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

TrickyTree83

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

I voted to remain in the EU because being a full member of and completely within the single market and customs union has boosted the UK economy far in excess of what it otherwise would have been.

I would absolutely agree when the EU was comprised of fewer countries. Even in political union it was better with fewer members. If we were not in political union but still had the access we needed to the single market but able to strike our own trade deals (Switzerland/Norway) would you be on side with that? Because that's why I voted to leave the EU. The political union has become toxic, where the interests of so many nations crash against one another. Lobby groups can influence the UK economy simply by paying the right people in Brussels. That is wrong. If as the remain side say, we're still truly sovereign whilst in the EU then we should be able to say no to the rules and regulations handed down from Brussles which have been influenced by lobby groups that are against our interests.

But we can't.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

We have far exceeded what our full potential outside the single market can be, therefore if we leave it, the only way is down.

The single market is good, I wouldn't class it as all important, nothing ever is. I would prefer single market access but on balance we can far exceed what we're doing now with the EU with the rest of the world.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

It is also the case that being in the EU has provided an additional layer of checks and balances to the worst excesses of national governments, enriched us socially and culturally, and enabled us to replace the missing millions of young people through free market immigration, so vital to our future and prosperity, without this being subject to the whims of populist/racist/xenophobic moves to restrict it.

The UK parliament does that. We don't need the EU for workers or human rights. We've always been, as a country, ahead of the EU curve on such issues.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Without significant inwards migration Scotland in particular faces an existential threat to our survival as a country.



The recent pandering to the ugly anti-immigration sentiments coming from the populist politicians in England is not just something most of us Scots find repugnant, and suspect is fundamentally driven by racism and xenophobia, it's also a threat to our very existence.

Lets not beat about the bush. Am I racist or xenophobic?

Are the concerns of some citizens of these isles not worth any merit if they believe mass immigration has hurt their standard of living or way of life do they not deserve to be heard?

Immigration will not stop because we leave the political union of the EU. It will also not stop if we leave the single market and the FoM ends. Immigration will continue in much the same way it has done just under a different system. It might be more difficult to get in but as a country we'll have the ability to tailor that system to meet the needs of the economy. That's the argument of people who support immigration controls. It's not beyond the ability of the government to let unskilled workers in if needed, or to let masses of young people in. If the policy needs tailoring for Scotland in particular then that can also be achieved. It doesn't require the FoM to do that.

On a different note, just to try and show you that I don't see my position as a million miles away from yours (you may though), I quite enjoyed the prospect of what Tusk has been saying at the recent summit and Conrad Black on QT regarding the EU coming under pressure to renegotiate the terms Cameron failed to get in February in order to allow the UK to remain in some capacity. If we were able to remain in the EU/EEA/EFTA, have controls on the numbers of EU migrants (according to the UK government this is required by the public), remain in the single market without exception and able to make our own trade deals, I would back that all the way and would do so until the day I died most likely. That truly would be the best of both worlds for all concerned.

kabayiri

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I thought this was a parody on Twitter tonight, but no, it really is the front page of the Daily ( Labour/Vow ) Record tommorow. Wow... I agree with Pat Kane.




Along with the editorial yesterday. I think I need a lie down.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/nicola-sturgeon-well-within-rights-9085154

If PM May is trying to push Scotland 'out of the door' she is not making a very good job of it.

She could start by cutting the tax breaks to the oil industry.

That would get the SNP'ers frothing like they had just swallowed a whole sherbet dab.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

I would absolutely agree when the EU was comprised of fewer countries. Even in political union it was better with fewer members.

I completely disagree.

The EU should be expanding further.

If we were not in political union but still had the access we needed to the single market but able to strike our own trade deals (Switzerland/Norway) would you be on side with that?

No.

I'd rather we remained in the political union and in fact deepened our membership and became more integrated not less.

But if we do leave the EU I'd prefer to stay in both the customs union and single market - any minor inconvenience from the loss of ability to negotiate our own trade deals is a price well worth paying.

Lobby groups can influence the UK economy simply by paying the right people in Brussels.

Och away...

That's so far down the agenda of practical concerns it's an irrelevance.

The single market is good, I wouldn't class it as all important, nothing ever is. I would prefer single market access but on balance we can far exceed what we're doing now with the EU with the rest of the world.

Absolutely no chance.

Remaining fully within the single market is vital to our continued prosperity and there's precisely zero prospect of us making up for the losses of leaving it within my lifetime.

