Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Riii-iiight. So the SNP.. 'simply don't have a mandate' to block Trident renewal. Yet suddenly, they're in charge of the entire Scottish economy performance. We all must have missed the part where Scotland voted yes and that the Scottish Govt is now solely responsible for running the Scottish economy as a completely separate entity to the UK one. Pull the other one Gen, it's got bells on.

Westminster and the Conservative government at the present time run the Scottish economy. The Scottish Govt get a block grant to administer. So you're absolutely correct.... the Conservatives are doing a really, really poor job when it comes to Scotland. Since they have the mandate.

It might be better all round to have a more local and a government which focuses and targets on Scottish economic issues and management. And with a much reduced population to cater for. Things are obviously going badly within the union as the FT figures show and aren't likely to change. Not when Osborne is openly giving out warnings of bad times ahead and RBS stock brokers are telling everyone to sell, sell, sell.

The Scottish economy isn't just oil prices. You as an economist should actually know that. It's a bit sad that you keep repeating it.

The Scottish economy isn't just oil prices but it is 17% oil prices or at least was. Now, by a back of envelope calculation it's well under 15% oil prices and falling fast.

The point isn't that any of this is the SNP's fault. The point is that Scotland as an economy is massively overexposed to oil. As part of the UK that isn't so much of a problem as the lower the oil price the more Londoners' taxes are diverted to solve Scotland's economic problems. Outside the Union, Scotland doesn't have that stabilising money available.

I don't think you appreciate quite the hole you'd be in right now outside the union. Scotland would be looking at trying to slash spending in the face of a terrible depression. That it doesn't have to do that is solely due to the fact that Scotland is a part of the UK.

Time for the scales to fall from your eyes. Either you stay in the Union or face decades of grinding poverty for a freedom that is largely illusory.

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Imo the main driving factor behind EVEL is less to do with the Scots, than it is for locking in an in-built Conservative majority in England. Labour can win throughout the UK, but without a majority in England, they'll have some problems getting things through when in power. They could always repeal it I suppose, but I doubt that would go down very well at ALL with voters now it's in place. But UK Labour are totally against EVEL too as they know this.

There's no denying as you infer.. that the timing of it has been absolutely fantastic for the SNP though. Not a single new power for Scotland as yet, scores of amendments put forward to the Scotland Bill by Scottish MP's all voted down by English MP's, and barred from votes in the UK HOC for the first time in it's history into the bargain ! Could it get any better in terms of how things look to your average Scots voter regarding Westminster and staying with it as an 'equal partner'. Oh wait, yes it could. There's still Trident and the EU referendum.

Just to help understanding, I made bold those parts of the post which were actually true, the rest being standard SNP spin; the same old drivel.

On the subject of having a Tory Government being good for the SNP I am reminded of the several times, before the last GE, when you said exactly that and how that would be win win for the SNP. Then there was that affair about the memo which was leaked regarding Sturgeon's remarks, amounting to much the same thing, to the French Ambassador. Attention focussed on the impropriety of the leak itself and a denial was issued by Sturgeon and also the French Ambassador. As the lies and spiteful spin mount, it becomes more and more difficult to believe anything said by the collective.

Thrugelmir

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Imo the main driving factor behind EVEL is less to do with the Scots, than it is for locking in an in-built Conservative majority in England.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Is this the latest official line. I guess the oil price is a topic to be avoided at all costs.

May backfire. Surely supporting Labour is a better way of achieving this objective.

.string.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The SNP didn't claim 500 jobs. The MOD did after a FIR by an anti-Trident group.

I have just explained why that is not the whole story, also that came from the MOD.

I don't think the SNP have moral principles in their politics.

Shakethedisease

Mistermeaner wrote: »

Cant remember where i saw it but some bright spark had a brilliant idea of an English referendum to leave the UK. On scots logic it would mean that England could leave behind all the UK debts to scotland & wales et al.

Correct. Successor states. Either they agree to split amicably and split the debt. Or the new state walks away debt free should they choose. Historically.

You should go for it.

Shakethedisease

CLAPTON wrote: »

Scottish people can vote for issues controlled by Holyrood and its only fair that English MP vote on the English equivalent

you know that is fair

OK, if you/SNP wish to use this as an issue to achieve independence then that simply reflects on how corrupt the SNP have become .
Once corrupt it's hard to go back to being honest: be afraid for the future of your children.
Independence isn't worth any price as many have discovered in the past.

The SNP have had nothing much to say officially about EVEL. People are just drawing their own conclusions as far as I can see. Labour aren't exactly thrilled either.

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Correct. Successor states. Either they agree to split amicably and split the debt. Or the new state walks away debt free should they choose. Historically.

You should go for it.

It still wouldn't go anywhere near closing the budget gap.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

The Scottish economy isn't just oil prices but it is 17% oil prices or at least was. Now, by a back of envelope calculation it's well under 15% oil prices and falling fast.

The point isn't that any of this is the SNP's fault. The point is that Scotland as an economy is massively overexposed to oil. As part of the UK that isn't so much of a problem as the lower the oil price the more Londoners' taxes are diverted to solve Scotland's economic problems. Outside the Union, Scotland doesn't have that stabilising money available.

I don't think you appreciate quite the hole you'd be in right now outside the union. Scotland would be looking at trying to slash spending in the face of a terrible depression. That it doesn't have to do that is solely due to the fact that Scotland is a part of the UK.

Time for the scales to fall from your eyes. Either you stay in the Union or face decades of grinding poverty for a freedom that is largely illusory.

No. Time for the scales to fall from yours.

27 February 2014

The challenges facing an independent Scotland's economy are significant but not unsurpassable, according to global ratings firm Standard and Poor's. The company set out its "broad conclusions" on the creditworthiness of the potential new sovereign state in a report.
S&P makes clear in its report that it is not passing judgement on the actual rating of an independent Scotland, and it takes no view on the merits or otherwise of independence...

..."Standard & Poor's have concluded that Scotland's wealth levels are comparable to those of AAA-listed nations, and that as an independent country - even without North Sea oil - Scotland will qualify for S&P's highest economic assessment.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/13147964.Standard_and_Poor_s__challenges_facing_iScotland_s_economy_are_significant_but_not_unsurpassable/

I think you're just one of many amateur ( Scotland wise ) economists with an 'opinion', largely coloured by the friends you have here quoting Kevin Hague ( another armchair economist popular because he says things unionist's want to hear ).. and other sources.. There are other views, and opinions. Scotland is more than oil prices. You're no more credible than anyone else I'm afraid. Though is good in debating terms re pros and cons.

At the end of the day, a specific Scotland targeted economy, would be better looked after by a specific Scottish government in control of all economic levers, targeted towards Scottish centric economic activity, borrowing and investments. With or without oil which is running out anyway.

House prices crashing in London is a bit of a worry isn't it....

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

It still wouldn't go anywhere near closing the budget gap.

You have no idea what the budget gap is or will be. Apart from what Kevin Hague says it will be, based on a Scotland still following UK policy, debt and deficits. Which it won't be.

Shakethedisease

Thrugelmir wrote: »

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Is this the latest official line. I guess the oil price is a topic to be avoided at all costs.

May backfire. Surely supporting Labour is a better way of achieving this objective.

Is not an official line. EVEL is what Labour fear most even if they regain Scotland. The SNP haven't said very much. Though it plays into their hands just fabulously at the moment.