Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

wotsthat

Shakethedisease wrote: »

No.

And try here. Not that I'm a fan of this guy at all, but he at least has a go at it.

No wonder - his ideas are wonderfully fanciful..

How do you fund a £9bn deficit...

Borrowing – allow for £3 billion for growth related investment funding

Tax rises – allow for £3 billion, without introducing serious distortions across the UK

Spending cuts – allow for £3 billion without affecting frontline services

The special lever, the one the SNP need to make all the difference, needs to be a magic wand.

elantan

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The short answer is that there aren't enough Tory rebels to defeat the bill at the moment. It would be passed anyway. The SNP ( and other parties ) have put forward amendments in the hope that more Tory MP's will vote against it next time stopping it being passed altogether. As far as I saw on Twitter and in other places, that's the hope. But even if not, and the bill isn't substantially revised, both in it's current form and going forward. They'll be voting against it.

You have to bear that Tory majority in mind. Opposing anything and everything just for the sake of it, turns the SNP into Scottish Labour. And we can't have that can we.

I get that the Tories would've got it through anyway ... and I know the plan is to change it ... but .... nah I'm no buying the tales ... it would've still passed even if they all voted against it, and it will still go to committee where changes can be made ... but the SNP just abstained ... that's not good

No doubt though Nicola will pull something out as she has done so before and I know she will do again ... I remember the fox hunting issue ... so will see how it plays out

Shakethedisease

elantan wrote: »

I get that the Tories would've got it through anyway ... and I know the plan is to change it ... but .... nah I'm no buying the tales ... it would've still passed even if they all voted against it, and it will still go to committee where changes can be made ... but the SNP just abstained ... that's not good

No doubt though Nicola will pull something out as she has done so before and I know she will do again ... I remember the fox hunting issue ... so will see how it plays out

Try this then.

https://talkingmince.wordpress.com/2016/03/15/snp-abstention-on-ipbill/

But imho, this bill is simply legislating for what is already done anyway. Will, like you wait and see how it's played out.

Shakethedisease

wotsthat wrote: »

No wonder - his ideas are wonderfully fanciful..

How do you fund a £9bn deficit...

The special lever, the one the SNP need to make all the difference, needs to be a magic wand.

I'm not sure that they're any more fanciful than Osborne's are today.

Andrew Neil ‏@afneil 2 hrs2 hours ago Osbo will borrow £40bn more til 18/19 ... then borrow £30bn less in 19/20. Credible?

Laura Kuenssberg ‏@bbclaurak 1 hr1 hour agoBlimey - public spending will be 32.9bn lower over the next five years than planned at Autumn Statement

Robert Peston ‏@Peston 1 hr1 hour ago
There is huge budget tightening of £14bn forecast by @George_Osborne for 2019/20, the year before election. Totally implausible surely?!!

Bell is usually splashed front page of Scottish newspapers as an 'ex Salmond advisor' coming out with all sorts of anti-SNP stuff. So it was a surprise to see him have a stab at this yesterday.

baldelectrician

It's all nonsense- just in different levels


The Unionist Argument
Too wee, too poor - black hole - skint


The nationalist argument
Unionism has had 300 years at running a Scottish economy and it is still running a large deficit. To paraphrase another 'madness is doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting a different answer'



The whole point of independence is to run a Scottish economy for the sole benefit of Scotland and it's people whilst Westminster runs it's economy for the benefit of London and the south east of England.


The money issues are not accurate- the GERS figures are lots of guess work- they don't include tourism which contributes to Scotland's economy.

wotsthat

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I'm not sure that they're any more fanciful than Osborne's are today.

Why is the standard defence when a nationalist is accused of spouting rubbish to point out someone else might be talking rubbish too?

I said on a different thread I think Osborne is lying or seriously deluding himself that we'll be deficit free by 2020.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Bell is usually splashed front page of Scottish newspapers as an 'ex Salmond advisor' coming out with all sorts of anti-SNP stuff. So it was a surprise to see him have a stab at this yesterday.

I don't think I'd heard of him. It had the look of a 12 year old's first attempt at a blog post. How to deal with a deficit..