The UK parliament does that. We don't need the EU for workers or human rights. We've always been, as a country, ahead of the EU curve on such issues.

The EU protects us from the UK parliaments excesses.

I don't trust the UK government (or Scottish govt for that matter) as far as I can throw them.

Lets not beat about the bush. Am I racist or xenophobic?

I have no idea. You tell me...

Are the concerns of some citizens of these isles not worth any merit if they believe mass immigration has hurt their standard of living or way of life do they not deserve to be heard?

People believe all sorts of irrational and factually incorrect things.

It is however deeply irresponsible for highly educated people in Government to pander to such ignorance.

Immigration will not stop because we leave the political union of the EU. It will also not stop if we leave the single market and the FoM ends. Immigration will continue in much the same way it has done just under a different system. It might be more difficult to get in but as a country we'll have the ability to tailor that system to meet the needs of the economy. That's the argument of people who support immigration controls. It's not beyond the ability of the government to let unskilled workers in if needed, or to let masses of young people in. If the policy needs tailoring for Scotland in particular then that can also be achieved. It doesn't require the FoM to do that.

Sorry - I have no faith whatsoever in the UK government to be competent in allowing in the millions of migrants we need - and particularly not this government.

On a different note, just to try and show you that I don't see my position as a million miles away from yours (you may though), I quite enjoyed the prospect of what Tusk has been saying at the recent summit and Conrad Black on QT regarding the EU coming under pressure to renegotiate the terms Cameron failed to get in February in order to allow the UK to remain in some capacity. If we were able to remain in the EU/EEA/EFTA, have controls on the numbers of EU migrants (according to the UK government this is required by the public), remain in the single market without exception and able to make our own trade deals, I would back that all the way and would do so until the day I died most likely. That truly would be the best of both worlds for all concerned.

The EU should do no negotiating whatsoever.

Britain can choose either a hard Brexit with no deal at all for at least the usual 7-10 years it takes to negotiate one - or to remain in the Single Market via the EEA/EFTA route under all of it's current rules and fully accepting the existing freedoms.

If we choose the former then the UK will break up and the tories will lose power for a generation after the economic carnage unfolds - with the likely end result being we'd eventually beg to be let back into Europe.

If we choose the latter then the UK will hold together, the tories may well lose a bit of ground to UKIP but survive in power, and we may well continue to prosper while technically being outside the EU.

CLAPTON

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

I voted to remain in the EU because being a full member of and completely within the single market and customs union has boosted the UK economy far in excess of what it otherwise would have been.

We have far exceeded what our full potential outside the single market can be, therefore if we leave it, the only way is down.

It is also the case that being in the EU has provided an additional layer of checks and balances to the worst excesses of national governments, enriched us socially and culturally, and enabled us to replace the missing millions of young people through free market immigration, so vital to our future and prosperity, without this being subject to the whims of populist/racist/xenophobic moves to restrict it.

Without significant inwards migration Scotland in particular faces an existential threat to our survival as a country.



The recent pandering to the ugly anti-immigration sentiments coming from the populist politicians in England is not just something most of us Scots find repugnant, and suspect is fundamentally driven by racism and xenophobia, it's also a threat to our very existence.

one would observe that as the scottish birth rate declined , the people of scotland became richer per head

TrickyTree83

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

I completely disagree.

The EU should be expanding further.



No.

I'd rather we remained in the political union and in fact deepened our membership and became more integrated not less.

But if we do leave the EU I'd prefer to stay in both the customs union and single market - any minor inconvenience from the loss of ability to negotiate our own trade deals is a price well worth paying.



Och away...

That's so far down the agenda of practical concerns it's an irrelevance.



Absolutely no chance.

Remaining fully within the single market is vital to our continued prosperity and there's precisely zero prospect of us making up for the losses of leaving it within my lifetime.



The EU protects us from the UK parliaments excesses.

I don't trust the UK government (or Scottish govt for that matter) as far as I can throw them.



I have no idea. You tell me...



People believe all sorts of irrational and factually incorrect things.

It is however deeply irresponsible for highly educated people in Government to pander to such ignorance.



Sorry - I have no faith whatsoever in the UK government to be competent in allowing in the millions of migrants we need - and particularly not this government.



The EU should do no negotiating whatsoever.

Britain can choose either a hard Brexit with no deal at all for at least the usual 7-10 years it takes to negotiate one - or to remain in the Single Market via the EEA/EFTA route under all of it's current rules and fully accepting the existing freedoms.

