Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Generali

I'll start a new thread to deal with Scotland's finances as measured by GERS. It's very interesting from an economic POV.

michaels

The bbc seem determined to champion democracy, except when it is a matter of scots mps voting on e&w only matters, when the headline is about tory splits. Do I have any democratic say over scottish shop opening hours?

I guess as an snp mp the ends justify the means

mwpt

Mistermeaner wrote: »

Can someone please explain how the values of £a and £b will be different for an IScotland such that not only is the removal of the block grant neutralised but also how £a is increased without increasing taxes and/or £b is reduced without reducing spending such that the deficit position is improved?

From what I can make of their position, everything is the fault of Tories/Westminster (read this as a proxy for England). The hole in Scotland's finances only exists because "the Tories".

Therefore from that frame, you can't use the hole in the finances to argue that Scotland would be worse off independent because the position is that if Scotland were in charge, they'd run things much better and generate a lot more wealth somehow. I'm not sure if the how has been formalised but there isn't need for that, "because Tories".

mwpt

michaels wrote: »

The bbc seem determined to champion democracy, except when it is a matter of scots mps voting on e&w only matters, when the headline is about tory splits. Do I have any democratic say over scottish shop opening hours?

I saw the interview on the BBC last night. The reporter was determined to make the issue about the split in the Tory votes rather than being interested in why Scottish MPs voted against something in England which Scotland themselves have.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

There have been plenty of GERS articles today. For and countering. Little point countering them once again with you. Is pointless as we're both entrenched in our positions and we'll never change them most likely.

The SNP have did what they said they would do. Looked after their constituents best interests at Westminster. That's what MP's are for. Shock, horror. Cameron wanted to keep Scottish MP's at Westminster come hell or high water. That's what he got. Suck it up buttercup.

what the SNP did was to demonstrate that the ONLY way that they can protect scotttish sunday pay rates, is to vote at Westminster which mean they MUST stay part of the union.

Rinoa

Shakethedisease wrote: »

But for every one of the above there is another who feels that GERS releases are a damning confirmation of the sheer state the UK has let Scotland's accounts and economic performance get to, year upon year.. while Westminster has been in control of most of it. A real impetus to get out of the UK asap.

Scotland has total autonomy over its football, rugby and cricket teams. How's that working out?

.string.

wotsthat wrote: »

...The Sunday shopping thing is hilarious. Makes the SNP look like a sulking child rather than a party fit to govern an independent country.

The technical term is Childish, following what was said by Sajid Javid (“childish and hypocritical” to be exact).

michaels

wotsthat wrote: »

The Sunday shopping thing is hilarious. Makes the SNP look like a sulking child rather than a party fit to govern an independent country.

To me it makes them look principled. The principle they stand by is doing anything they can to lead to Scottish Independence regardless of the consequences for democracy for anyone else, and demonstrating to the rUK what a raw deal they (rUK) get under the current constitutional arrangements which hugely benefit the Scots must lead towards break up - if the rUK got a referendum to leave the Scots I would vote in favour.

kabayiri

A future UK independence referendum should ask everyone in all the regions whether they should be independent.

If the majority of Scots voted Yes; majority of English voted Yes; same for Welsh and NI; it would be a clear expression of intent.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

That is my own analysis of the GERS figures. The only thing I quote that doesn't come from the Scottish Government directly is the date of 24th March 2016 as being when Mr Salmond wanted independence.

There really is nothing to counter. The Scottish state's finances would be in a horrible mess in 2 weeks' time and getting worse. We already have some insight into how the next set of figures are likely to look and unless something very dramatic happens in the oil market then it ain't gonna be pretty my friend.

Ironically, the SNP's insistence that the Scottish Government should be seen as a separate entity with separate accounts could end up dealing a pretty mighty blow to Scotland's finances. At some point the English, especially Londoners, are going to work out the extent to which they are subsidising the Scot's free this and that and I suspect the results are not going to be pleasing for the typical subsidy-engorged SNP voter.

As the UK's deficit for 2015-6 now looks to be set to be about £69 billion, Scotland's numbers look really bad on the face of it. We'll just have to wait for 2015-6 to see exactly how bad but I should be able to put together a rough and ready draft.

Feel free. I doubt it will top Kevin Hague's indepth analysis from a unionist perspective. However that being said, it won't alter the fact that growing numbers of Scots are now seeing GERS absolutely as a reason to leave the UK, not stay within it. I guess that's what happens when so much wall to wall emphasis is now put on a single set of figures once a year. People start asking questions rather than just accepting whatever the Daily Record headlines are.

Next year there will be no election either, so bad as they may be. The SNP will most likely weather the storm with little damage. My own views are similar to this piece.

http://autonomyscotland.org/independence-supporters-need-to-embrace-gers/?utm_content=buffer8f95d&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer Is too long to quote in full.

The first thing to note is that it is not all bad news. The rise in the onshore economy almost covered the losses made by the decline in oil revenues. The economy is growing, our employment rate is higher than the UK as a whole. Our output per head and our growth of productivity has outstripped the UK. Our exports are doing well. Spending on capital projects and economic growth is over £400 per head higher than the UK, meaning that some of the large deficit could be viewed as an investment that will reap future dividends.

That said, the size of the deficit is a worry that we should not shy away from. Our political opponents and the general public certainly will not.

Which was taken from the analysis here.

Just as Westminster controls some 70% of the revenue of Scotland it also controls more than 40% of the expenditure IN Scotland (including well as expenditure outside but “on the behalf of” Scotland).

https://thecommongreen.wordpress.com/2016/03/09/we-need-to-talk-about-gers-2014-15-edition/

There is plenty to counter. But as I say, GERS itself is no longer the magic bullet it once was.