula.

But if we look at GVA (Gross Value Added)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_..._by_region

1 England 20,442 ($31,545)
2 Scotland 19,744 ($30,468)
3 Northern Ireland 15,795 ($24,374)
4 Wales 14,842 ($22,903)

So Scotland is lagging close behind England. But break England down even further and you see a more accurate picture.

1 Greater London 34,200 ($52,776)
2 South East England 20,923 ($32,287)
3 East of England 18,591 ($28,689)
4 South West England 18,211 ($28,102)
5 East Midlands 17,349 ($26,772)
6 North West England 17,263 ($26,639)
7 West Midlands 16,788 ($25,906)
8 Yorkshire and the Humber, England 16,569 ($25,568)
9 North East England 15,621 ($24,106)

If you inserted Scotland into this list then it would come in at third place, just behind the south east of England and London. And that's not bad at all! Scotland has a higher GVA than the majority of England, and way higher than Wales and Northern Ireland.

The whole of Britain is being bled dry by London and this is causing the south east of England to be constantly built over every square bit of land so that more and more people can commute to London. (Try living there before you argue with this. I'm originally from the south east myself and have family still living there).



(21-09-2014 05:25 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Scotland's deficit is at best the same as the UK as a whole (without, it's substantially larger as a percentage).

This is an example of you trying to create an impression without backing it up using facts. This is so typical of the disingenuous arguments used by unionists.

For example, the GERS figures that you posted yourself

So just what did GERS tell us?

Quote:However closer scrutiny revealed all was not as it first appeared. The budget deficit was a mere 0.1% worse than the UK as a whole.

Quote:Clear cut, Scotland - at least in this one year, received more than it generated.

But take a closer look at how public sector expenditure is defined and we begin to see a different picture. The £65.2bn total includes spending 'for the benefit of Scotland' by the UK Government. This includes areas like defence, border control and ... the House of Lords.

This year Scotland was 'charged' £3bn to help pay for the UK's defence budget, however only £2bn was eventually spent in Scotland, so £1bn included in the GERS report as Scottish spend never actually made it north of the border.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Mathilda's post
22-09-2014, 08:46 PM
RE: Scottish Independance ahead in Poll
(22-09-2014 04:00 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  I was saying "Wrong" to the assertion that it is a plain fact. Many of Scotland's businesses have their headquarters in London and therefore many of Scotland's industries are counted as contributing to London's economic productivity despite all the natural resources being in Scotland.

GDP is a highly distorted figure that is constantly fiddled by successive governments over time looking to boast about how they have improved the economy in their short term in office. And many of the figured from Westminster regarding Scotland are fiddled even more because of the Barnett formula.

But if we look at GVA (Gross Value Added)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_..._by_region

1 England 20,442 ($31,545)
2 Scotland 19,744 ($30,468)
3 Northern Ireland 15,795 ($24,374)
4 Wales 14,842 ($22,903)

So Scotland is lagging close behind England. But break England down even further and you see a more accurate picture.

1 Greater London 34,200 ($52,776)
2 South East England 20,923 ($32,287)
3 East of England 18,591 ($28,689)
4 South West England 18,211 ($28,102)
5 East Midlands 17,349 ($26,772)
6 North West England 17,263 ($26,639)
7 West Midlands 16,788 ($25,906)
8 Yorkshire and the Humber, England 16,569 ($25,568)
9 North East England 15,621 ($24,106)

If you inserted Scotland into this list then it would come in at third place, just behind the south east of England and London. And that's not bad at all! Scotland has a higher GVA than the majority of England, and way higher than Wales and Northern Ireland.

The whole of Britain is being bled dry by London and this is causing the south east of England to be constantly built over every square bit of land so that more and more people can commute to London. (Try living there before you argue with this. I'm originally from the south east myself and have family still living there).



(21-09-2014 05:25 PM)cjlr Wrote:  Scotland's deficit is at best the same as the UK as a whole (without, it's substantially larger as a percentage).

This is an example of you trying to create an impression without backing it up using facts. This is so typical of the disingenuous arguments used by unionists.

For example, the GERS figures that you posted yourself

So just what did GERS tell us?

Quote:However closer scrutiny revealed all was not as it first appeared. The budget deficit was a mere 0.1% worse than the UK as a whole.

Quote:Clear cut, Scotland - at least in this one year, received more than it generated.

But take a closer look at how public sector expenditure is defined and we begin to see a different picture. The £65.2bn total includes spending 'for the benefit of Scotland' by the UK Government. This includes areas like defence, border control and ... the House of Lords.

This year Scotland was 'charged' £3bn to help pay for the UK's defence budget, however only £2bn was eventually spent in Scotland, so £1bn included in the GERS report as Scottish spend never actually made it north of the border.




There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: