The New Fat Scotland 'Thanks for all the Fish' Thread.

ProDave

baldelectrician wrote: »

The report out on Friday specifically states that there will be no austerity under this plan they put out for discussion, you must be thinking of the scenario we are currently in or the one where we stat in the UK
.

From the famous document

"Scotland's deficit, the gap between public spending and revenue, is currently 7.1%.

Wilson's report says as Scotland leaves the UK, this could be brought down to 5.9% by reducing spending on things like defence, debt servicing, and contributions to projects in the rest of the UK.

Defence spending would see a 0.4% reduction in GDP.

The deficit would have to be reduced in the years following independence to bring it within a target of 3%.


So Either much reduced public spending, or increased taxation.

A "deficit reduction programme" will be needed to stabilise public finances.

Spending by the government of an independent Scotland would only be increased by "sufficiently less" than GDP growth over the business cycle.

This sounds to me like Austerity on Steroids.

At THE (once in a generation) referendum in 2014, Better Together suggested public spending would have to fall, or taxes rise to close the gap. This was dismissed as "project fear"

It is good to now be vindicated and have those figures confirmed by the SNP's own research.

I am sure this document has killed any indy ref #2 for the foreseeable future. I cannot imagine they would go to the people with this document now themselves admitting the scale of SNP austerity we would have.

antrobus

ProDave wrote: »

...
This sounds to me like Austerity on Steroids.

.

Well, that's what I've been pointing out on this thread for donkey's years.:) What's interesting is that the Wilson report's version of 'fiscal austerity' is based on the notion that this hypothetical independent Scotland would take no responsibility for the UK national debt, and thus start off debt free. Although Scotland would apparently offer some kind of 'solidarity' payment.

The chances of any UK government agreeing to any such thing is less than zero, so the reality would be 'Austerity on Steroids Double Plus'.:)

Of course, this all very hypothetical, as there is very little chance of the UK government agreeing to hold another referendum any time in the near future.

Thrugelmir

baldelectrician wrote: »

If you failed to notice we have just had about 10 years of austerity inside the UK


The report out on Friday specifically states that there will be no austerity under this plan they put out for discussion, you must be thinking of the scenario we are currently in or the one where we stat in the UK

Seems as if the report suggests at least 10 years of austerity..... and that the SNP accept that it will be neccessary to achieve independence. Appears you are singing off the wrong hymn sheet. That's poor communication down the ranks.

loadsacash

The problem there is in Scotland is voter apathy - in 2016 only 55% bothered to get out and vote - of that 46% of them voted SNP and therefore the SNP got in!

The people of Scotland have it in their power to stop Indy2.

elantan

sheesh this thread still going ?


well since we last spoke (oh what fun we had) I have swithered whether I will vote yes next time or not bother voting at all, my son has been the same only with the added previso he may vote no next time, my husband he is still a deff yes voter... the current way our family looks is this

me: not voting at all
son: voting no
Husband: still voting yes ... reluctantly

so in a family of 3 two have altered their original stance, just thought I would share

.string.

antrobus wrote: »

Well, that's what I've been pointing out on this thread for donkey's years.:) What's interesting is that the Wilson report's version of 'fiscal austerity' is based on the notion that this hypothetical independent Scotland would take no responsibility for the UK national debt, and thus start off debt free. Although Scotland would apparently offer some kind of 'solidarity' payment.

The chances of any UK government agreeing to any such thing is less than zero, so the reality would be 'Austerity on Steroids Double Plus'.:)

Of course, this all very hypothetical, as there is very little chance of the UK government agreeing to hold another referendum any time in the near future.

In the last Referendum campaign the SNP had a budget item in their infamous White Paper for paying their concept of what would be Natland's debt interest share of the UK National debt. But there was no, zilch, provision for paying off the debt itself.

To be clear, that would mean that as the UK struggled to pay off the debt, the parasitic SNP would be very happy seeing their interst payments go down over the years having made no contribution themselves.

Fairly recently (*) the SNP have reiterated the same strategy claiming, dishonest to a fault, that they would be paying their share of the UK national debt.

(*) Sorry no link for that; nowadays I don't bother to take notes on the SNP's whingeing bile.

gfplux

elantan wrote: »

sheesh this thread still going ?


well since we last spoke (oh what fun we had) I have swithered whether I will vote yes next time or not bother voting at all, my son has been the same only with the added previso he may vote no next time, my husband he is still a deff yes voter... the current way our family looks is this

me: not voting at all
son: voting no
Husband: still voting yes ... reluctantly

so in a family of 3 two have altered their original stance, just thought I would share

Do not forget that BAD politicians and policy are elected by GOOD PEOPLE not voting.

elantan

they are also elected by people that are voting . so I don't get what point your trying to make

Thrugelmir

elantan wrote: »

sheesh this thread still going ?

The issue is never going to go away as long as the SNP exists.

elantan

ohhh I would say at least until we get Indy . . Indy is still coming ... that's the exciting bit