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

TrickyTree83

.string. wrote: »

Do you remember the magic economic levers which the SNP say will solve all economic woes.

Well, the signs are there:

Proposed EU corporate tax reforms are "quite radical and frightening for Ireland

The EU, now with the UK exiting so no longer acting as a brake to ever closer union, will gradually absorb European Countries into itself, especially the little ones. into itself. "Independent Scotland" - you've got to be kidding. Mind you, I can see some opposition to this coming up, but the writing is on the wall. I use for this type if reason why I, as a fiercely pro remained, would not like to rejoin the EU without our acquired opt-outs which we have at present.

Goodbye Magic Levers.

It gives the UK a competitive edge however and a bit more at the negotiation table.

That's a beauty.

kabayiri

CLAPTON wrote: »

and why won't Nicola tell the voters of scotland what the plan is for currency, banking and government borrowing when iscotland occurs?

what an absolute shambles; probably cost her iscotland

If you use the term "iScotland" I think you should be consistent and also use the term "omnishambles"

TrickyTree83

Shakethedisease wrote: »

By the end of the year ( announced today ) the Scottish Govt will set out proposals and put them to the Uk Govt outlining ways Scotland can stay in the single market among other things, even if rUK leaves. It's up to the UK government to say Yes or No to those first, nothing to do with the EU.

May will have three months after those are presented to her before she presses the Article 50 button according to her own timeframe. But the Scottish Govt will know one way or the other if their proposals are going to be dismissed before Article 50 is even invoked.

She cannot know the options that are available to Scotland because negotiations have not begun let alone concluded. I expect she'll be told exactly that. A big fat slap in the face with reality.

Thrugelmir

Shakethedisease wrote: »

The SNP have very little media support in both Scotland and in the UK as a whole.

Nothing to do with support. It's the relentless generation of news headlines to keep the topic in the faces of people. When there's actually nothing new to say. Just a slant that supports a particular unbalanced view. The problem for politicians is that words can so easily come back to haunt them. As outside events as yet unforeseen can quickly overtake them. True states people take a measured approach. They don't adopt an outright election campaigning style (such as Salmond did). As eventually they have nowhere to hide except the shadows to avoid the inevitable questioning of their previous statements. Which no longer stand up to scrutiny.

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

I only read chokkablog for the interesting pieces about the SNP and its social media presence.

I prefer Whytepaper. That's more me.

https://whytepaper.wordpress.com/

He eloquently debunks pretty much everything indy supporters say about the economy and general fact checking.

I read that too. Same as Hague and Wings, hopelessly biased. One reads them all and makes up one's own mind. I think probably most people interested in Scottish politics do these days.

But one has to also take into account personal experience of living and working in Scotland under an SNP government that's been around since 2007. There, most Scottish residents have a huge advantage over those such as yourself of assessing truth from fiction. People can write any old crap on the internet and call it fact. Some of us who post here actually live with an SNP government in charge.

TrickyTree83

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I read that too. Same as Hague and Wings, hopelessly biased. One reads them all and makes up one's own mind. I think probably most people interested in Scottish politics do these days.

But one has to also take into account personal experience of living and working in Scotland under an SNP government that's been around since 2007. There, most Scottish residents have a huge advantage over those such as yourself of assessing truth from fiction. People can write any old crap on the internet and call it fact. Some of us who post here actually live with an SNP government in charge.

Quote me one piece of the Whytepaper which is looking at statistics in a biased way. If it's as biased as you say, it should take no less than 5 minutes to find a perfect example and be conclusive and not open to reproach.

Share it with everyone here, a biased statistic that doesn't prove the SNP are wrong.

Just one.

People can write any old crap on the internet and call it fact.

Yes, yes they can. The SNP and pro-independence supporters are quite adept at it.

Edit: Are you now saying that I won't understand GERS because I don't live in Scotland?

Shakethedisease

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Nothing to do with support. It's the relentless generation of news headlines to keep the topic in the faces of people. When there's actually nothing new to say. Just a slant that supports a particular unbalanced view. The problem for politicians is that words can so easily come back to haunt them. As outside events as yet unforeseen can quickly overtake them. True states people take a measured approach. They don't adopt an outright election campaigning style (such as Salmond did). As eventually they have nowhere to hide except the shadows to avoid the inevitable questioning of their previous statements. Which no longer stand up to scrutiny.

Unfortunately these days the only way people can get press coverage, especially tv coverage in Scotland is to be seen to be heartily slagging off the SNP and everything they do and stand for. It's kind of run of the mill in generating headlines. The only time you ever hear anything about any of the other parties is the Sunday edition of the Herald and the National.

Salmond was repeatedly painted UK wide as a politician that every one hated. Yet regularly topped popularity polls in Scotland for years. We quite liked him.

TrickyTree83

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Unfortunately these days the only way people can get press coverage, especially tv coverage in Scotland is to be seen to be heartily slagging off the SNP and everything they do and stand for. It's kind of run of the mill in generating headlines. The only time you ever hear anything about any of the other parties is the Sunday edition of the Herald and the National.

Salmond was repeatedly painted UK wide as a politician that every one hated. Yet regularly topped popularity polls in Scotland for years. We quite liked him.

Defining "we" as those who share his views. Conclusively proved to be less than half of Scotland.

antrobus

Shakethedisease wrote: »

It won't be delayed from the Holyrood end in terms of waiting until the very end of negotiations and the results of them. When Sturgeon said 'dragged out against our will'. She really did mean it. So did those who voted for her and her party in May. England and Wales can leave if they wish. ...

The UK voted to leave the EU. There are no regional opt-outs.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

..The Scottish Govt will seek an article 30, and probably won't get it. Then will go ahead anyway even if it ultimately means dissolving the current Holyrood parliament and standing on an explicit independence manifesto. ...

An election is not a referendum.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

...Osborne telling Scots they couldn't use the £ started independence support shooting up in the first referendum. ....

No, he said that Scotland could not share the pound. And it wasn't just him, it was everybody.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

..May refusing a referendum altogether will send it sky high. The Tories know this. Davidson and Mundell certainly do. ......

No, that's what you hope might happen.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

..The aim is to stay in the Single Market/EU. So everything logically regarding timing must be and has to be done before Scotland is taken out. There is no way around this from the Scottish Governments current position. So that's what they'll do and everything said so far is indicating this to be the case. You can quote me on it later if you like. Hard Brexit = indy ref before UK( inc Scotland) out of EU.

It's not a position, it's kite flying. If the UK leaves the EU, so will Scotland. The SNP is simply using as a justification to hold another referendum in the hope they can get a different result than the last one.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

..A softer Brexit such as the one both you and Sturgeon would like means there are other options still on the table.

Sturgeon has no options. Brexit is a matter for the UK alone.

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Quote me one piece of the Whytepaper which is looking at statistics in a biased way. If it's as biased as you say, it should take no less than 5 minutes to find a perfect example and be conclusive and not open to reproach.

Share it with everyone here, a biased statistic that doesn't prove the SNP are wrong.

Just one.

All of them.

"Lies, damned lies, and statistics" is a phrase describing the persuasive power of numbers, particularly the use of statistics to bolster weak arguments. It is also sometimes colloquially used to doubt statistics used to prove an opponent's point.


The term was popularised in United States by Mark Twain (among others), who attributed it to the British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."

Yes, yes they can. The SNP and pro-independence supporters are quite adept at it.

Yawn. One sided and a point made for the sake of saying it. Take what you like from Hague and Whytepaper. But don't try and sell nonsense that either of them is any less biased than Wings over Scotland is when it comes to putting across their OWN view and spin on things.