1) Don't bother. Only try to deal with two thirds of it and use the £3bn borrowed to 'invest'
2) increase taxes by £3bn but only in areas where no one will notice
3) reduce spending by £3bn but only in area where no one will notice

Job done.

It's worthy of Viz top tips

Shakethedisease

wotsthat wrote: »

Why is the standard defence when a nationalist is accused of spouting rubbish to point out someone else might be talking rubbish too?

No, it's an observation on budget day of the Chancellor who's currently in charge of the entire UK in terms of fiscal policies... compared to a blog post written by an ex-Spad (years ago) of Alex Salmond's. In terms of who's spouting the biggest pile of rubbish.

I said on a different thread I think Osborne is lying or seriously deluding himself that we'll be deficit free by 2020.

That means Scotland is unlikely to be deficit free either then. Whatever happens if there's a Yes vote in future, it's very unlikely that Scotland would start off deficit free. It's the size of it that's in question. And when you have tv reporters tweeting stuff like the below on budget day. You do have to wonder as to what the real story is sometimes.

Laura Kuenssberg ‏@bbclaurak 5 hrs5 hours ago Rupert Harrison says Treasury has ways of 'shifting money' around 'up their sleeve' to make the numbers work...

I don't think I'd heard of him. It had the look of a 12 year old's first attempt at a blog post. How to deal with a deficit..

1) Don't bother. Only try to deal with two thirds of it and use the £3bn borrowed to 'invest'
2) increase taxes by £3bn but only in areas where no one will notice
3) reduce spending by £3bn but only in area where no one will notice

Job done.

It's worthy of Viz top tips

He gave it a go at least.

Shakethedisease

baldelectrician wrote: »

It's all nonsense- just in different levels


The Unionist Argument
Too wee, too poor - black hole - skint


The nationalist argument
Unionism has had 300 years at running a Scottish economy and it is still running a large deficit. To paraphrase another 'madness is doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting a different answer'



The whole point of independence is to run a Scottish economy for the sole benefit of Scotland and it's people whilst Westminster runs it's economy for the benefit of London and the south east of England.

The money issues are not accurate- the GERS figures are lots of guess work- they don't include tourism which contributes to Scotland's economy.

Yes it goes around in circles a lot. Your last two paragraphs are it in a nutshell. GERS does allocate a share regarding tourists, but it doesn't look likely to be at all accurate.

Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland (GERS) is a National Statistics publication. It estimates the contribution of revenue raised in Scotland toward the goods and services provided for the benefit of Scotland...

...Any analysis of public sector receipts in Scotland relies on estimation, and as such alternative estimates are possible. ..

The majority of public sector revenue payable by Scottish residents and enterprises is collected at the UK level. Generally it is not possible to identify separately the proportion of that revenue receivable from Scotland...

...Note that, for most consumption taxes, Scotland's estimated share of UK revenue is based upon data relating to UK residents. This is because there is a lack of data on taxes paid by tourists. As such, GERS assigns Scotland a share of consumption receipts from tourists, in proportion to Scotland's share of UK domestic household consumption.

Mistermeaner

So elentan shakeys response was a link to ablog that was quickly dismissed as garbage.... Can you do any better in explaining to me the financial working of your indi scotland

Remember its the vision on 5 key points. Not details

Mistermeaner wrote: »

I must have missed it although I'm sure I've asked loads of times. I'll ask again:

Can someone please explaining simple terms how Scotland will balance its public finances with the evil Westminster gone on the basis of / in terms of:

1. The block grant (Barnett) going going gone
2. A share of the uk total debt (this is unavoidable)
3. Taxation up / Down / the same
4. Expenditure up /down / the same
5. Borrowing

............
*************
Eg:

1. Keep your Money Westminster this will be zero
2. We will only accept 5bil of the debt
3. We will raise 10% more tax by getting rid of the 20% band and going straight to 40%
4. No change to spending.
5. We will borrow an extra 5bil a year for the first 5 years while wait for oil to go back up
*************

I'm just desperately trying to understand the vision, not the details, of how the proindi supporters think i scotland will work.

Thrugelmir

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I'm not sure that they're any more fanciful than Osborne's are today.

Must be difficult to accept that austerity "Osborne" style is working. Could easily be totally blown off course. But that's something to be addressed on another day.