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

Generali

chewmylegoff wrote: »

There's no need for the SNP to introduce a 50% tax or really ramp up any other taxes for that matter because Scotland is part of the Union and her public spending is therefore not directly related to the amount of tax raised in Scotland. If I was the SNP there is no way I would risk my popularity by slapping a 50% tax on higher earners just for the sake of it - it would not raise a great deal of additional money to be spent in Scotland and just isn't worth it.

Of course if you had all voted for independence then you would probably be staring down the barrel of 30% basic rate (not including NI) and 50% tax above about £50k (sorry, €60k) given the current economic situation in Scotland so thank god you didn't, eh?

The reality of Scottish independence with the current oil price would look a lot like Czech Republic. Not so bad but you can forget about 'free' university and medicine.

Generali

chewmylegoff wrote: »

So would you prefer full independence with basic rate tax increased to 30% and the current 40% band increased to 50%, but public services receiving the same or even less funding than currently? Would that be a worthwhile price to pay? (Please answer this question rather than saying that it wouldn't happen for whatever reason, we can call it a hypothetical question if that makes it easier).

It's not possible to fill the fiscal gap in Scotland by increasing taxes.

If Scotland had become independent yesterday (today your time) then some very hard choices would be needed. The gap between spending and revenue is about what is spent on education. People would have died had Scotland become independent because Scottish state wouldn't have been able to afford their meds.

It sounds melodramatic but it's thr reality.

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

It's not possible to fill the fiscal gap in Scotland by increasing taxes.

If Scotland had become independent yesterday (today your time) then some very hard choices would be needed.

I think we both know that at gap between independence and staying in the Union.. is more based on Tories being ahead or behind in the UK polls than any spreadsheet. We're at margin's of error territory just at the start of any second campaign.

Show me the Conservatives 6 to 10 points ahead of Labour going into 2020, and I'll show you an independence Yes vote. Regardless.

The gap between spending and revenue is about what is spent on education. People would have died had Scotland become independent because Scottish state wouldn't have been able to afford their meds.

It sounds melodramatic but it's thr reality.

It sounds melodramatic because it is. Get a grip. Seriously. If you're resorting to people dying as a case for the Union, then it's really time to give up because you're truly at the bottom of a fully scraped barrel.

There's rumours flying round of a Survation poll of Scottish over 60's tonight. Will be interesting to see what they're thinking given the solid No vote there in 2014 and since in polling.

cells

Generali wrote: »

It's not possible to fill the fiscal gap in Scotland by increasing taxes.

If Scotland had become independent yesterday (today your time) then some very hard choices would be needed. The gap between spending and revenue is about what is spent on education. People would have died had Scotland become independent because Scottish state wouldn't have been able to afford their meds.

It sounds melodramatic but it's thr reality.

the scots if oil is to be their main thing need an independent currency which can go up and down with oil. That way in Scottish pesos the value of oil would not fall and rise as much as it would do in US-Dollars or English-Pounds allowing a buffer against falling dollar priced oil.

in my mind I think an independent Scotland would have to swing right and cut taxes and spending to draw in English tax. Imagine a scotland with lower VAT lower fuel duties lower income tax lower corp tax to try and draw English shoppers and workers both virtual and physical. Oil would not be their thing, tax arbitrage would be

HornetSaver

Shakethedisease wrote: »

There's rumours flying round of a Survation poll of Scottish over 60's tonight. Will be interesting to see what they're thinking given the solid No vote there in 2014 and since in polling.

Given that the over 60s are more likely to vote Tory, more likely to want the NHS to stay roughly as it is, and less likely to care about where Scotland is in a generation's time, I wouldn't expect miracles. Regardless of the indyref2 result, that group will vote to remain, the only question is the proportion.

That said, a swing among that group towards either side would be significant, precisely because they're the group least likely to change their minds as a result of the latest news cycle.

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

It sounds melodramatic because it is. Get a grip. Seriously. If you're resorting to people dying as a case for the Union, then it's really time to give up because you're truly at the bottom of a fully scraped barrel.

What do you think happens when you have to cut spending by £10 billion or more in a population of 5 million? Scotland would be facing a wholesale closure of large amounts of the Government including the NHS.

Austerity in Greece has caused 2,000 excess deaths. As Scotland would need to cut spending by proportionately far more than Greece, the outcomes would be worse.

It's what happens when you try to start a country reliant on oil prices being at an all time high.

Shakethedisease

HornetSaver wrote: »

Given that the over 60s are more likely to vote Tory, more likely to want the NHS to stay roughly as it is, and less likely to care about where Scotland is in a generation's time, I wouldn't expect miracles. Regardless of the indyref2 result, that group will vote to remain, the only question is the proportion.

That said, a swing among that group towards either side would be significant, precisely because they're the group least likely to change their minds as a result of the latest news cycle.

Not as bad as I feared. Though Scottish Labour seem to have collapsed in that age group as well as all the others.

The exclusive survey of 1,000 older voters shows the Tories are expected to push past Scottish Labour into second place at the Holyrood election.

Falling behind hated rivals the SNP and Tories in both constituency and list voting intentions is a far cry from the party’s dominance of Scottish politics for more than half of a century.
But our poll shows the dramatic collapse in Labour’s fortunes in recent years. It is even struggling in areas such as Glasgow and Fife, once impregnable party strongholds.
As a consequence, nearly half of pensioners don’t think Labour will ever return to power in Scotland, including one in 10 of its own supporters.


The SNP remains on course to win May’s election according to the poll – though fewer older people back the Nationalists than in other age groups – and the party enjoys support for its record in running the Scottish Government among OAPs in all areas bar the economy.

https://www.sundaypost.com/news/exclusive-pensioner-power-to-sink-labour-in-scottish-elections/

The SNP don't run most of Scotland's economy. At the moment it's run on a pocket money system.

Scottish Parliament constituency VI, pensioners only:
SNP: 43%
CON: 28%
LAB: 19%
LDEM: 6% (via Survation)

Shakethedisease

Generali wrote: »

What do you think happens when you have to cut spending by £10 billion or more in a population of 5 million? Scotland would be facing a wholesale closure of large amounts of the Government including the NHS.

Austerity in Greece has caused 2,000 excess deaths. As Scotland would need to cut spending by proportionately far more than Greece, the outcomes would be worse.

It's what happens when you try to start a country reliant on oil prices being at an all time high.

Is this all based on GERS again ? There's been a few interesting rebuttals going on lately.

GERS describes Scotland's notional public finances within the union, not its "economic performance." Scotland’s economic performance includes the
private sector, and indeed private sector financial flows in and out of
Scotland.
"It estimates the contribution of revenue raised in Scotland
toward the goods and services provided for the benefit of Scotland."
(GERS, 2016) "Looking only at government related flows gives only an
incomplete picture of the Scottish economy and its relations with the
rest of the world." (Cuthbert, 2011)

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Is this all based on GERS again ? There's been a few interesting rebuttals going on lately.

we should start discussing the only real downside of a iscotland (frankly no-one gives a damn if the scotttish economy goes down the pan)

the real issue is that of national security

scotland will be totally unwilling and unable to defend itself and will be open house to every random terrorist group that wants to attack either scotland or more importantly, england.
Russia will continual overfly scottish air space and encroach on scottish territorial waters

the major issue is how england will respond and the massive potential damage to the iscottish economy.

Rinoa

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Is this all based on GERS again ? There's been a few interesting rebuttals going on lately.

When Oil was $100+ Alex Salmond was very happy quoting from them.

Of course, when the price of oil plummeted nobody believed them anymore.