Independence - how would you vote?

[Mr Rational]

Dinnae be daft....

[Reynard]

I take it Sturgeon's speech is getting all the attention it deserves?

Indeed it is.

[Ad Lib]

Labour aren't pulling out of BetterTogether. From a friend of mine who works for them, United with Labour is project "neutralise the campaigning in bed with the Tories" to protect their position in Greater Glasgow and it won't in any way reduce their involvement in BetterTogether, either administratively or substantively.

[Ad Lib]

I take it Sturgeon's speech is getting all the attention it deserves?

That would be "none at all" then?

Sturgeon is a clueless numpty. No amount of polling of the Scottish people will change that.

[xbl]

That would be "none at all" then?

Sturgeon is a clueless numpty. No amount of polling of the Scottish people will change that.

Engaging with the substance I see.

[Cardiffdon]

The irony of 'Better together' going their separate ways

[Ad Lib]

Engaging with the substance I see.

The substance was tantamount to scaremongering. Around the semblance of a legitimate point that Scotland can't choose who controls their macroeconomic policy, was a disingenuous claim that somehow an independent Scotland wouldn't have any austerity. Nothing new, plenty predictable.

[Colkitto]

Now let me get this right.
Vote Yes so Scotland gets the Government we vote for.
Vote No so England doesn't get the Government they vote for.

Crazy Unionist mentality

[Baxter Parp]

Engaging with the substance I see.

The substance was tantamount to scaremongering. Around the semblance of a legitimate point that Scotland can't choose who controls their macroeconomic policy, was a disingenuous claim that somehow an independent Scotland wouldn't have any austerity. Nothing new, plenty predictable.

I dunno, when we're in control of our taxes we'll clearly be better off. Instead of spending billions on a replacement for trident, for instance, and all of our taxes will be spent here instead of some going south. Plus our spending policy will be focused towards what's good for Scotland, not London and the South East. Has to be better.

[Ad Lib]

I dunno, when we're in control of our taxes we'll clearly be better off. Instead of spending billions on a replacement for trident, for instance, and all of our taxes will be spent here instead of some going south. Plus our spending policy will be focused towards what's good for Scotland, not London and the South East. Has to be better.

Scotland's pro-rata share of Trident is a few hundred million a year. Hardly anything. Besides which, we can't even AFFORD a replacement within the UK. All this means is we'll be less out of our depth.

The notion that we wouldn't have had to have had *any* of our pro-rata share of austerity (circa £8billion) in a European environment where every single state has had to tighten its belt, and even in an environment where our deficit was *marginally* better than the UKs, with it still being one of the worst in the developed world, is fanciful.

[xbl]

Scotland's pro-rata share of Trident is a few hundred million a year. Hardly anything. Besides which, we can't even AFFORD a replacement within the UK. All this means is we'll be less out of our depth.

The notion that we wouldn't have had to have had *any* of our pro-rata share of austerity (circa £8billion) in a European environment where every single state has had to tighten its belt, and even in an environment where our deficit was *marginally* better than the UKs, with it still being one of the worst in the developed world, is fanciful.

Just a few hundred million a year eh? You're right, hardly anything. Is that why the Lib Dem government are renewing it? Better to concentrate on punishing the disgusting work-shy poor. What difference would a few hundred million a year make, eh?

[Ad Lib]

Just a few hundred million a year eh? You're right, hardly anything. Is that why the Lib Dem government are renewing it? Better to concentrate on punishing the disgusting work-shy poor. What difference would a few hundred million a year make, eh?

This is the thing though. A few hundred million is chicken feed (it shakes out at about £200 million a year) in governmental terms. And the point is we can't afford it ANYWAY. The alternative isn't "spend it on something else". The only viable alternative is "don't spend it at all".

There is no LibDem government. There is a Coalition government. Within which the Lib Dems continue to make the case for a less expensive alternative and who have postponed the final decision until the next Parliament while alternatives are touted. In a Parliament where two parties, comprising more than 500 MPs of the 646, support the like-for-like renewal of the Trident missile system.

Politics doesn't exist in a vacuum. The economy doesn't exist in a vacuum. We should be scrapping Trident because we can't afford it. Not because that money can be used for other public services. Because it can't. We're broke.

[vikingTON]

Politics doesn't exist in a vacuum. The economy doesn't exist in a vacuum. We should be scrapping Trident because we can't afford it. Not because that money can be used for other public services. Because it can't. We're broke.

No: the CDU is broke. Scotland isn't.

[Baxter Parp]

How can we be broke and be cutting taxes for millionaires? The fact is the country is rolling in cash. Lots of it is hidden abroad, for instance. Somehow, in a time of desperate financial straits the top 1% have seen their wealth grow by close on 22%. Which is obviously unsustainable.

What's more there are other defence savings that mean we can redirect money to our vital services. At the moment we contribute 3.5bn as our share of the defence budget but the MoD only spends 2.5bn so even if we increase that to 3bn for our defence force we'll still be saving .5bn p.a.

