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

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

I wasn't talking about the political landscape in Scotland really, just that any idea of increasing taxation on the rich to subsidise the poor will undoubtedly end badly.

The very definition of a social-democratic party, which is what the SNP claims to be, includes the redistribution of wealth through taxation as a pillar of their beliefs. Whichever way you look at doing that, whether it's a direct or indirect tax, it has to be a tax on wealth or there's simply no point in it as it wouldn't get paid.

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_National_Party)

They may not be talking about doing it now because it would be detrimental to their raison d'etre, a poisoned chalice. Anyway, back to iScotland.

So if you're going to end up as a social-democracy (see above), someone has to pay for the socialist top-down, central planning re-distribution of wealth, right? Which would relate to my previous posts about it being counter-productive to 'hunt the rich'.

Edit:

Having just looked at this.

SNP income tax policy:

http://www.snp.org/pb_what_are_the_snp_plans_for_income_tax_in_scotland

It does appear to be an attempt to veil/spin tax increases for the rich whilst less taxation for the poor in order to fund government. Which is what I've been saying.

If you end up with a right wing government in an iScotland scenario, what other arguments are there for an independent Scotland if really you're all right wing closet Tories and it'll be the same (probably poorer) than what you've got now in 'years of Tory government'? (who really are kept in check in the UK by swing voters to at least maintain a centre-right position).

I don't buy that independence is the solution to all your ills.

It doesn't appear to work economically, although that's disputed but not particularly well. And if what you're saying in your previous post is correct, Scottish politics is in such dire trouble because of this belief that you'll be better off outside the Union that there's a chance you'll end up exactly where you are right now (right wing government) and being poorer for it. So it may not benefit you politically either.

The only politically material change would appear to be that the Scottish government would be the focus of all this angst instead of Westminster.

The SNP are middle of the road when it comes to taxation. In actual fact I would assume that to be the case whoever was in power in Scotland at the present time. Scottish Labour's volte face was done more in an attempt to win back left wing voters than with any expectation of winning the election. It failed as there is too much competition on the left in Scotland politically. There's also a widespread view that the other parties in Scotland ( except the Greens ) having spent so long and fighting so hard in getting a No vote... now spend all their time wanting Scots taxpayers to pay increased income taxes - in order to mitigate the worst policies that are handed down from Westminster. Or in the Scottish Tories case, expect the SNP to pull money out of a hat mitigating them. It's not a good look for either of them.

Regarding green issues, renewables, welfare, Trident, immigration etc etc the SNP do tend to sit quite left wing in policy matters. It seems to be a status that the voters like for moment and there's much more to running a devolved country than income tax up or down - much of which absolutely depends on what the Chancellor of the Exchequer decides to do in yearly budgets anyway.

An iScotland am afraid taxation is an unknown. For the simple fact that no one knows what it would leave the Union with or not. The same is now true currently regarding the UK and the EU. But one thing that is pretty likely in an iScotland, is that the SNP will fade away and split afterwards once the negotiations are done and the focus turns inwards politically, and outwards towards the EU regarding trade.

I read this comment yesterday somewhere and it struck me as true, yet along the same lines as a Brexiteer thinks such as yourself.

The tariffs are two way and Scotland imports more from the rest of the UK than it exports, it will cost the rest of the UK more than Scotland in real terms. Obviously some things may stop but a lot of these will just be sold within the home markets, the rest will go on pretty much as before as there may be no alternative.

The idea that trade will stop is highly unlikely, and it would be better for Scotland to diversify its trade, being dependent on a single export destination is not a good idea. Maybe it will make some of the business's to be a bit more proactive in finding new markets.

TrickyTree83

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The SNP are middle of the road when it comes to taxation. In actual fact I would assume that to be the case whoever was in power in Scotland at the present time. Scottish Labour's volte face was done more in an attempt to win back left wing voters than with any expectation of winning the election. It failed as there is too much competition on the left in Scotland politically. There's also a widespread view that the other parties in Scotland ( except the Greens ) having spent so long and fighting so hard in getting a No vote... now spend all their time wanting Scots taxpayers to pay increased income taxes - in order to mitigate the worst policies that are handed down from Westminster. Or in the Scottish Tories case, expect the SNP to pull money out of a hat mitigating them. It's not a good look for either of them.

