When will indyref2 happen?

[SANTAN]

Lock it. 

[sophia]

12 hours ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

The point is

How is an independent Scotland going to raise the funds to pay for public spending (capital and revenue) for which  it is currently being subsidised by the RUK?

The SNP Growth Commission forecast years of austerity to keep borrowing at an affordable level.
The sunny uplands will be a long time coming.

Whats the point when the status quo is just so advantageous?

Referendum - bring it on. Sooner the better.

One only is required to cast a cursory glance towards Govan for the answer.

A new club which started with heritage advantages was able to be successful over a short period of time.

It was able to do so as borrowing in the short term is cheap, easy and sustainable.

 

[Dawson Park Boy]

7 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

Regardless of views on independence, why does the unionist side persist with blatant lies like this?

Are you hoping people will just be daft enough to believe it? Is that the strategy?

Nope.

Just look at GERS figures produced by SG and not refuted.

Look at the Growth Commisssion produced by Andrew Wilson.

If it’s all lies, give us the facts.

Our side is the status quo. It’s up to the separatists to prove their case.

As I said, let’s have the referendum and let the people decide.

[Arabdownunder]

To sum up:

1.Scotland can only achieve prosperity as part of the UK.
2. The evidence for this is a report showing that Scotland has not achieved prosperity as part of the UK.

I detect a flaw in this logic.

[HTG]

Just now, Arabdownunder said:

To sum up:

1.Scotland can only achieve prosperity as part of the UK.
2. The evidence for this is a report showing that Scotland has not achieved prosperity as part of the UK.

I detect a flaw in this logic.

You can add that the UK is "prosperous" with a massive burden of debt (which seems to bother nobody - there's been no scrutiny of how and when that debt will be repaid). 

Then there's this

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/damning-scale-uk-child-poverty-24136619.amp

Most of all, the democratic deficit and inability to be governed by people the majority voted for in Scotland is what makes this union the shitfest it's become. 

[lichtgilphead]

4 hours ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

Just look at GERS figures produced by SG and not refuted.

As you well know, the GERS figures are full of estimates which apportion UK current spend to Scotland on a population basis. They attempt to represent Scotlands financial position as part of the UK, not as an independent country.

If Scotland was not part of the UK, do you not imagine that some things would be done differently, or is your view just too blinkered?

For example, in 2015/16, GERS allocated £3bn defence costs to Scotland. I believe that this was done on a population basis. However, in real life, it is estimated that only around £1.8bn was spent in Scotland. The positive economic multiplier effects of the £1.2bn spent elsewhere did not accrue to Scotland.

This drain on spending within Scotland  is increased by the stream of vehicles leaving Faslane/Coulport every weekend as military personnel return to their full-time places of residence to spend their wages elsewhere. (Jackie Baillie never points out how little they actually spend in Helensburgh!)

However, these facts pale into significance beside the potential savings on defence in an independent Scotland. The UK currently maintains an active nuclear deterrent, a blue water navy and the ability to – at least in theory – to go to war with anyone that the USA tells them to threatens international stability.

Obviously, future iScotland defence spending will be a matter for the future iScotland government, but I cannot imagine that it will invove nuclear weapons & aircraft carriers (without planes).

The 2015/16 Gers figure of £3bn was 1.94% of Scottish GDP. In comparison, Eire, which is similar-sized NATO member to the future iScotland, had defence spending of 0.45% of their GDP. That's less than a quarter of Scotland's notional spend under GERS.

So, if we take the GERS starting point as being that iScotland's implicit budget deficit is 8.6% of GDP and that we have to reduce the deficit to a similar level as the UK (2.6% of GDP), we've already identified 25% of the necessary cuts in this one area alone!

The same principles can be applied to all other aspects of the budget - the simple rule to remember is that an iScotland's budget decisions will be made according to Scottish needs, not dictated by a fadied world power that still has pretentions of empire.

 

 

 

[Dawson Park Boy]

2 hours ago, lichtgilphead said:

As you well know, the GERS figures are full of estimates which apportion UK current spend to Scotland on a population basis. They attempt to represent Scotlands financial position as part of the UK, not as an independent country.

If Scotland was not part of the UK, do you not imagine that some things would be done differently, or is your view just too blinkered?

For example, in 2015/16, GERS allocated £3bn defence costs to Scotland. I believe that this was done on a population basis. However, in real life, it is estimated that only around £1.8bn was spent in Scotland. The positive economic multiplier effects of the £1.2bn spent elsewhere did not accrue to Scotland.

This drain on spending within Scotland  is increased by the stream of vehicles leaving Faslane/Coulport every weekend as military personnel return to their full-time places of residence to spend their wages elsewhere. (Jackie Baillie never points out how little they actually spend in Helensburgh!)

However, these facts pale into significance beside the potential savings on defence in an independent Scotland. The UK currently maintains an active nuclear deterrent, a blue water navy and the ability to – at least in theory – to go to war with anyone that the USA tells them to threatens international stability.

Obviously, future iScotland defence spending will be a matter for the future iScotland government, but I cannot imagine that it will invove nuclear weapons & aircraft carriers (without planes).

The 2015/16 Gers figure of £3bn was 1.94% of Scottish GDP. In comparison, Eire, which is similar-sized NATO member to the future iScotland, had defence spending of 0.45% of their GDP. That's less than a quarter of Scotland's notional spend under GERS.

So, if we take the GERS starting point as being that iScotland's implicit budget deficit is 8.6% of GDP and that we have to reduce the deficit to a similar level as the UK (2.6% of GDP), we've already identified 25% of the necessary cuts in this one area alone!

The same principles can be applied to all other aspects of the budget - the simple rule to remember is that an iScotland's budget decisions will be made according to Scottish needs, not dictated by a fadied world power that still has pretentions of empire.

 

 

 

Fair enough.

I rather thought that you would agree with me that we should have the referendum ASAP and all these matters can be fully debated.

The earlier the better.

[lichtgilphead]

3 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

Fair enough.

I rather thought that you would agree with me that we should have the referendum ASAP and all these matters can be fully debated.

The earlier the better.

Unlike you, I believe that we should obey Covid lockdown restrictions. It is impossible to fully debate the matters involved whilst most forms of political discussion are unavailable. Not everyone posts on politics forums, and the pandemic has changed my previous view relating to the timing.

Obviously, your side would hope to use the "Nicola is dragging us through a divisive separatist referendum during a pandemic" line (let's be honest - you've got f*ck all else left!) but I'm happy to have the referendum in the next 3-5 years.

[Dawson Park Boy]

3 minutes ago, lichtgilphead said:

Unlike you, I believe that we should obey Covid lockdown restrictions. It is impossible to fully debate the matters involved whilst most forms of political discussion are unavailable. Not everyone posts on politics forums, and the pandemic has changed my previous view relating to the timing.

Obviously, your side would hope to use the "Nicola is dragging us through a divisive separatist referendum during a pandemic" line (let's be honest - you've got f*ck all else left!) but I'm happy to have the referendum in the next 3-5 years.

Nicola says she wants it in the first half of this parliament. I’d go with that.

Boris should call her bluff.

[The_Kincardine]

2 hours ago, lichtgilphead said:

The 2015/16 Gers figure of £3bn was 1.94% of Scottish GDP. In comparison, Eire, which is similar-sized NATO member to the future iScotland, had defence spending of 0.45% of their GDP. That's less than a quarter of Scotland's notional spend under GERS.

So, if we take the GERS starting point as being that iScotland's implicit budget deficit is 8.6% of GDP and that we have to reduce the deficit to a similar level as the UK (2.6% of GDP), we've already identified 25% of the necessary cuts in this one area alone!

The same principles can be applied to all other aspects of the budget - the simple rule to remember is that an iScotland's budget decisions will be made according to Scottish needs, not dictated by a fadied world power that still has pretentions of empire.

Eire isn't a member of NATO and the guideline for NATO members is 2% of GDP by 2024 - pretty much in line with the GERS figure if The Scotland joins NATO.

[SANTAN]

10 minutes ago, lichtgilphead said:

Unlike you, I believe that we should obey Covid lockdown restrictions. It is impossible to fully debate the matters involved whilst most forms of political discussion are unavailable. Not everyone posts on politics forums, and the pandemic has changed my previous view relating to the timing.

Obviously, your side would hope to use the "Nicola is dragging us through a divisive separatist referendum during a pandemic" line (let's be honest - you've got f*ck all else left!) but I'm happy to have the referendum in the next 3-5 years.

Shitting it. 

[lichtgilphead]

1 minute ago, The_Kincardine said:

Eire isn't a member of NATO and the guideline for NATO members is 2% of GDP by 2024 - pretty much in line with the GERS figure if The Scotland joins NATO.

1) Eire has had a formal relationship with NATO since 1999, when they joined as a member of the NATO Partnership for Peace programme and signed up to NATO's Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council. 

2) Currently, 20 Nato allies spend less than 2%. 