Finally, austerity is a busted flush and Keynes has been proven correct once again. He didn't base his theories on a wonky excel spreadsheet for a start. The only way out of recession is to spend and then cut your deficit when you return to surplus. Anybody who thinks Greece or Spain can restore their fortunes by continuing to cut spending and sustain 25% unemployment at the same time is barmy. Even the IMF don't believe in austerity now.

[Reynard]

How can we be broke and be cutting taxes for millionaires? The fact is the country is rolling in cash. Lots of it is hidden abroad, for instance. Somehow, in a time of desperate financial straits the top 1% have seen their wealth grow by close on 22%. Which is obviously unsustainable.

What's more there are other defence savings that mean we can redirect money to our vital services. At the moment we contribute 3.5bn as our share of the defence budget but the MoD only spends 2.5bn so even if we increase that to 3bn for our defence force we'll still be saving .5bn p.a.

Finally, austerity is a busted flush and Keynes has been proven correct once again. He didn't base his theories on a wonky excel spreadsheet for a start. The only way out of recession is to spend and then cut your deficit when you return to surplus. Anybody who thinks Greece or Spain can restore their fortunes by cutting spending and sustain 25% unemployment at the same time is barmy. Even the IMF don't believe in austerity now.

Like Japan?

Hows that working out for them?

Keynes being proven right yet they have had twenty years of stimulus spending which has rendered them f**k all growth, and a mountain of debt.

Nice tunnels and trains though.

[Reynard]

Who is that utter c**t of a green on Newsnicht just now?

What a fucking p***k he is.

[Ad Lib]

No: the CDU is broke. Scotland isn't.

No, one is marginally less broke than the other. This is like comparing Rangers and Airdrionians. Both are dead. One just died bigger than the other.

1. How can we be broke and be cutting taxes for millionaires?

2. The fact is the country is rolling in cash. Lots of it is hidden abroad, for instance.

3. Somehow, in a time of desperate financial straits the top 1% have seen their wealth grow by close on 22%. Which is obviously unsustainable.

4. What's more there are other defence savings that mean we can redirect money to our financial services

1. We're not. Increases in stamp duty and disincentives regarding tax avoidance and capital gains tax increases amount to a net increase on the taxation burden on the richest in our society.

2. Therefore "this country" isn't rolling in it. Good luck with your imperial venture to take assets lawfully held in other countries, champ.

3. And how, exactly, will an independent Scotland reverse this trend, exactly? Post independence the uber-wealthy in London are still going to increase their wealth. Even if the gap between rich and poor narrows slightly in Scotland or widens less quickly, it's going to be marginal, and will have virtually no effect on the underlying trends whereby the biggest financial centres still see an increase in wealth disproportionate to the rest of society. The only difference will be that said financial sectors are not notionally counted as being in the same country as Scotland. Woopee!

4. Again, we can't afford to spend this money ON defence, let alone anything else. Labour left a black hole in the defence budget OVER AND ABOVE any austerity-based cut-backs of £40billion.

At the moment we contribute 3.5bn as our share of the defence budget but the MoD only spends 2.5bn so even if we increase that to 3bn for our defence force we'll still be saving .5bn p.a.

Great. And the only thing we can afford to spend that on is paying back our creditors.

Finally, austerity is a busted flush and Keynes has been proven correct once again. He didn't base his theories on a wonky excel spreadsheet for a start. The only way out of recession is to spend and then cut your deficit when you return to surplus. Anybody who thinks Greece or Spain can restore their fortunes by continuing to cut spending and sustain 25% unemployment at the same time is barmy. Even the IMF don't believe in austerity now.

Keynes also said you should run significant surpluses in the good years, champ. We didn't, so we can't afford a huge expansionary stimulus now. He didn't argue that spending in a recession would better equip you to cut a deficit. He said deficit spending could mitigate the harmful short-term social effects of negative growth, using proceeds raised from the years of plenty. Also note that actually Osborne's strategy, excluding debt interest AND excluding the effect of unemployment on welfare, involves a real terms INCREASE in government spending over the term of the Parliament. Put simply: it's a Keynesian stimulus. It doesn't suit his (or his opponents') political agenda to admit this, but it's true.

[Dunning1874]

Katie Grant is an embarrassment.

[vikingTON]

No, one is marginally less broke than the other. This is like comparing Rangers and Airdrionians. Both are dead. One just died bigger than the other.

No, Scotland's finances are in reasonable order, by any measure of the world's developed industrial economies. The CDU isn't.

It's more like when the Rangers fans were pointing out that Celtic had a lot of debt, 15 months ago. They did. But their situation wasn't anywhere near as bad as the bankrupt mess across the divide.

[Ad Lib]

No, Scotland's finances are in reasonable order, by any measure of the world's developed industrial economies. The CDU isn't.

It's more like when the Rangers fans were pointing out that Celtic had a lot of debt, 15 months ago. They did. But their situation wasn't anywhere near as bad as the bankrupt mess across the divide.

We are pro-rata within the margin of error of the CDU's debt and deficit to GDP ratios. Every other economic indicator suggests we are at best fractionally better placed economically.