The New Fat Scotland 'Thanks for all the Fish' Thread.

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

LOL, don't go back there.
We showed the analogy was deeply flawed.
I didn't rant wither, I just pointed out the errors in your use of the analogy

Here we go again...

I think you'll find most reasonable people understood it and didn't acquaint it with employment law as you did since doing so wasn't relevant to the context in which it was intended.

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

What a selective set of dates.

July 2007 Euro 1.48
July 2012 Euro 1.28
July 2015 Euro 1.42

You've made no comment on the trend against the dollar either

All you're doing so far is proving that currency is in fact volatile without considering Brexit.
Or will you refuse to accept that too, despite proving so yourself?

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

So much so that you're blind to your own it seems.

Are you going against the opinion of many, experts included who acknowledge the beneficial aspects of a fall in exchange rate?
"Crash" is frankly ridiculous terminology too; I imagine you like "Cliff-edge", "Car Crash Brexit" and other such emotive stuff too.

I'm well aware that there can be beneficial aspects of a fall in exchange rate. I'm not aware of any experts who say these benefits apply only south of the Scottish border.

Yes, it's just in your imagination that I like 'cliff-edge' or 'car crash brexit' - I reckon that'll be the first time I've typed those words on this forum.

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Its understood, you have blinkers on and not willing to apply in a wider context



Not at all.
I've raised before that the 500,000 jobs you reference is based on a £50B export to rUK
In proportion then, the UK is looking at 2.4M jobs at risk from the £240B export to the EU.

I've then articulated in a close minded, no trade with EU extreme example, I'd rather work within a much larger market than the much smaller rUK market



I've not claimed it trumped it, I've merely articulated that the Brexit you have chosen to cite is one where the UK will see mass unemployment, a reduced marketplace and one which shows the greater potential with the EU than the rUK



Nobody is suggesting a magical solution.
I also showed examples where the Scottish exports are getting swept up with the UK accounts.



Scotland is not Greece.
I see why you are making comparisons, but they have completely differing demographics and industries



Where are you sourcing it from?




Fair enough.
You have the capacity, no need to purchase from iScotland.
If there is so much capacity, why are they looking at an interconnector to Iceland?



Possibly, but there could be an argument that more people travel from Scotland to / through England than the other way round.
I don't have the figures.
Nevertheless, you miss the point about where these role up into with regards to the accounts.



Its true that TM appears to see us heading more towards the extreme exit, which is why in that scenario, being ties to a shrinking rUK market, would not be a preferred as a growing EU market



NS was happy to take off the table, but TM is driving us towards a bleak scenario



Indeed, as long as the take the full context into consideration as opposed to a narrow view of the impact.

It's not a blinkered view, the impact analysis has been done for Scotland by the Fraser of Allander institute and the SNP use it for Brexit argumentation, so in discussing Scotland we use that and we can also use the same analysis by the same institute on the impact of independence. Hence 120,000 vs 500,000.

Educate all of the readers here then on what the implications are for the rest of the UK in this wider context and how you arrived at such a conclusion that because of this an independent Scotland, risking all that you've agreed with, is the better solution?

Simply saying "a market 8 times bigger" is not going to wash because the comparative argument for Brexit with Scotland a part of the UK is that the rest of the world is approx. 9,005,714 times bigger than the EU market.

2.4m jobs at risk in the UK is it.

Lets do the math.

2.4m jobs from the UK workforce of 31.42m (https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/bulletins/uklabourmarket/february2016)

that works out at 7.63% of the workforce. The highest estimate I've seen for job losses due to Brexit is 1.4m. (http://www.growthbusiness.co.uk/research-brexit-fears-blame-business-closures-loss-1-4m-jobs-2550757/)

this works out at 4.45%.

Lets look at Scotland - 2.6m workforce (http://www.gov.scot/Topics/Statistics/Browse/Labour-Market/LMSummary/LMBriefMay2017)

So 500,000 would be 19.23%.

And just for completeness 120,000 would be 4.6% of the workforce.

You clearly are claiming it to be magic, the mere fact your claim of the EU being 8 times bigger (if that is indeed true I've not looked) is somehow indicative of an economic miracle that could potentially replace and surpass nearly 20% of the current Scottish workforce that would be at risk from independence is quite obviously a miraculous suggestion, particularly if as you claim the UK couldn't deal with replacing the upper 2.4m figure which equates to 7.63% of the workforce. Don't you see? Your argument is internally inconsistent...

The claim that Scottish exports are swept up within the UK accounts is as much true as me saying the moon is made of cheese. It's been done to death, I'll refer you to Kevin Hague/Fraser Whyte for your answers on that. Whilst the survey conducted to obtain the Scottish government trade statistics is not complete or all encompassing it is indicative and again adheres to international standards on statistics.

Quite right that Scotland is not Greece. The Greeks are in a far worse situation because they do not control their currency and have a large deficit an no way to deal with it. The comparisons will hold true should Scotland go it alone, immediately jump in bed with the EU and have to use the Euro as a result of the TFEU (again if you don't know what that is you're uninformed).

RE: Water...

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13050431.Salmond_floats_plan_to_sell_water_to_English/

Using water that is locally available
is generally more cost effective than
transporting water long distances.
Current studies show that local
options, such as water conservation,
desalination and recycling, cost
around $1–2 per thousand litres;
a supply from 1500 kilometres (km)
away would cost around $5–6 per
thousand litres.5

https://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/43d0da9e-c594-4b28-ae03-3ebf6e0f69eb/files/moving-water.pdf

Page 3.

Tourism:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-32810916

15m visitors circa 2015.

Of those only 11% were overseas. That makes 13.35m domestic rUK tourist visits to Scotland. With the majority of overseas visitors coming from Europe, and 500,000 of the overseas visitors being from America.

I await your reply to the evidence and statistics with trepidation.