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

TrickyTree83

beecher2 wrote: »

I just find it it interesting that the Scottish debate is so very different. Yes are unlikely to get away with saying 'look, just vote yes and we'll leave the negotiators to get the best deal for Scotland. We don't need a plan about what kind of Scotland we'll live in'.

Everyone is aware of the UK's deficit position, it's currently better than Scotland's in isolation pretty much by a factor of 2.

So assuming the UK's deficit increases by 100% as Hamish's forecast supposes, what do you think will happen to Scotland's?

Will it go down, as if by magic?

It's hilarious that for some the argument for an independent Scotland is because the UK deficit will increase. Completely ignores that 64% of Scottish external trade is done with the rest of the UK, ignores that the UK is in control of its currency, ignores that Scotland would be starting from a position of an ~10% GDP deficit.

Like Scotland is somehow the land of milk and honey, where pigs do fly and unicorns graze on the glens. Where Scotland will do great, because the UK will be screwed, what kind of twisted logic is this? Even if the UK does well Scotland has massive issues to contend with and all any of you have done over the past what, 10 pages, is ignore it.

kabayiri

beecher2 wrote: »

I just find it it interesting that the Scottish debate is so very different. Yes are unlikely to get away with saying 'look, just vote yes and we'll leave the negotiators to get the best deal for Scotland. We don't need a plan about what kind of Scotland we'll live in'.

In the discussions on here before Scottish indy ref 2014, I could see the merit in having local autonomy and control for iScotland. I said as much.

But...I think the lack of clear answers on currency and liabilities like debt/future pensions made the independence case weaker.

Generally, the tendency is for people to vote for 'knowns' rather than 'unknowns'. (EU ref was a notable exception).

Move forward to Scottish indy ref 2, and we still don't have a definitive answer on the currency.

But yes, I agree with you in leaving it to the negotiators. I would want rUK negotiators to go in fighting for the rUK interests, obviously. There are bargaining chips on both sides.

beecher2

TrickyTree, you never engage with what anyone actually posts. It is tiresome - conrad shouts 'what currency' and you shout 'GERS, deficit'. Nowhere on this thread does anyone say anything about the lank of milk and honey, Hamish has posted extensively on the problems he believes Scotland will face. My point was about the different expectations placed on Scotland where we are supposed to say exactly how the future will be.

wotsthat

Shakethedisease wrote: »

pssst there's no referendum even been called yet. And when you've got a UK govt that's been ar*ing about since June dithering about what Brexit even means and don't even bother telling the people that voted for it what it means. I don't think you should be psssting anyone about a possible indy ref maybe two years from now. Or currency.

It's ironic that you defend the SNP by saying Westminster are just as bad.

The SNP are made from better stuff - why do you think you are being kept in the dark about their views on currency? I know why - it's because every option is sub-optimal vs the status quo.

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Polls who are pretty crap at predicting referendums and elections at the moment it has to be said, have independence support sitting in margin of error territory +/-3% either way around 50%. I think we'll go with that on the pro-indy side. Last time it was 28% when a ref was called. Salmond had no hesitation in calling it anyway. Neither will Sturgeon if she feels it's necessary.

Sturgeon will tell you what you'll go with and when. You will be noting the pure perfectness of whatever she decides in due course I find it quite funny that you and Clapton are in compete agreement about the referendum being called based on polls rather than principles - you just have slightly different numbers in mind.

There will be no referendum until Sturgeon thinks it can be won or it looks as if the SNP are losing influence in Scotland.

If 50% of people can't be persuaded to tell a pollster they'd vote for independence then they're not going to stand in a real polling booth and decide to throw all the pieces of their lives in the air and see where they land. Again.

Sturgeon agrees with me and not you.

beecher2

kabayiri wrote: »

In the discussions on here before Scottish indy ref 2014, I could see the merit in having local autonomy and control for iScotland. I said as much.

But...I think the lack of clear answers on currency and liabilities like debt/future pensions made the independence case weaker.
.

I think NS will run a very different campaign from AS. I don't think we're anywhere near having an actual referendum and I just hope that all of these things are being worked on at the moment. The lowest point of the 2014 was AS in the 1st televised debate, being incredibly weak on currency.

Many of the 'knowns' aren't actually knowns, they're predictions.

Thrugelmir

beecher2 wrote: »

I think NS will run a very different campaign from AS.

Very apparent it is different, Very much a Blair based media spin campaign for a younger generation. The one lesson learnt from the Blair era. Is that the lack of substance is the downfall of the entire empire. Simply papering over the fundamental issues without resolution means that they'll simply resurface over and over again. To the point of self destruction.

TrickyTree83

beecher2 wrote: »

TrickyTree, you never engage with what anyone actually posts. It is tiresome - conrad shouts 'what currency' and you shout 'GERS, deficit'. Nowhere on this thread does anyone say anything about the lank of milk and honey, Hamish has posted extensively on the problems he believes Scotland will face. My point was about the different expectations placed on Scotland where we are supposed to say exactly how the future will be.

Sigh... No it's tiring that the pro indy brigade constantly ignore the facts, never present any answers of their own and never discuss reality. You deflect, spin, pivot, whatever it takes to not tackle the truth head on. I bang the economic argument so much because I know you've got no answers for it. So eventually you might actually capitulate and admit independence is a crap idea under current circumstances, as I've said many times.

kabayiri

beecher2 wrote: »

I think NS will run a very different campaign from AS. I don't think we're anywhere near having an actual referendum and I just hope that all of these things are being worked on at the moment. The lowest point of the 2014 was AS in the 1st televised debate, being incredibly weak on currency.

Many of the 'knowns' aren't actually knowns, they're predictions.

The tricky time for NS and the Scottish government would be in the months after independence.

You will have sky high expectations from the independence voters, which have to be married with the concerns of the Union voters. All this, set against a backdrop of potentially austere times.

Sure, you can find a way through this period, but it could also spell the end of the SNP. They will inevitably carry the can for anything which goes wrong.

beecher2

kabayiri wrote: »

The tricky time for NS and the Scottish government would be in the months after independence.

You will have sky high expectations from the independence voters, which have to be married with the concerns of the Union voters. All this, set against a backdrop of potentially austere times.

Sure, you can find a way through this period, but it could also spell the end of the SNP. They will inevitably carry the can for anything which goes wrong.

I don't think anyone thinks it would be a bed of roses after independence.

SNP may well end up out, if there's an alternative party which looks better. Maybe Scottish Labour will get their act together at some point. Maybe their policy of increasing income tax will be more popular when it isn't seen as paying for Westminster imposed austerity. Anything could happen, but it'd be up to the people living in Scotland who was in government.

Shakethedisease

kabayiri wrote: »

a. You have no evidence that the government are ar*ing around (as you put it). In fact, many of the key personnel at the heart of the UK government have changed. Nobody can be surprised if they take their time over making plans.

b. They have no obligation to tell the public about the inner discussion and arguments. That public includes you and I. The EU negotiation team will also not feel beholden to discuss their day to day plans with 450m EU citizens either. If you want to know the real detail, then get yourself a job on one of the negotiating teams. ?

c. When is this much floated indy ref 2? You keep talking about it, yet we are still in the dark. It sounds like the SNP/Nicola are ar*ing around ! (to use a phrase someone used)

You're confusing what's needed to win the vote, with what happens afterwards. An independence vote needs to be won by articulating what's possible, pros and cons.

Not by detailing every single nuance of it's negotiating strategies before any referendum has even been called.

Brexit needs fleshed out first about what it means to everyone in their day to day lives. If there is a referendum comes off the back of this, and it's still not certain.. then currency and deficit reduction plans (plural) will be outlined. Is likely that other entities from the Greens to Business and Civic groups will also be invited to put their own plans forward too and given a lot of space and prominence to do so.

I've mused on myself here, and from the latest Times article from Kenny Farquarson yesterday after talking to SNP 'higher ups'.. it seems that any future campaign won't be a 'one size fits all' plan in order to win the referendum like there was last time. No one definitive white paper from the SNP.

Negotiations of course come afterwards. No one can say where they will end up. Neither in Brexit nor after any Scottish ref Yes vote.