We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies
Comments
-
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »Explain that one then
Take the first bar.
In 99-00, Scotland's Relative Deficit vesus rUK was almost -£750 per person
This means our relative deficit was lower than the rUK
It's why you highlighted the spike of increased deficit under the "Yes" campaign period
Come on ISTL..... I know you're smarter than that.
The chart reads in 99/00 Scotland's relative deficit to the RUK was £750 worse....
It's a deficit.... Deficits are expressed in negative terms.
Hence the use of the minus symbol.
The 5 year period the Yes campaign used for their comparison included a year of near record high oil prices, hence it flattered their argument, as they could cherry pick that misleading data and the clueless would believe it was representative.
Scotland cannot afford to be independent or fully fiscally autonomous and maintain current heavily subsidised levels of expenditure or anything close to it.
We could of course survive under indy or FFA.... But only with savage cuts to services, benefits and public sector wages and employment.“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »Come on ISTL.....
The chart reads in 99/00 Scotland's relative deficit to the RUK was £750 worse....
It's a deficit.... Deficits are expressed in negative terms.
Hence the use of the minus symbol.
No, you missunderstand the terminology of relative.
if the deficit was relatively the same, the graph would be balanced on £0.
The facts showing in this graph that the Scotland relative compared with the UK was minus.
Remember, this graph you have shown includes Oil and Gas:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »Come on ISTL.....
The chart reads in 99/00 Scotland's relative deficit to the RUK was £750 worse....
It's a deficit.... Deficits are expressed in negative terms.
Hence the use of the minus symbol.
The graph also illustrates how figures can be presented (or spun) differently if you highlight a specific chosen window - to support one's own bias.
The last 2 years are the interesting ones. The direction of travel is most certainly not positive. There is every chance the deficit of Scotland vs rUK will remain negative in the near future.
This is why I can't work out the "hard done to" line. I expect Scotland to get a pretty good deal out of the post-referendum discussions.
The Scots drive a pretty canny bargain. I just wish the politicians down here showed the same canny nature when it comes to equivalent sized regions.
There are plenty of people in NW / Yorkshire / NE struggling right now, and all they hear is how Scottish interests are supposedly more important.0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »No, you missunderstand the terminology of relative.
if the deficit was relatively the same, the graph would be balanced on £0.
The facts showing in this graph that the Scotland relative compared with the UK was minus.
Remember, this graph you have shown includes Oil and Gas
Lets try another graph showing the same thing.
The blue line is the onshore revenue we raise on a per head basis. It is consistently lower than the RUK.
The Red line is the amount we spend on a per head basis. It is consistently higher than the rUK.
The Black line is oil revenue. In the years where the black line is higher than the red line, we ran a smaller deficit than rUK, in the years it is below we ran a bigger deficit.
You can see it is the same as the bar chart, in only three years did we have a smaller deficit than the rUK per person over the last 15 years, and it's getting worse.
So on average our deficit per person is much worse than the UK, and has been for all of the last 15 years except 3. This is the IFS 'black hole' and in practical terms represents the amount we are subsidised by UK taxpayers.
“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
Nope. Wrong on all counts.
FPTP works very well when you effectively have a 2 party system. With a 6 party system it's ludicrous. The Greens, UKIP and Lib Dems will all get far more votes than the SNP but far fewer seats.
PR all but ensures that there will never be a Conservative Government again.
The last sentence - I would not go so far as that because one can still have majority governments and while that may be true now, in time times change.
But PR does make coalition governments much more likely. I am not so happy with that prospect, preferring a clear choice in an election, rather than a cobbled together compromise manifesto that, literally, nobody voted for.Union, not Disunion
I have a Right Wing and a Left Wing.
It's the only way to fly straight.0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »...Take the first bar.
In 99-00, Scotland's Relative Deficit vesus rUK was almost -£750 per person
This means our relative deficit was lower than the rUK....
No, it means that your relative deficit was higher than the UK.IveSeenTheLight wrote: »...It's why you highlighted the spike of increased deficit under the "Yes" campaign period
No, there was a spike of reduced deficit during the referendum campaign. Clever old Salmond for getting the timing right and at least maximising the chance of getting a yes vote. OK, it din't work, but you can't blame him for trying.0 -
Have a read of this summary report
Gers figures show Scotland's debt 'lower than UK level'Scotland had debt of £3.4bn, or 2.3% of Gross Domestic Product, if a geographical share of North Sea oil was included.
Equivalent numbers for the UK showed a deficit of £92.3bn, or 6.0% of GDP.The figures also said:
Total public sector spending for the benefit of Scotland by the Scottish and UK governments and other public sector areas was £64.5bn, or 9.3% of total UK public sector expenditure (including a per capita share of UK debt interest payments).
The estimated current budget balance for the public sector in Scotland was a deficit of £14.0bn without North Sea revenue, £13bn including a per capita share of North Sea revenue, or £3.4bn including a geographical share of North Sea revenue.
The UK as a whole ran a current budget deficit, including North Sea revenue, of £92.3bn, or 6% of GDP.
Yes, Scotland had a deficit, but it was lower than the UK's:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
No, there was a spike of reduced deficit during the referendum campaign. Clever old Salmond for getting the timing right and at least maximising the chance of getting a yes vote. OK, it din't work, but you can't blame him for trying.
Yes, here are the figures showing the highly misleading Yes campaign cherry picking of data.
“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
gotta go and pick up my boy.
Will be back later:wall:
What we've got here is....... failure to communicate.
Some men you just can't reach.
:wall:0 -
IveSeenTheLight wrote: »Yes, Scotland had a deficit, but it was lower than the UK's
That was for one year....
As it happens, one of only three years in the last 15 where that statement has been correct.
How is it possible you don't know this?“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.3K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.8K Spending & Discounts
- 244.4K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.1K Life & Family
- 257.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards