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

beecher2

elantan wrote: »

do they ? Ive never heard of that one, kranky, nippy etc aye but no Elsie ... I know I should be doing my research paper but think my brain is still exhausted after my run of mental night shifts and i cant seem to concentrate today... maybe I should go make soup or something

I think it's because it's 'always someone else's fault'. Dear lord.

ruggedtoast

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

No it won't because opinions are like ar*eholes, everyone's got one.

Facts don't care about feelings or opinions.

For example, everyone I talk to on these forums who knows I voted to leave generally appears to have the opinion of me that I'd be swimmingly happy with a hard brexit because I wanted to stop those dirty migrants coming here, taking our jobs, etc...etc... Except the facts don't support that narrative. They don't like the facts of why I voted to leave, it doesn't play into their hands of being able to brand me a racist/xenophobe, little Englander, etc...

So in the debate around Scottish independence, I also want to focus on the facts. Empirical evidence of why you should or should not vote for independence. What does the empirical evidence suggest you should do? What does it suggest would happen if you did vote for independence? Is that a sensible option for you, your family, your children's family and their countrymen and women?

For me it's quite clear that the economic argument for remaining in the union is lightyears ahead of the economic argument for independence within the EU. You will no doubt have seen the myriad of reasons splattered across pages of this thread and its predecessors. The statistical evidence for Scotland remaining in the union based on Scotland's economy is a clear and simple choice. So then you (as an actual voter) need to be able to rationalise taking the fiscal punishment that will come with independence for what appears to be a whimsical dreamy eyed vision of an "independent" Scotland subservient to the EU. Because that is what is on offer right now.

Does your discomfort in being "ruled" by Westminster trump the suffering you will induce economically?

Which is an argument I cannot take on board, I cannot understand why as an Englishman I get Scottish votes on English laws, I have no say on Scottish only matters, yet you say you're ruled by Westminster, and it's so bad, you do so badly right now, that you would be willing to take fiscal punishment the likes of which are only comparable to Greece in recent memory in order to free yourself from this uncomfortable opinion.

Greek austerity caused this:



http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/761676/40000-protest-pension-reform-as-general-strike-grips-greece

What will Scottish austerity cause?

And on the journalistic note, what will journalists living in Scotland say of independence once the financial reality hits home? They will of course blame the government.

Will their pro-independence platitudes be remembered with a misty eyed fondness or will they themselves be targets of anger and vilification when thousands of people protest on the street at having their benefits cut, hospitals shut, police, fire and ambulance services eroded to a former shadow of themselves.

I understand this must be coming across as project fear. I genuinely wanted elantan and others to go away, look at it and come to the same conclusion on their own. That whilst they may want to be independent, now is not the right time to even try to make it happen. In pushing it so early, they will go off half-cocked and you will either lose a 2nd referendum and consign the movement to the rubbish bin of history for a generation or two, or you will win and endure this fiscal punishment. Along with riots, civil unrest, widespread poverty and service degradation. Perhaps even losing the NHS.

Within the EU - how well equipped will Scotland be to sort its post-independence problems out? If Scotland joins the Euro, definitely Greece v2.0.

I'm pretty sure you are a Welsh.

.string.

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Here's some more information about the "border effect".

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/236579/scotland_analysis_macroeconomic_and_fiscal_performance.pdf#page=52

The empirical evidence on economics points to the Union being good for Scotland. So why do you have this narrative that it's bad for Scotland?

This is where I'm making the point that you only feel the way you do because of the SNP, the pro-independence movement and the bile they spew about the English and about Westminster. It's clouding judgement and people are possibly making misinformed decisions if they have not researched and considered the economic consequences for themselves instead of reading a meme about GERS being wrong, Whiskey Export Duty paying everything, Scotland paying towards large projects in England that they don't benefit from and many other pro-independence supported myths!

By not questioning these myths, or researching these issues yourself you're falling into the same trap that UKIP followers fall into and those who believed in Judensau in Germany. Misinformation is a great weapon in political power.