[lichtgilphead]

9 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

Nicola says she wants it in the first half of this parliament. I’d go with that.

Boris should call her bluff.

 

3 minutes ago, Stormzy said:

Shitting it. 

Looking forward to it, whenever it happens. 

If the UK are so sure of winning it, I hope Johnson takes DPB's advice

[The_Kincardine]

5 minutes ago, lichtgilphead said:

1) Eire has had a formal relationship with NATO since 1999, when they joined as a member of the NATO Partnership for Peace programme and signed up to NATO's Euro-Atlantic Partnership Council. 

2) Currently, 20 Nato allies spend less than 2%. 

Waffle all you like but Eire isn't a member of NATO.  

If The Scotland does join then they will have the same target as everyone else and you basing your recalculation of defence spending based on a country being a member of NATO when it isn't is very Natter - to the surprise of no one,

Edit:  What you're really saying is that Newco Scotland will have to make cuts and defence is an obvious area.

Edited May 19, 2021 by The_Kincardine

[lichtgilphead]

2 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:

Waffle all you like but Eire isn't a member of NATO.  

If The Scotland does join then they will have the same target as everyone else and you basing your recalculation of defence spending based on a country being a member of NATO when it isn't is very Natter - to the surprise of no one,

Eire's policy of neutrality prohibits them from becoming full members of NATO, but they have participated in Nato task forces in Kosovo & Afghanistan in recent times. I would hope that Scotland would participate in NATO in exactly the same fashion.

I voted against the current SNP position on NATO, so my views on Scottish participation are entirely in accord with my own previously expressed views.

You really are scraping the gutter, however, when your only line of attack is that "you're not comparing with a FULL NATO member"

Nothing to say about the obscene waste of money located just over 20 miles from my house?

 

[The_Kincardine]

4 minutes ago, lichtgilphead said:

Eire's policy of neutrality prohibits them from becoming full members of NATO, but they have participated in Nato task forces in Kosovo & Afghanistan in recent times. I would hope that Scotland would participate in NATO in exactly the same fashion.

I voted against the current SNP position on NATO, so my views on Scottish participation are entirely in accord with my own previously expressed views.

You really are scraping the gutter, however, when your only line of attack is that "you're not comparing with a FULL NATO member"

Nothing to say about the obscene waste of money located just over 20 miles from my house?

I'm entirely neutral on Future Scotland's spending on defence but the cuts you propose will have an economic impact - and that includes high skill/high wage jobs in Govan, Scotstoun and Rosyth.

Where else do you see you losing jobs?

[lichtgilphead]

There are currently around 6,500 workers directly employed by defence contractors in Govan, Scotstoun and Rosyth. How many of these jobs do you predict will be lost, and how many relate of these to Faslane/Coulport? 

As P&B's  expert on going back on your word, can you then compare these losses with the money not spent by the UK Government at Govan & Scotstoun when they welched on their promise to build 13 frigates on the Clyde if we voted "No" in 2014.?

 

 

[Cheese]

2 minutes ago, lichtgilphead said:

As P&B's  expert on going back on your word, can you then compare these losses with the money not spent by the UK Government at Govan & Scotstoun when they welched on their promise to build 13 frigates on the Clyde if we voted "No" in 2014.?

[lichtgilphead]

43 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:

Edit:  What you're really saying is that Newco Scotland will have to make cuts and defence is an obvious area.

Interesting edit after I had already responded

1) "Newco" is usually used to describe something that died. I don't think that applies to iScotland

2) I wouldn't describe a reasonable reduction in defence spending as "cuts", but go on, , you fill your boots. Personally, I would describe the main reduction as "stopping pissing money away on a defence system that we will hopefully never use, and that if we do use it, will result in the nuclear obliteration of the whole UK"

It's all just semantics though.

[The_Kincardine]

6 minutes ago, lichtgilphead said:

Interesting edit after I had already responded

1) "Newco" is usually used to describe something that died. I don't think that applies to iScotland

2) I wouldn't describe a reasonable reduction in defence spending as "cuts", but go on, , you fill your boots. Personally, I would describe the main reduction as "stopping pissing money away on a defence system that we will hopefully never use, and that if we do use it, will result in the nuclear obliteration of the whole UK"

It's all just semantics though.

1.  When the parliaments of Scotland and England were dissolved in 1707 both countries ceased to exist as nation states.  'Newco' is apt.

2. You may think that these cuts are worth making but cuts they are - and in high-paying manufacturing jobs which are in short supply in Scotland.  Where else do you see The Scotland making cuts?