Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

The bit you're missing is that the SNP have consistently lied to Scots to the extent that there is a commonly held view that fiscal life will carry on as is, that an independent Scotland could simply redirect existing spending as they see fit.

The reality is that an independent Scotland would spend the first couple of years working out how to reduce spending by 10-15% while dealing with a huge surge of unemployment and the collapse of the welfare state.

I realise that sounds overblown but that is the reality of a cut in the state of the size the SNP is proposing just so they can be ruled by people with different accents.

You see to be under the impression that Scots aren't capable of working out implications for themselves. Or who's 'lying' to them. Good luck with peddling that line to anyone in Scotland.

mwpt

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I guess if you can separate 'while in the Union' and 'independence' it will all make sense to you. While in the Union, Westminster hold most of the purse strings. The SNP of course will put Scottish interests first when it comes to getting the best it can for Scottish taxpayers/citizens and residents ( think David Cameron and the EU ).

Independence means no Westminster holding the purse strings. No need to get the 'best deal' for Scots from another Govt. No 'subsidies' either.

In short, you're asking the Scottish Govt to act and make policies as if it's already independent, when it's Westminster that dish out the pocket money. Alas, Scotland isn't independent, so the SNP are stuck with simply getting the best deal it possibly can from Westminster. While in the Union.

Simple enough for you ?

I must admit I am at a bit of a loss as to what you (meaning nationalists) actually want. You seem to accept that you'll be worse off outside of the UK than inside (reference previous posts). You seem to be happy enough to take the subsidy right now, while complaining that westminster isn't good for you for some reason. You seem to think that being in a different union (EU) is acceptable, but not one with your closer neighbours (UK).

It strikes me as the primary driving force for separation is a bit of xenophobia rather than anything else.

What am I missing?

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

You see to be under the impression that Scots aren't capable of working out implications for themselves. Or who's 'lying' to them. Good luck with peddling that line to anyone in Scotland.

I hope that the good people of Scotland don't fall for the ridiculous lies the SNP have been spinning vis-a-vis the economics of independence.

Good luck as a known SNP flag waver if you realise your dreams. You're going to have some very unhappy neighbours when they realise that Londoners aren't going to be buying Granny's cancer meds any longer.

Shakethedisease

Tromking wrote: »

I was talking about the SNP attitude to the English subsidy "while in the Union", is was you who started talking about full independence.
Westminster does not just hold the purse strings to Scots and their penchant for the nicer things in life it is THE purse. Controlling the levers of the Scottish economy doesn't eradicate the fiscal blackhole, it means as Generali has stated,

Generali has an opinion and that's fair enough. It shouldn't be treated as 100% indisputable fact however. Economists are more often wrong than right. Especially in the UK it seems when predicting debt and deficit reduction, meeting targets or global financial crashes. Or as they're known anywhere north of the border, but never anywhere else... 'fiscal black holes'. You also posted that a Scottish political party that has campaigned for Scottish independence for a century seem 'desperate' to hang on to English subsidies. Which doesn't square up.

that the SNP has to make difficult choices, choices so far it seems reluctant to share with the Scots people. No wonder Nationalists keep losing referendums.

They've only lost one ? It took two goes for devolution and a Scottish parliament too. A landslide the second time round too.

The point a poster made a couple pages back, that the more Scots extract by way of subsidies from a jumpy rUK the harder it will be to make a financial case for an independent Scotland is a good one.
It's ironic that the more the SNP protects the interests of Scots, the closer it binds Scotland to the Union.

No, I don't think so. I only humour you when I post 'subsidies' in my own posts. Many don't agree with the subsidy junkie label. And the truth is that no one knows the outcome of any negotiations of debt/assets etc that would come from an independence vote. While a single pound of Scottish taxpayers money still goes to the exchequer while still in the union.. then there will be a Barnett formula in some form. How could there not be ? Seems pretty churlish to complain about it to me.

But Barnett hasn't bound the Scottish any closer to the union, certainly not in recent years.

Shakethedisease

mwpt wrote: »

I must admit I am at a bit of a loss as to what you (meaning nationalists) actually want. You seem to accept that you'll be worse off outside of the UK than inside (reference previous posts). You seem to be happy enough to take the subsidy right now, while complaining that westminster isn't good for you for some reason. You seem to think that being in a different union (EU) is acceptable, but not one with your closer neighbours (UK).

It strikes me as the primary driving force for separation is a bit of xenophobia rather than anything else.

What am I missing?

That while in the union, things will never change. And the best Scotland can ever hope for is to be 'subsidy junkies' ? To have folks like yourself, Gen, and Tromking shoving it down our throats every 5 mins that Scotland will always be a basket case ? So best stay in the Union to make absolutely sure of it ?

No Thanks.

Generali

The fiscal gap is about accountancy not economics. Hey ho though. Neither really matter when all you want is independence no matter the price.

Happy new year to all: Nats, Indies, Tories, Socialists, Commonwealers (stoners?) and all those in between and of other persuasions. Enjoy the pics of the Sydney fireworks.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

I hope that the good people of Scotland don't fall for the ridiculous lies the SNP have been spinning vis-a-vis the economics of independence.

Good luck as a known SNP flag waver if you realise your dreams. You're going to have some very unhappy neighbours when they realise that Londoners aren't going to be buying Granny's cancer meds any longer.

There's been a fair amount of lies in the other direction. McCrone and the recent releases from cabinet papers over the last few days. The economics of an iScotland are an unknown. The sooner you admit that better. You can't apply Westminster policies and choices to an independent Scotland for the next 5,10,20 years and then come up with 'answers'. Because it's patently obvious that an independent Scottish govt, wouldn't be implementing the same policies and choices economically over the first 10 years of it's existence. As stated also, the results of any negotiations are also an unknown.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

The fiscal gap is about accountancy not economics. Hey ho though. Neither really matter when all you want is independence no matter the price.

Yes, the accountancy is in question too. But hey ho.

Happy new year to all: Nats, Indies, Tories, Socialists, Commonwealers (stoners?) and all those in between and of other persuasions. Enjoy the pics of the Sydney fireworks.

Same to you. I'm away to get my shortbread and vodka in, and prime up Netflix with 'Still Game' episodes for after the bells.

All the best for 2016 Everyone. :beer:

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

There's been a fair amount of lies in the other direction. McCrone and the recent releases from cabinet papers over the last few days. The economics of an iScotland are an unknown. The sooner you admit that better. You can't apply Westminster policies and choices to an independent Scotland for the next 5,10,20 years and then come up with 'answers'. Because it's patently obvious that an independent Scottish govt, wouldn't be implementing the same policies and choices economically over the first 10 years of it's existence. As stated also, the results of any negotiations are also an unknown.

So you accept that the SNP has lied in pretty egregious terms about the finances an independent Scotland would face...?

It's disgraceful really although to be expected I suppose.

**sigh**

mwpt

Shakethedisease wrote: »

That while in the union, things will never change. And the best Scotland can ever hope for is to be 'subsidy junkies' ? To have folks like yourself, Gen, and Tromking shoving it down our throats every 5 mins that Scotland will always be a basket case ? So best stay in the Union to make absolutely sure of it ?

No Thanks.

No, that is a cop out answer. Tell me what will change when outside of the union please. Tell me why you can't raise extra taxes for public spending right now (I believe you can). Tell me why EU is acceptable but UK is not.