Regarding green issues, renewables, welfare, Trident, immigration etc etc the SNP do tend to sit quite left wing in policy matters. It seems to be a status that the voters like for moment and there's much more to running a devolved country than income tax up or down - much of which absolutely depends on what the Chancellor of the Exchequer decides to do in yearly budgets anyway.

An iScotland am afraid taxation is an unknown. For the simple fact that no one knows what it would leave the Union with or not. The same is now true currently regarding the UK and the EU. But one thing that is pretty likely in an iScotland, is that the SNP will fade away and split afterwards once the negotiations are done and the focus turns inwards politically, and outwards towards the EU regarding trade.

I read this comment yesterday somewhere and it struck me as true, yet along the same lines as a Brexiteer thinks such as yourself.

Ok so moving away from the politics back to the economics. Let me address some of the political points there first.

You state the SNP is 'middle of the road' on taxation. Yet the policy on income tax I read was quite obviously removing taxation for the poor, freezing taxation increases on the wealthy for a period of time and increasing thereafter alongside a maximum of inflation. That is an increase in taxation on the wealthy and a reduction in taxation on the poor.

Whilst I appreciate there's much more to running a devolved country than just income tax, we cannot possibly debate everything in one go. So talking purely about the income tax policy is a reasonable place to start. And yes you're correct that a lot of it depends on the Chancellor, and that person is going to want to increase the tax base across the entire UK to raise funds to pay for services to the best of their ability, some of the devolved powers mean that how money is spent relies solely on the devolved government. Perhaps Scotland would have more money to spend if they didn't have free prescriptions or free tuition like England.

So if there's a lot of competition on the left in Scotland then surely you're going to end up with a left wing government in an iScotland scenario, which would mean some form of 'progressive' (I don't believe it is) taxation to re-distribute wealth or prop up a welfare state. It's not a foregone conclusion but if what you say is correct then it's a highly probably outcome, would you agree?

If the probable outcome is that the rich will face higher taxation in order to pay for a welfare state for example, and the poor are asked to contribute less but take just as much, or perhaps more, is that not going to end up with higher paid skilled workers seeking employment elsewhere? Or at the very least not making iScotland as attractive a place for skilled migrants to move to as somewhere which doesn't follow a variant of socialist doctrine?

Regarding the comment, it's true that rUK sells much more to Scotland than Scotland exports to rUK. And that tariffs would hurt both sides as would hard borders. You would think also that business would re-orient or find a way to make it work. I'm fairly sure reasonable people can accept that much.

However some business won't be able to make it work. So there will be pain on both sides. So a market of 5 million selling into a market of 50 million will likely suffer more as barriers are erected between them, the larger market will have the ability to serve to replace that lost business in rUK. Therefore whilst rUK might sell more in £sterling terms the proportional percentage of trade would hurt iScotland more. You cannot expect 64% of your trade to take a hit and still pursue a socialist agenda in government. Particularly without drastic changes in tax policy, and recognising that diversification isn't an overnight transformation - unlike taxation can be.

Thrugelmir

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The SNP are middle of the road when it comes to taxation.

Not sure an annual increase in Council Tax of 3% would go down well. That's above average earnings growth for the majority.

TrickyTree83

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Not sure an annual increase in Council Tax of 3% would go down well. That's above average earnings growth for the majority.

Is that in reference to this:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nicola-sturgeon/12180981/Nicola-Sturgeon-unveils-double-council-tax-increase-for-middle-classes.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/12179946/John-Swinney-forced-to-defend-higher-Scottish-taxes.html

Lumping further burden on those with aspiration and skills is a sure way to drive them away. Then who will pay for the public services? I guess the poor will?