If we choose the former then the UK will break up and the tories will lose power for a generation after the economic carnage unfolds - with the likely end result being we'd eventually beg to be let back into Europe.

If we choose the latter then the UK will hold together, the tories may well lose a bit of ground to UKIP but survive in power, and we may well continue to prosper while technically being outside the EU.

I appreciate the dialogue.

I would completely disagree about the further integration. It may be the solution for the Eurozone but not for the countries outside it.

I'd also argue that it's not a minor inconvenience that we're unable to negotiate our own trade deals. The sheer number of actors in the EU now makes it extremely difficult to reach an consensus, which is why I said before it was a better model with fewer members.

The lobbying is right up there for me, the ability for big business to influence decisions that affect me, you and our families. Decisions that big business will pay to shape to our detriment is a big worry, Brussels facilitates big business being able to shape the lives of 400m-500m people, as a group the lobbyists are now second only to the gratuitous lobbying in the US which is so out of hand now they can effectively purchase presidential elections.

I'd also disagree that we'd be unable to make up losses from leaving the single market. If you believe that Scotland would be able to make up losses from leaving the UK market in such a situation then the UK making up losses from the single market is also equally feasible. There's far more people in the world than the 400m - 500m in the single market. We'd be talking about opening up opportunity with the other 6.5 billion people on the planet, greater than that which we've had whilst being inside the EU. That's why I want the best of both worlds, but to say that leaving the single market will be catastrophic and will result in the UK not being able to replace that lost trade in a possible market place of 6.5 billion as opposed to the previous 500m is a hysterical exaggeration.

You having no faith in the current government is your own personal choice but I would point out that at many times in recent history we've have conservative governments who have upheld our workers rights higher than the EU minimum when they have had plenty of chances to reduce it to the minimum. There is no track record there to show that there will be a burning of workers rights on the pyre of far right-wing ideology.

This ingrained hatred for the Conservatives may well push Scotland into making a decision they may come to regret it seems. Perhaps Scottish people should be looking at things more objectively.

A_Medium_Size_Jock

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Perhaps Scottish people should be looking at things more objectively.

Many already are.

As mollycat said earlier in this thread and as I myself have said before; just because a few in this thread are so vocal about their dreams, do not suppose that their viepoint is the one held by a majority of Scots.
It is not.

TrickyTree83

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

Many already are.

As mollycat said earlier in this thread and as I myself have said before; just because a few in this thread are so vocal about their dreams, do not suppose that their viepoint is the one held by a majority of Scots.
It is not.

Apologies, substitute 'Scottish people' for 'independence supporters' then.

kabayiri

A_Medium_Size_Jock wrote: »

Many already are.

As mollycat said earlier in this thread and as I myself have said before; just because a few in this thread are so vocal about their dreams, do not suppose that their viepoint is the one held by a majority of Scots.
It is not.

Whenever have any UK politicians, SNP or otherwise, solved our problems in the last few generations?

The solution is invariably more money; more state control; we know what's best for you mentality.

I trust very few of them.

If the politicians in Scotland did their job properly, you would have an environment thriving right now. That is because it would represent a place with the right conditions to attract world class business.

The argument for independence would then be a no brainer, because you would be outcompeting your nearest neighbours.

kabayiri

CLAPTON wrote: »

one would observe that as the scottish birth rate declined , the people of scotland became richer per head

On the quiet, Hamish agrees, which is why he doesn't have any kids of his own. (MHINKY - Multiple House Income No Kids Yet)

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

The lobbying is right up there for me, the ability for big business to influence decisions that affect me, you and our families.

For heavens sake...

Lobbyists will lobby - it makes no difference to them if it's in London or Brussels - and our current govt is likely to be far more compliant with the requests of big business than the EU.

the UK not being able to replace that lost trade in a possible market place of 6.5 billion as opposed to the previous 500m is a hysterical exaggeration.

It's a hysterical exaggeration to say we don't have access to that larger market now.

But what we have in addition to that is hugely preferential access to the EU which is also right on our doorstep.

You having no faith in the current government is your own personal choice but I would point out that at many times in recent history we've have conservative governments who have upheld our workers rights

I'm not talking about workers rights - I'm talking about the shallow populism and rampant xenophobia currently plaguing the Conservative party - which risks destroying much of what is Great about Britain.

This ingrained hatred for the Conservatives

I'm a life long Conservative voter.

But what I heard from the latest party conference was absolutely repugnant.