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

Shaka_Zulu

Shaka_Zulu

They can try but all the unionist groups we are in touch with (most) are united in preparing to organise a full scale boycott any attempt by the SNP to hold an illegal referendum and we highly suspect all the principle opposition party's will also recommend a boycott, which will involve all local authorities not under SNP control, refusing to take part...

(Source:- Do not break our Unity)

This is the way forward, just take the ball away from them.

ash28

setmefree2 wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39330702

Without a doubt Scotland could be independent. I've always thought so and said as much on here in 2014.....I might put forward arguments where it might appear I don't think so, but I do that to my husband all of the time because of his inability to consider any other argument but his own and some independence supporters remind me of him.

In 2014 it was the assumptions made by the SNP that I argued against, they would use the £, the BoE would be their lender of last resort, continue to use British Embassies in the same way, they would only need a treaty change to be in EU, article 48 instead of the usual route of article 49, etc, etc. It seemed as if they wanted nothing to change. Plus all of the nonsense being put about....Scottish whiskey duties .....huge oil field under the Clyde estuary that the UK government was suppressing....

I'm still of the same opinion, Scotland could make a go of independence even though the economic circumstances are hugely different, oil is half the price it was in 2014, and Scotland's share of the oil revenue fell to £60m in the last financial year. Scotland has very large fiscal deficit (they would need to find someone to lend them money, if they can) and then try and live within their means without Barnet money, it could mean austerity measures similar to or worse than Greece for a number of years. If people really want independence then they will live with that as for them it's better than the alternative of being part of a union they don't want. Some people will be happy to do that while other people in Scotland won't.

I do really think the Scottish government should lay out the facts (as far as they know them) to Scottish people, with none of bullsh*t of 2012 - 2014, and let the people make an informed choice. Athough it's already started....trade with the EU is more important to Scotland than trade with the UK...really???

I voted to leave the EU and to be frank the economic arguments on both sides were secondary, although I remained undecided until near the end. The reasons I wanted to leave had nothing to with either economics or immigration but more to do with sovereignty and democracy. So it would be hypocritical of me to argue against independence for Scotland. But I will argue because I can!

I can also understand the hatred of the Tories, I'm originally from the north east and lived in Scotland from 1979 to 1988 and saw the effects of de-industrialisation with nothing to replace it. The hardship suffered is not something that people get over in 30 years. My grandfather was a miner and took part in the 1926 general strike (he was locked out of work anyway) and he hated the Tories as much when he was 70 as he did when he was 20.

So, no, I'm not against Scottish independence but I will argue with you and I'll start now.

Why has Ms Sturgeon stopped citing the 'will of the Scottish people' and started citing the 'will of the the Scottish Parliament' ? Is it because the polls are begining to demonstrate that another referendum in the next couple of years is not the will of the Scottish people after all?

And can someone explain to me why, given the scale of trade with the UK vs EU, trade with the EU is more important to the SNP than trade with the UK,

fun4everyone

Amazingly spot on String.

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Economically antro is correct, none of the waffle changes the figures, the importance of the UK market, the insignificance of the EU single market by comparison, that Sturgeon has lied about this and that iScotland will be markedly poorer with much higher unemployment at a time when they allegedly want to get the deficit under control to re-join the EU.

I can't see any of it which makes any sense. Confuse the converted so they cannot be enlightened perhaps?

Hague has steam coming out of his ears about this today.

Professor Richard Murphy: Why you can't rely on GERS figures to judge Scotland's financial state

...then point out that does not usually mean that 25 of the 26 income figures in a set of accounts are estimates extrapolated from data for the UK as a whole and some consumer surveys. And yet that is the case for GERS. Estimates may be a part of financial life but this is ridiculous: what this really says, yet again, is that there is no financial data for Scotland...

...First, all with concern for Scotland need to demand proper data on its economy. That can start now. Secondly, it means that GERS has to be treated properly, with deep suspicion. The chance that Scotland makes a deficit of the scale it suggests is remote. It is exceptionally unlikely that eight per cent of the population make 17 per cent of the UK deficit

http://www.thenational.scot/news/15169186.Professor_Richard_Murphy__Why_you_can_t_rely_on_GERS_figures_to_judge_Scotland_s_financial_state/?ref=twtrec

Full article at link.

Gordon Brown according to the Daily Record 'privately' thinks Yes will win. And Merv King thinks currency won't be a problem.

Shakethedisease

kabayiri wrote: »

My only concern over the adoption of the status quo, from the Scottish perspective, is the assumption it will continue.

When considering the future of the UK in the EU, it is not unreasonable to try and project the future economic health of the EU, and then make some assessment as to how that impacts the UK long term.

By the same token, everyone seems to assume the willingness of rUK (read, mainly London) to continue funding a perceived deficit North of the border will remain strong.

Why should this be? If we go through another decade of grinding austerity, there might be fringe political parties pushing forward nationalism from an English or even Southern perspective.

Sturgeon/SNP may indeed stir up anti-Scottish sentiment by continually blaming everything on Westminster. It seems designed to provoke a response. You can only poke a bear through the cage with your stick so many times.!

Who's poking a bear through a cage ? This is nothing to do with the rUK and everything to do with the way Scots people vote and have voted in the last few years.

Leave the EU and the Single Market if you wish. No one is stopping you, but don't expect the Scots or indeed perhaps NI along for the ride without an internal and final decisive vote on the matter. No one expects the status quo to continue, and that is entirely the basis for another vote.

Two conflicting results in two different referendums. Needs resolved in Scotland. Also the EU need to be aware that the Scottish Parliament as a majority has voted through ( tomorrow ) it's wishes for a section 30 order. In other words Scots assets are also off the negotiating table for now until the situation is resolved one way or another.

May would probably just be better off giving Sturgeon her Section 30 asap and getting it all over with to be honest.

TrickyTree83

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Hague has steam coming out of his ears about this today.

http://www.thenational.scot/news/15169186.Professor_Richard_Murphy__Why_you_can_t_rely_on_GERS_figures_to_judge_Scotland_s_financial_state/?ref=twtrec

Full article at link.

Gordon Brown according to the Daily Record 'privately' thinks Yes will win. And Merv King thinks currency won't be a problem.

I give up for now...

We've been over Richard Murphy and GERS. The same man responsible for 'Corbynomics', borrowing £500bn and then telling Conservatives their debt control isn't good enough. Muppets. I need to let others beat the economics drum for a bit, I'm fed up of repeating myself and having you completely ignore the Fraser of Allander Institute and Scottish government statistics argument with this rubbish about GERS again. This isn't a discussion or debate, it's like talking to people at your door trying to convert you to Scientology.

Shakethedisease

ash28 wrote: »

Without a doubt Scotland could be independent. I've always thought so and said as much on here in 2014.....I might put forward arguments where it might appear I don't think so, but I do that to my husband all of the time because of his inability to consider any other argument but his own and some independence supporters remind me of him.

In 2014 it was the assumptions made by the SNP that I argued against, they would use the £, the BoE would be their lender of last resort, continue to use British Embassies in the same way, they would only need a treaty change to be in EU, article 48 instead of the usual route of article 49, etc, etc. It seemed as if they wanted nothing to change. Plus all of the nonsense being put about....Scottish whiskey duties .....huge oil field under the Clyde estuary that the UK government was suppressing....

I'm still of the same opinion, Scotland could make a go of independence even though the economic circumstances are hugely different, oil is half the price it was in 2014, and Scotland's share of the oil revenue fell to £60m in the last financial year. Scotland has very large fiscal deficit (they would need to find someone to lend them money, if they can) and then try and live within their means without Barnet money, it could mean austerity measures similar to or worse than Greece for a number of years. If people really want independence then they will live with that as for them it's better than the alternative of being part of a union they don't want. Some people will be happy to do that while other people in Scotland won't.

I do really think the Scottish government should lay out the facts (as far as they know them) to Scottish people, with none of bullsh*t of 2012 - 2014, and let the people make an informed choice. Athough it's already started....trade with the EU is more important to Scotland than trade with the UK...really???

I voted to leave the EU and to be frank the economic arguments on both sides were secondary, although I remained undecided until near the end. The reasons I wanted to leave had nothing to with either economics or immigration but more to do with sovereignty and democracy. So it would be hypocritical of me to argue against independence for Scotland. But I will argue because I can!

I can also understand the hatred of the Tories, I'm originally from the north east and lived in Scotland from 1979 to 1988 and saw the effects of de-industrialisation with nothing to replace it. The hardship suffered is not something that people get over in 30 years. My grandfather was a miner and took part in the 1926 general strike (he was locked out of work anyway) and he hated the Tories as much when he was 70 as he did when he was 20.

So, no, I'm not against Scottish independence but I will argue with you and I'll start now.

Why has Ms Sturgeon stopped citing the 'will of the Scottish people' and started citing the 'will of the the Scottish Parliament' ? Is it because the polls are begining to demonstrate that another referendum in the next couple of years is not the will of the Scottish people after all?

Scots voters will see the final deal. And for everyone's protestations about the SNP, ultimately this is down to the people and what they want to do once they've seen it. For many it's extremely important that they are given the choice at the end of negotiations. Sturgeon is making sure they have it.

You and other's are either willfully or purposefully misreading current polls and I can't be bothered explaining again. Not that they matter anyway since if they did matter that much we'd be electing governments on who currently has the lead in them. We do not elect representatives through opinion polls.

And can someone explain to me why, given the scale of trade with the UK vs EU, trade with the EU is more important to the SNP than trade with the UK,

Scotland wants both. End of story ( unless you're talking sanctions or something ? ).

sss555s

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

I give up for now...

We've been over Richard Murphy and GERS. The same man responsible for 'Corbynomics', borrowing £500bn and then telling Conservatives their debt control isn't good enough. Muppets. I need to let others beat the economics drum for a bit, I'm fed up of repeating myself and having you completely ignore the Fraser of Allander Institute and Scottish government statistics argument with this rubbish about GERS again. This isn't a discussion or debate, it's like talking to people at your door trying to convert you to Scientology.

At least you know when you're beat Tricky.

We all know how frustrating it is when people are banging the same old drum and ignoring examples of when they are wrong and that things can change (no one worse than you :whistle: ) and you've put a long shift in.

Go and have a lie down old chap, seeya :wave:

Shakethedisease

Shaka_Zulu wrote: »

(Source:- Do not break our Unity)

This is the way forward, just take the ball away from them.

Terrified of the result of asking ordinary Scots voters what they think of Brexit v's an independent Scotand ? Yes, I can understand that, since there's more than a fair chance you'd lose it in two years time.

Best to take the ball away from Scots voters then. Just in case ? If the only way to prevent the break up of the UK is by not letting a vote happen and to deny Scots voters the choice their own parliament has voted to give them. Then the Union is all but over anyway.