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

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Like I said before too.

Accuracy is not incorrect.

It doesn't need to be 100% accurate to indicate issues, it could be less than 100% accurate, assuming what is said by indy supporters being true,

Indy supporters come in all shapes and forms, and support independence for many different reasons. Neither the oil price drop ( we've been through all this already too ) nor GERS have made any difference to independence support rising. In fact the worse they've gotten over the last few years the more support has bumped up for the SNP.

Independence support would be falling off a cliff if these figures were trusted would they not ? No one is saying that there wouldn't be issues or huge challenges. Just that in 2014 there was overplaying and downplaying respectively from both sides of the debate. Most people think the economic reality will be somewhere in the middle I expect. And no, I don't think England will stop all trade with Scotland altogether whatever happens.

and yet there are still gaping holes in the books of the Scottish economy with the SNP at the wheel no less.

The SNP aren't at the wheel... that's the point of independence no less, and I don't mean necessarily the SNP in power either.

Westminster is at the wheel. Sturgeon's a back seat passenger with a different map.

TrickyTree83

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Indy supporters come in all shapes and forms, and support independence for many different reasons. Neither the oil price drop ( we've been through all this already too ) nor GERS have made any difference to independence support rising. In fact the worse they've gotten over the last few years the more support has bumped up for the SNP.

Does that bode well? Does that mean that there are far too many buying into 'Whiskey export duty' and other myths that are being transmitted across social media? Baldelectrician appears to believe it.

So although you think the figures are flawed or inaccurate, even if that were the case the figures would not be incorrect enough to overturn £9bn or even the higher estimate of £15bn.

The margin of inaccuracy to make the economics of iScotland work would be unheard of in such official statistical work.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Independence support would be falling off a cliff if these figures were trusted would they not ? No one is saying that there wouldn't be issues or huge challenges. Just that in 2014 there was overplaying and downplaying respectively from both sides of the debate. Most people think the economic reality will be somewhere in the middle I expect. And no, I don't think England will stop all trade with Scotland altogether whatever happens.

Well it's not whether 'England' will stop trade as it'll be the rest of the UK and the decision makers would be the EU in Scotlands case if Scotland left the UK to join the EU.

An independent Scotland can absolutely work, lets get that out of the way. What I'm saying is that whilst you might be 'in charge' you would as far as I can see be a poorer nation whilst trying to follow a socialist agenda. That would surely involve tax increases and then either an unattractive country for talent or even worse a flight of wealth and talent exasperating the situation.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The SNP aren't at the wheel... that's the point of independence no less, and I don't mean necessarily the SNP in power either.

Westminster is at the wheel. Sturgeon's a back seat passenger with a different map.

mmm they kind of are when they're spending more than they get given to spend.

TrickyTree83

Leanne1812 wrote: »

Tricky, here's the video that I spoke of a couple of posts ago. I know the figures are outdated but it makes an interesting watch if you have half an hour.

( I hope it's the correct video, my iPad is playing up with copying)

Once I post I'll check.

https://youtu.be/1W8cKHcZn60

I'll check it out tomorrow.

Thrugelmir

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Neither the oil price drop ( we've been through all this already too ) nor GERS have made any difference to independence support rising.

Why would it? Most people have no understanding of the real impact . Nor any understanding of the global oil market. Nor will Nicola wish to bring it up as a topic of conversation. As there's nothing positive to discuss at the current time. To convince the undecided's though the topic cannot be ignored.

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Does that bode well? Does that mean that there are far too many buying into 'Whiskey export duty' and other myths that are being transmitted across social media? Baldelectrician appears to believe it.

So although you think the figures are flawed or inaccurate, even if that were the case the figures would not be incorrect enough to overturn £9bn or even the higher estimate of £15bn.

The margin of inaccuracy to make the economics of iScotland work would be unheard of in such official statistical work.

Sweden probably thought that about Norway too. Those against independence from Great Britain in the USA wondered about it as well. It'll be a shock to the system no doubt. Lots of problems but at the end of the day all you're talking about IS the shock.

Mid to long term you have no idea because the only model you have to go on is one that is based on following the current UK one. Which absolutely wouldn't happen.

Well it's not whether 'England' will stop trade as it'll be the rest of the UK and the decision makers would be the EU in Scotlands case if Scotland left the UK to join the EU.

STAY in the EU, not join. We're already EU citizens and to strip 5 million of that is just as complicated as stripping 65 million of their citizenship. All this talk of Scotland having to leave then rejoin is as false as it was in 2014. In order to rejoin we'd have to leave first and would take years to do either.

An independent Scotland can absolutely work, lets get that out of the way. What I'm saying is that whilst you might be 'in charge' you would as far as I can see be a poorer nation whilst trying to follow a socialist agenda. That would surely involve tax increases and then either an unattractive country for talent or even worse a flight of wealth and talent exasperating the situation.

The SNP aren't socialist. They're Labour 20 years ago, with added independence. Labour went right, Scottish voters didn't and in actual fact have remained remarkably consistent in what they vote for in terms of policies.

mmm they kind of are when they're spending more than they get given to spend.

Well that's not up to them now is it. They don't make the rules because they have no power to do so. And at the end of the day so does the UK as a whole so Scotland is no different there.

Shakethedisease

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Why would it? Most people have no understanding of the real impact . Nor any understanding of the global oil market. Nor will Nicola wish to bring it up as a topic of conversation. As there's nothing positive to discuss at the current time. To convince the undecided's though the topic cannot be ignored.

I'm afraid it's Brexit and the shock to the UK system that might be the immediate problem. I don't know if perhaps you might have missed that ?

The undecideds are soft No Scottish Labour looking forward to Conservative governments ad finitum, EU nationals who voted No last time in case Scotland was out of the EU and newly on the register 16/17 year olds. 200,000 voting differently from 2014 and that's that. Nicola doesn't need to bring oil up as a topic. It's all unionists and unionist media ever talk about with the SNP not getting a look in. Shoved down Scottish gobs 24/7 whenever it falls but has made absolutely no difference whatsoever to support rising.

LABMAN

The SNP were more than happy to 'bring up' Scottish oil revenue for years when the price of it was high...now not at all. Guess why?

LABMAN

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/snp-chief-angus-robertson-says-8567213#z16oDGehb8yu705Q.97


I think five years is a serious under estimation.

LABMAN

Don't get me started on elantan's pseudo Scottish phrases....they are really quite offensive.

elantan

LABMAN wrote: »

Don't get me started on elantan's pseudo Scottish phrases....they are really quite offensive.

I bet you if I met you you would find my speech offensive... as I occassionally write how i speak and that's probably the stuff that offends ye... so it's a kinda safe assumption tae make ...

Being offended... dae ye lead a boring life ? Have ye not got better things tae be offended by ?