Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

IveSeenTheLight

Tromking wrote: »

I've never quite got the anti-Trident thing as it relates to Scotland, some areas of the UK would see it as a huge boost to the local economy to house Trident. It depends on your mindset I suppose.

I recall linking an article showing that Trident contributed to only 500 jobs directly in Scotland.

CLAPTON

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I recall linking an article showing that Trident contributed to only 500 jobs directly in Scotland.

of course you do

you always vaguely recall articles that support SNP policies: amazing

Tromking

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I recall linking an article showing that Trident contributed to only 500 jobs directly in Scotland.

....only 500 jobs?

A different mindset up there obviously.

Generali

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I recall linking an article showing that Trident contributed to only 500 jobs directly in Scotland.

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-20132118

Asked for the number of civilians working on the strategic nuclear deterrent, the Ministry of Defence said it was 520.

but

If you count all those employed on supporting the deterrent and the four submarines which provide their platform, the number goes above 6,500 jobs.
Of those, the MoD says about 3,500 are uniformed Royal Navy, 1,700 are contractors and 1,600 are other civilian employees.

and

More are on their way. Two Astute class submarines are already based at HMNB Clyde, and five more are due to follow when they've finished sea trials.
Four older Trafalgar class submarines are having their base moved, so that the whole Royal Navy submarine fleet will be based on the Clyde, from 2017.
The MoD says that should take employment numbers up to about 8,000.

but what about the money that those employees spend, aka the multiplier effect?

The article covers that too:

To rewind, an economic consultancy reported for Scottish Enterprise 10 years ago that there is a multiplier effect in the west of Scotland - that is, local businesses supply Faslane and Coulport, and then a portion of the salaries of 6,500 people is spent on local businesses.
That was reckoned to take the number of jobs dependent on the bases to about 11,000.

As there are 2,622,000 people employed in Scotland (link) almost 0.5% of Scottish employees could be said to rely on Trident for their jobs one way or another.

IveSeenTheLight

Generali wrote: »

As there are 2,622,000 people employed in Scotland (link) almost 0.5% of Scottish employees could be said to rely on Trident for their jobs one way or another.

I find it difficult to believe that all these jobs are solely dependent on Trident.

Having worked looking at Manufacturing, Supply Chain and MRP systems over the years, I've seen how difficult it can be working with suppliers as their base is so diverse and not solely reliant on any one company / industry.

To consider that 11,000 people are "reliant" on Trident for their jobs would need more substantial data to justify and not any extrapolation or magnifying multiplier effect.

Generali

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

I find it difficult to believe that all these jobs are solely dependent on Trident.

Having worked looking at Manufacturing, Supply Chain and MRP systems over the years, I've seen how difficult it can be working with suppliers as their base is so diverse and not solely reliant on any one company / industry.

To consider that 11,000 people are "reliant" on Trident for their jobs would need more substantial data to justify and not any extrapolation or magnifying multiplier effect.

Most Keynesians, and the SNP's economic policies seem to lean heavily on a particular interpretation of Keynes's work, would say that the people employed as a result of the money the UK Government spends on Trident indirectly (e.g. the barman at the local pub, the bank clerk in the local bank, the checkout chick at the Tesco) are just as clearly employed as a result of Trident spending as the bloke employed to polish the missiles or lube the firing tubes (I suspect it's quickly becoming clear I'm not a Naval man but you get the idea I hope).

Ignoring the multiplier effect, 8,000 people will be employed looking after Trident by 2017 according to current plans according to the BBC.

Including the multiplier effect that will take total employed as a result of trident up to about 14,000, give or take.

The multiplier is given as a calculated figure, observed by adherents empirically. The Beeb has used quite a conservative figure for the multiplier. IIRC, the IMF reckons it's about 1.7 for the UK which would mean more than 20,000 employed directly and indirectly as a result of Trident by 2017.

I reckon the multiplier effect cuts two ways: all you do is move employment from hither to yon but !!!!!! do I know?

IveSeenTheLight

Generali wrote: »

would say that the people employed as a result of the money the UK Government spends on Trident indirectly (e.g. the barman at the local pub, the bank clerk in the local bank, the checkout chick at the Tesco) are just as clearly employed as a result of Trident spending as the bloke employed to polish the missiles or lube the firing tubes (I suspect it's quickly becoming clear I'm not a Naval man but you get the idea I hope).

I do get the idea and have not worked in the area, but I also take note of Leannes post who considered that the local economy does not outwardly appear to be benefiting

Froggitt

If Scotland doesn't want Trident, and however many jobs go with it, there are many other parts of the country that do.

IveSeenTheLight

Generali wrote: »

IIRC, the IMF reckons it's about 1.7 for the UK which would mean more than 20,000 employed directly and indirectly as a result of Trident by 2017.

So now it's 20,000 using statistical calculations at a time when Austerity measures are being put in place, but lets rewind a moment

If you count all those employed on supporting the deterrent and the four submarines which provide their platform, the number goes above 6,500 jobs.
Of those, the MoD says about 3,500 are uniformed Royal Navy, 1,700 are contractors and 1,600 are other civilian employees.

So the 6500 jobs are MOD, Contractors and Civilian Employees.

It's interesting that this link also relates to these figures, but goes on further to state the number of Direct and indirect

http://nuclearinfo.org/article/uk-trident-operational-berths/ministry-defence-reveals-just-520-faslane-jobs-depend-trident

An expert study into the economic consequences of cancelling Trident commissioned by the Scottish Trades Union Congress and Scottish CND concluded that the total reduction in direct and indirect civilian employment across Scotland if Trident was scrapped would be less than 1800 and that this reduction would not take place until after 2022.

There seems to be a vast difference between less than 1800 and 20,000.

One could argue that scrapping trident would release budget which could create even more jobs than just 1800.

IveSeenTheLight

Froggitt wrote: »

If Scotland doesn't want Trident, and however many jobs go with it, there are many other parts of the country that do.

Go for it. Did you say that your local area was one of them?