Economists Urge Scotland to Vote No......

Thrugelmir

Shakethedisease wrote: »

And au contraire re funding. You have it the wrong way round. Most of the polls show that far from Westminster handing Scotland a cheque after taking what she 'owes' out of it. Most Scots want it precisely the other way round. With Scotland collecting her own revenues.. then handing Westminster a cheque for defence and foreign affairs. Devo Max. The Smith commission's proposals haven't exactly set the world on fire up here I can assure you.. ( hence the SNP jump in the polls ).

Salmond sold you a pup. Just like Brown did while in power. Unfunded promises. The SNP has to deliver on transforming Scotlands economy. A challenge in this globally competitive world.

Thrugelmir

Shakethedisease wrote: »

and push through anti-austerity policies. That really, really annoys people.

What policies might these be? Austerity is a certainty. The political make up of Westminster will have no bearing on the direction of travel. Just the speed.

Thrugelmir

Shakethedisease wrote: »

And accept, that low oil prices are the UK's problem for the forseeable future.

UK as a whole benefits from lower energy prices. So SNP threats carry far less threat. Particularly if the UK recovery continues and gains traction. Still going to take a long time though.

zagubov

kabayiri wrote: »

Very true. It's so much easier to be the opposing party. They will get their share of the blame for the next round of harsh cuts. The next 5 years are going to be extremely tough.

They already get their share of the blame for everything under the sun- from the state broadcasters and the dead tree media.

Do you think the public are gullible enough to fall for it, going by the polls and membership figures?

Shakethedisease

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Salmond sold you a pup. Just like Brown did while in power. Unfunded promises. The SNP has to deliver on transforming Scotlands economy. A challenge in this globally competitive world.

Well, they'd need the chance first eh ? Can hardly 'transform' an economy with only 30% of tax raising powers which are then immediately taken off the Barnett formula. Zero-sum game there.

So yes, totally unfunded as you state. Shame about the deluded bit of 'Salmond' trying to sell it though. Try closer to home ?

You cannot expect an SNP government to transform anything given what it has to work with at present. Thus you cannot say anyone is selling a pup, when they aren't actually allowed to compete in a 'globally competitive' world. But any old excuse to get a dig in I suppose, even if it is on the most fantastical notion in the world.. ie that a devolved government with limited economic powers can 'transform' anything much.

Meanwhile the Telegraph has gone totally tonto and just illustrates Zag's post most beautifully...

Today, it seems as if the only political argument in Scotland is the struggle between the Nats and Labour for voters in the Central Belt, many of whom live on benefits, most of whom used to be unthinking Labour supporters. Enterprise Scotland, aspirational Scotland, hard-working Scotland: all are being ignored in a competition for the support of those who, if offered a job, would run a mile.

Indeed, there might seem to be so little distinction between Labour and the Nats that they could easily join forces. As no one else is using the label at the moment, why not call themselves National Socialists?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/11314336/England-must-be-resolute-and-save-the-Scots-from-self-destruction.html

:mad:

Tromking

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The independence referendum, and SNP in Westminster are two very different things.

Make yer mind up.
A few posts ago, you talked of a relative who said owing to the current travails of the Westminster Scottish Labour Party the Nats would win the next referendum "oot the park!".
He was "reading the writing on the wall" you said.
STD, it seems despite being on the ground and claiming to know the motivations of every Scots voter, your narrative is muddled.

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I think the ability to call a referendum might be on Sturgeons wish list in return for propping Labour up if the polls bear out. So that would be that wouldn't it.

Labour, as a Unionist party, might not wish to play ball.

It was made very clear that the last referendum was a one off. You might find that the 50,000,000 English might get increasingly annoyed at having to finance the delusions of 1,600,000 separatists.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

Labour, as a Unionist party, might not wish to play ball.

It was made very clear that the last referendum was a one off. You might find that the 50,000,000 English might get increasingly annoyed at having to finance the delusions of 1,600,000 separatists.

Yes, I don't expect Labour will play ball. Especially over Trident etc. In fact I fully expect some sort of deal between the main parties in terms of squeezing any SNP MP's out. Win/Win really for the SNP if so.

Alex Massie has a good take on things as they stand ( he's a unionist ).

In other words, as matters stand now, the general election looks like being a win-win proposition for nationalists and a lose-lose calamity for unionists. Scotland’s election will be 59 mini-referendums on the national question. And that will serve as an overture to the 2016 Scottish parliamentary elections, at which another SNP triumph would open the door to a second independence referendum.


Such a ballot would, technically, require Westminster’s approval — but it is difficult to imagine circumstances in which London could deny the clearly expressed will of the Scottish people. What Scotland wants, Scotland will get. The winds of change are still blowing and they will continue to blow in favour of the nationalists. They have not gone away and, you know, they need only get lucky once. The Union was preserved in September, but for how long?

http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9383482/the-national-shows-just-how-much-danger-the-union-and-scotland-is-still-in/

Shakethedisease

Tromking wrote: »

Make yer mind up.
A few posts ago, you talked of a relative who said owing to the current travails of the Westminster Scottish Labour Party the Nats would win the next referendum "oot the park!".
He was "reading the writing on the wall" you said.
STD, it seems despite being on the ground and claiming to know the motivations of every Scots voter, your narrative is muddled.

You said that I personally was confusing electoral support for the SNP with support for independence. I do not. Nor do many other voters in Scotland. Have you processed that part yet ? Good.

The independence referendum 3 months ago, and the prospect of a load of SNP MP's going down to Westminster are also two different things in terms of what happens next. What's confusing you about that ?

My dad is a confirmed No voter, hates the SNP and was involved in the trade union movement all of his working life. He thinks Labour have lost the plot, and that there will be another vote in a few years where Yes will win oot the park..
He does not relish this, nor agree with it. But he can see things are changing around him. I was surprised by him saying this. He will still vote Labour and would vote No again if the opportunity arises. He can appreciate however, that more and more, and most especially the newly politically engaged, of the electorate do not share his views.

I hope this clears your confusion somewhat.

Tromking

Shakethedisease wrote: »

You said that I personally was confusing electoral support for the SNP with support for independence. I do not. Nor do many other voters in Scotland. Have you processed that part yet ? Good.

Yet you quote and say a journalist "has a good take on things" who says that in May we have 59 mini-referenda on independence.
Like I say, make yer mind up!