A cycle repeated throughout history, the fall of empires is usually related poor government taxation policy and a bloated welfare state.

beecher2

Anyone see the Charlie Hebdo piece? Would be good to read the whole thing, I loved 'Ripley Bogle' when it came out.

http://www.thenational.scot/news/charlie-hebdo-pens-forecast-of-scottish-independence-or-ecosse-bientot-les-couilles-libres-sous-le-kilt-as-they-say-in-france.20813

beecher2

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Not sure an annual increase in Council Tax of 3% would go down well. That's above average earnings growth for the majority.

Council tax increases will be down to the local authorites who have been demanding the ability to increase council tax for years. Previously they had to agree to a freeze, and other issues such as not decreasing teacher numbers, as part of the deal with SG.

The GMB and other unions, as well as the Labour party have been calling for increases too.
http://www.gmb.org.uk/newsroom/scottish-council-tax-freeze

I personally think it is about time they went up, and I'm pleased to see more bands being introduced. Would rather see something more radical though to replace council tax.

TrickyTree83

beecher2 wrote: »

Council tax increases will be down to the local authorites who have been demanding the ability to increase council tax for years. Previously they had to agree to a freeze, and other issues such as not decreasing teacher numbers, as part of the deal with SG.

The GMB and other unions, as well as the Labour party have been calling for increases too.
http://www.gmb.org.uk/newsroom/scottish-council-tax-freeze

I personally think it is about time they went up, and I'm pleased to see more bands being introduced. Would rather see something more radical though to replace council tax.

I would be surprised if left leaning organisations were not calling for tax increases on the rich.

What's your point?

Because mine is that the more you tax these people, the more you hunt them, the more they will want to leave. And if they leave, who are you going to tax to pay for the socialist policies then? No one and borrow? The poor to pay themselves?

beecher2

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

I would be surprised if left leaning organisations were not calling for tax increases on the rich.

What's your point?

Because mine is that the more you tax these people, the more you hunt them, the more they will want to leave. And if they leave, who are you going to tax to pay for the socialist policies then? No one and borrow? The poor to pay themselves?

It isn't just the rich who pay council tax.

My point was to answer Thrugelmir's point and say that it is local authorities who will decide on the increase, and them that will be hit with much of any political backlash, while giving some background.

I have decided life's too short for answering your posts which just repeat the same two points a) Independence won't work
b) Everyone will leave if you become independent

Aren't you getting just a little tired of posting on something you won't even get a vote on?

TrickyTree83

beecher2 wrote: »

It isn't just the rich who pay council tax.

My point was to answer Thrugelmir's point and say that it is local authorities who will decide on the increase, and them that will be hit with much of any political backlash, while giving some background.

I have decided life's too short for answering your posts which just repeat the same two points a) Independence won't work
b) Everyone will leave if you become independent

Aren't you getting just a little tired of posting on something you won't even get a vote on?

Not really no.

And you're quite right it's not just the rich who pay council tax, I don't believe I ever said it was. You saying "it isn't just the rich" isn't an argument.

You'll be aware that it is a tiered system. Those with the lowest value homes pay less than those with the highest value homes. You're then also defending, or perhaps promoting since you've offered no defence, the raising of council tax for those in higher value housing. These people might not all be rich themselves and just be victims of circumstance. The vast majority of these high value property owners will be wealthy, at least comparatively wealthy.

I've not simply stated that independence won't work as you claim, of course it can work. I've just repeatedly said it won't work as well as what we have right now.

Nor have I said that everyone will leave as you claim, I've just repeatedly said that those with the most mobility to do so, the skilled and wealthy would be better off doing so rather than living under a regime which increases taxes on the rich to pay for social ideals.

Leanne1812

Tricky, you have to try and remember you're late to the party. Very late.

We've had this debate for at least 3 years now. Longer for some. So everything you say is something we have listened to and heard many, many times before. So, you can carry on & on thinking we are gleaning something new from you. I actually think you should thank Shakes for having the patience & courtesy to respond to you.

Things have changed. The EU referendum has made many look at the union in a new way and question their loyalty to it.

I'm still not thinking too much about another Scottish referendum but I am anxious to find out how and what Scotland's position & role with the EU will be. If we retain access to the single market & freedom of movement then I'd imagine that would appease those who may have voted Yes but will stick with No. If we don't achieve that then it's game on.