Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

MumOf2 wrote: »

All is peace and quiet here - we have our local hustings tomorrow and it should be lively but I'm absolutely confident that it will be free of the nastiness and racism that we encountered last year.

I'd say the chances are good none of the party supporters down there will be threatening to behead their opponents with a chainsaw anyway...

zagubov

CLAPTON wrote: »

why do you think that the people of Scotland don't support or start their own newspapers that reflect their own views?


how often do you post about the paucity of coverage of events in Yorkshire or of the SW (devon & cornwall) : they both have about the same population as Scotland and so why do the people there don't matter to you?

Maybe the difference is that the land there is less sacred and they aren't a 'nation' and so they don't count.

Ah. The "whataboutery" gambit.

I'm less familiar with them and don't know if they're being neglected or lied about on the scale that Scotland is. Maybe you can look into it for me.;)

kabayiri

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

During today's debate Nicola Sturgeon did not dispute the IFS assessment that full fiscal autonomy would cost Scotland £7.6 billion a year in tax revenues.

Interestingly, even WINGS admits this is the case, that Scotland would be £7.6bn worse off under FFA than with the Barnett formula.

So if Scotland is to avoid unsustainable levels of borrowing to cover that black hole, then uniquely amongst the nations of the developed world, we would have to achieve truly heroic growth levels in excess of 5% of GDP per year, double the international average, to make up the short fall.

How do the SNP plan to do it?

What Magic Miracle Growth Engine to they plan to start up, that we couldn't already do now?

Sturgeon has already backtracked on Salmond's planned cut to corporation tax to attract new business and stimulate growth, instead vowing there will be no cuts to company taxes, so how does she expect such miraculous growth?

The SNP keep refusing to answer this question, in fact she repeatedly refused to answer it again today, and when questioned on where this magic growth will come from they accuse the questioners of being part of "Project Fear".

That's not Project Fear.... That's Project Face The Facts.

They probably don't have an answer Hamish. It's lucky for many political parties that economic literacy is pretty low amongst the electorate.

Perhaps the SNP supporters here have the answer which they might share with the rest of us.

Leanne1812

MumOf2 wrote: »

I'm really glad for you, Leanne. We decided to live south of the border to get away from racist anti-English abuse in the run up to the referendum and are really glad we did. This just appears to be a re-run now - thank goodness we made our decision when we did.


All is peace and quiet here - we have our local hustings tomorrow and it should be lively but I'm absolutely confident that it will be free of the nastiness and racism that we encountered last year.

I'm saddened that you encountered that last year. We all know it was a very emotive time for Scotland. People all over had an opinion on the best way forward for Scotland so tensions were high. My husband is also from England and thankfully he didn't experience any abuse from anyone.

Shakethedisease

kabayiri wrote: »

They probably don't have an answer Hamish. It's lucky for many political parties that economic literacy is pretty low amongst the electorate.

Perhaps the SNP supporters here have the answer which they might share with the rest of us.

Why don't you tell us how Balls and Osborne would do it instead and when it will all end. That would be nice.

UK economy, 1.5 trillion in debt and rising. 90 billion deficit, economy wrecked by the Labour government over 13 years. No ones pensions safe, poverty rising, Osborne's borrowing double that of Labour over the last five years and rising, another 30 billion plus cuts over the next 5 years paid for mostly by the poor and ordinary working people.The list goes on and no one knows where or when or if it will end...

7.6 billion suddenly doesn't seem quite so bad ! But in answer to you. FFA would be phased in over a few years ( if it ever happened at all ).. producing figures on how it would affect Scotland right now/today is a little difficult in that scenario.

You also know that Barnett is being phased out as well anyway don't you ?

The Barnett formula will live on – outlasting its founder - but its contribution to spending by the Scottish Government will be reduced by some two thirds.
All five political parties in the Smith Commission have agreed that there needs to be a new funding model.

Sir Nicholas McPherson, on the Smith commission. 19th Jan 2015.

So whatever happens, there are changes ahead most likely in the way Scotland is funded and the extent it funds itself. This 7.6bn 'gap' is a Labour election tactic pure and simple..designed to splash headlines about 'pensions' and big 'SNP cuts' in the run up to the election. FFA is years off. Unless the Tories are in a position to offer it and the SNP accept after this election. Barnett is being changed/phased out over time anyway. So there won't be any 7.6bn 'gap' for a while yet. It's just a headline generator at present and doesn't exist. But it does give Hamish something to get annoyed about and post lots of fancy graphs so that's good. Re pension headlines a bit more in the way of consistency may be in order however.;)

Scottish pensions to be slashed, says Miliband (Telegraph) Scottish pensions to increase, says Miliband (Mail On Sunday)

CLAPTON

zagubov wrote: »

Ah. The "whataboutery" gambit.

I'm less familiar with them and don't know if they're being neglected or lied about on the scale that Scotland is. Maybe you can look into it for me.;)

No, it was about why the Scot buy newspapers that that they totally disagree with and why they lack the basic entrepreneurship to start ones that will be hugely popular and make them a fortune.
Presumably it due to the factors totally outside their control.

And yes, there is a lack of proportion why you consider the people of Yorkshire to be worth less than those of Scotland.

kabayiri

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Why don't you tell us how Balls and Osborne would do it instead and when it will all end. That would be nice.
...

Indeed. Nice

Well, Balls didn't have a clue when he was in the Treasury and he still doesn't. So that's him covered.

The coallition plan was to have growth in the economy deal with half the deficit if memory serves. Of course, that has proved somewhat problematic.

Osborne's plan was to be in credit by the end of the next parliament.

I suspect he is being optimistic, but at least he is not delusional like certain lefty parties.

kabayiri

Shakethedisease wrote: »

...
7.6 billion suddenly doesn't seem quite so bad ! But in answer to you. FFA would be phased in over a few years ( if it ever happened at all ).. producing figures on how it would affect Scotland right now/today is a little difficult in that scenario.
...

7.6 billion is significant when presented to 8.5% of the population. I am assuming you did understand this?

'Phasing in' - it all sounds so easy and nice when you word it like this. It's complete rubbish of course.

zagubov

CLAPTON wrote: »

No, it was about why the Scot buy newspapers that that they totally disagree with and why they lack the basic entrepreneurship to start ones that will be hugely popular and make them a fortune.
Presumably it due to the factors totally outside their control.

They're not. The print media is dying up there with a steady haemorrhage of readers, although the (Sunday) Herald and that Shetland paper seemed to be doing better when they broke ranks and backed the indy side. The National may carve a niche. There's another 30 papers pushing the other point of view.

CLAPTON wrote: »

And yes, there is a lack of proportion why you consider the people of Yorkshire to be worth less than those of Scotland.

No, I've not got the energy. You can sort out Yorkshire's problems if you're concerned enough.

Generali

zagubov wrote: »

They're not. The print media is dying up there with a steady haemorrhage of readers, although the (Sunday) Herald and that Shetland paper seemed to be doing better when they broke ranks and backed the indy side. The National may carve a niche. There's another 30 papers pushing the other point of view.



No, I've not got the energy. You can sort out Yorkshire's problems if you're concerned enough.

Print media are dying everywhere. Due to something called an interweb apparently.