Can you edit the link please it does not work for me

TrickyTree83

.string. wrote: »

Can you edit the link please it does not work for me

How's this?

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/236579/scotland_analysis_macroeconomic_and_fiscal_performance.pdf#page=52

elantan

beecher2 wrote: »

I think it's because it's 'always someone else's fault'. Dear lord.

ahhh right got ya ... oh dear ... oh well .... no surprise really ...

Moto2

beecher2 wrote: »

I have an off topic question - why do some Yoons call Nicola Sturgeon Elsie?

Because it's always someone else's (Elsie's) fault

TrickyTree83

Are we stuck in ever decreasing circles of:

Me: "You must read the evidence!"

Pro-indy: "No, it shatters my illusions!"

???

Has anyone looked at any of the information around the border effect, the veracity of GERS and data from the IFS?

Shakethedisease

beecher2 wrote: »

I think it is important to read commentators' views of what's going on. I don't think you know who KF is and how big a contrast this article is. As KF says, it isn't all about facts, for many people it is about sentiment. Not everyone thinks the same way and I thought reading this would help you understand that there's more to this debate than GERS.

I agree that the column from KF was a bit of a turnaround for him. He's spent the last few months doing mental gymnastics casting about for any credible political reason why Scotland should stay in the UK at any costs. It's weird to see his usual followers getting really annoyed about it too ( 'nonsense, talking crap, never happen etc ). He's right of course.

You mentioned Iain McWhirter, and I'd also put Kevin McKenna in the mix. All of them have gone from cosy consensus over Labour in charge in Scotland in their rightful place/frantic anti-SNP/independence criticism/to one by one gradual giving up on Labour....and gradual acceptance of what's going on around them and more importantly WHY.

In a way I think the first indy ref was a gradual dislocation between Labour and it's usual voters, ( same for previously supportive commentators ). The young deserted in droves only leaving the older traditional 'always voted Labour, always will' voters behind. Many of them also voted No thinking that a Labour govt was just months away.

Now that Labour is seemingly a spent force in Scotland, there's now the same kind of gradual dislocation between Scotland and the UK itself. Commentators like Kenny are finding it more and more difficult to justify exactly why Scotland should stay. Federalism for people like Kenny and probably half of Scottish Labour by now.. is the last throw of the dice, and even this is only purely on financial and economic grounds. There's little real sentiment or enthusiasm left and it's this KF has picked up on.

As for those older traditional Labour voters, I suspect many of them have also given up ( which is why imo turnout was lower in the Holyrood election). My dad couldn't bring himself to vote. I sincerely doubt he'll be voting in any potential future indy ref either, not while the Tories are in Govt. If there are many like him out there, it'll bring any No vote down by a fair bit.

Effie Deans and Historywoman are unhinged. One suspects they'd have little in the way of qualms about rounding up SNP MP's and MSP's and imprisoning them, or worse, for treason.

beecher2

Shakethedisease wrote: »

As for those older traditional Labour voters, I suspect many of them have also given up ( which is why imo turnout was lower in the Holyrood election). My dad couldn't bring himself to vote. I sincerely doubt he'll be voting in any potential future indy ref either, not while the Tories are in Govt. If there are many like him out there, it'll bring any No vote down by a fair bit.

.

I know 2 people who voted No and would now vote Yes just to get the inevitable out of the way. Not a representative sample I know, but I found it fascinating speaking to them. The arguments will definitely be different this time, especially of the tories and Scotland in Union take a driving seat.

Agree about Kevin McKenna and I do wonder if Alex Massie (whose writing I like a lot) will vote no next time round - I suppose his dad might never speak to him again if he admitted it

TrickyTree83

Nothing?

Anyone?

We're just going to pretend that we didn't see government and academia (Scottish at that) proposing that independent Scotland would suffer a 4 - 5.5% GDP hit as well as the ongoing deficit explained by GERS and the IFS, on top of the loss of Barnett funding are we?

It's irrelevant to people's decision making at the polling booth?