Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Shakethedisease wrote: »

And current polling is at 50/50.

You keep saying that, but current polling is at 49 No and 47 Yes with 5% undecided. (all figs rounded to nearest percent)

However, the undecideds broke last time 2-1 to remain in the UK.

The figures have barely moved from the referendum.

Mistermeaner

also bizarrely where the SNP have an opportunity to get a march on RoUK is in exploiting the shale reserves.... however SNP have declared yet more economically illiterate strategy in this regard.

The pro-Indi support line in this thread seems to be along the lines that 'economics don't matter' (glib paraphrasing) but that somehow things would be better if scotland was independent - Im struggling to understand what would be better?

How will a country of 5mil something people function better without the bung from 55mil other people?

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The Tories were in power for 18 years the last stint. They're heading for 10, mabye 15 or more this time round.

And yes, asking people to imagine a Conservative government was a prospect reduced the No lead by an instant 9% when it was asked back in 2014. ( 45% Yes was a distant possibility nine months before the referendum ).

http://survation.com/new-polling-on-scottish-independence-what-if-conservative-fortunes-improved/

That's a reality now. I imagine there will be a few out there having a rethink. And current polling is at 50/50.

I just don't understand this

with all the lies about the VOW
the insults to the lovely auntie Nicola
the disgraceful way the Scottish MPs have been treated in Westminster
the massive cuts and austerity
etc
I would have thought that the polls would have shown a massive majority for YES : maybe the scots are more clever than I was led to believe by the acolytes here.

Rinoa

Cameron sends 'happy St Andrews day' message to Scotland.

https://twitter.com/Number10gov

Does anyone know if Nicola or Alex sent a similar message to England on St Georges day? I'm sure they did.

Shakethedisease

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

As has been explained to you many times there are two factors to look at with oil revenues.

1) The gap between the cost of producing oil in the North Sea and the price it sells for and therefore how much tax revenue on profits the government can extract

2) The volume of oil being pumped out at those profitable levels and therefore how much tax revenue the government can extract

Even at $100 a barrel with current production levels, or anything close to them, Scotland would still be suffering a financial black hole to fill from either raising taxes or cutting spending that it has no realistic prospect of doing.

At $50 a barrel the tax take is essentially close to zero.... In fact the UK government has paid out more in allowances and rebates in the last 6 months than it has taken in tax, resulting in a negative revenue position from North Sea oil for the first time in history.

If you could first jump in zag's time machine and go back a few decades to when the UKCS was pumping over 3 times the quantity of oil it is today, and then also raise the price to the sort of record highs we saw a few years ago, I would agree that Scotland's finances would look very different.

But as it stands today I literally have a better chance of winning the lottery than you do of being able to achieve both those things at the same time.

Why don't you just save yourself some time and say that no matter what the oil prices are, that in your opinion a small country of 5 million people with oil and many, many other resources has no chance of making it as an independent country ? Too many financial black holes all over the place.

That just doesn't sound credible to me. In fact, it sounds a little bizarre to be honest given there are so many other small independent countries without oil. Within Europe too.

But at least we've finally established that oil prices matter not a jot in unionist land. Whatever they are. And, since support for independence hasn't fallen right alongside oil prices.. that also in Yes land, they matter not a jot either. You can change the record now.

Shakethedisease

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

You keep saying that, but current polling is at 49 No and 47 Yes with 5% undecided. (all figs rounded to nearest percent)

However, the undecideds broke last time 2-1 to remain in the UK.

The figures have barely moved from the referendum.

Yes is up 5% since the referendum. That's a good leap up. Early days too into this Conservative majority.

14/11/15

SCOT GOES POP POLL OF POLLS

MEAN AVERAGE (excluding Don't Knows) :
Yes 50.0% (+0.4)
No 50.0% (-0.4)

MEAN AVERAGE (not excluding Don't Knows) :
Yes 46.3% (+0.3)
No 46.3% (-0.4)

MEDIAN AVERAGE (excluding Don't Knows) :
Yes 49.2% (+0.5)
No 50.8% (-0.5)

(The Poll of Polls is based on a rolling average of the most recent poll from each of the firms that have polled on independence since the referendum, and that adhere to British Polling Council rules. At present, there are six - YouGov, TNS, Survation, Panelbase, Ipsos-Mori and ICM. Whenever a new poll is published, it replaces the last poll from the same company in the sample.)

Shakethedisease

Mistermeaner wrote: »

also bizarrely where the SNP have an opportunity to get a march on RoUK is in exploiting the shale reserves.... however SNP have declared yet more economically illiterate strategy in this regard.

The pro-Indi support line in this thread seems to be along the lines that 'economics don't matter' (glib paraphrasing) but that somehow things would be better if scotland was independent - Im struggling to understand what would be better?

How will a country of 5mil something people function better without the bung from 55mil other people?

Ask Denmark.

Shakethedisease

CLAPTON wrote: »

I just don't understand this

with all the lies about the VOW
the insults to the lovely auntie Nicola
the disgraceful way the Scottish MPs have been treated in Westminster
the massive cuts and austerity
etc
I would have thought that the polls would have shown a massive majority for YES : maybe the scots are more clever than I was led to believe by the acolytes here.

Early days. The Tories have only been in since May. Next May, if Scottish Labour does really badly, as Labour did in Westminter. The last large bastion of No voters Sept 14.. will probably give up and go home.

Tromking

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Why don't you just save yourself some time and say that no matter what the oil prices are, that in your opinion a small country of 5 million people with oil and many, many other resources has no chance of making it as an independent country ? Too many financial black holes all over the place.

That just doesn't sound credible to me. In fact, it sounds a little bizarre to be honest given there are so many other small independent countries without oil. Within Europe too.

But at least we've finally established that oil prices matter not a jot in unionist land. Whatever they are. And, since support for independence hasn't fallen right alongside oil prices.. that in Yes land, they matter not a jot either. You can change the record now.

What a silly thing to say.
You do realise that it's Unionists like Hamish that you need to convince to realise the dream?

.string.

Does anyone remember this report, published before the election?


http:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-28245717

Asked about the potential impact of the OBR report on the Scottish independence debate, Mr Salmond said: "The OBR are suggesting 10 billion barrels of oil and gas remaining. Oil and Gas UK say up to 24 billion barrels. Sir Ian Wood, who did the report just last year, says up to 24 billion barrels.

At the time, here on the forum, unionists were pointing out, time after time, the dangers of basing an economy on a volatile. Not much in the way of understanding of volatile by the nats then I revel. After the referendum, the word volatile was gradually rediscovered and is now being claimed to be about to cause a ruse in oil prices. Well it could not get much lower, so no points for a flash of inspiration there. You couldn't make it up --- at --- actually they did make up quite a lot.


The SNP were surely well aware of the fragility of their fairy dust economy, yet did not level with the Scottish Electorate. They could have put out the truth, they chose to lie.

For information, the White Paper SNP manifesto used the figure of 6.8 to 7.8 billion £ from oil aka off-shore receipts.