When will indyref2 happen?

[Clown Job]

Starting to think a written constitution wouldn’t be a bad idea after independence

[101]

2 hours ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

Well, I import goods from a number of EU countries and there isn’t much difference other than a bit more paperwork. I pay import VAT on goods which were formerly exempt but that can be reclaimed off output VAT so no change.

Don't know about the citizenship business but surely if they take out UK citizenship, then their kids will be British.

Or is this just a case where people were playing the system?

We haven't even got all the import controls on yet so how can you comment on Brexity being good bad or indifferent yet it's not done yet maybe you can comment when it's done.

[Guest Jedi]

6 hours ago, Aufc said:

Well not really. It depends on their financial circumstances. I would be happy to pay a bit more tax if it meant better services etc, however, there a limit to this. 

As i have pointed out, there is also a limit on higher rate and tax payers within the country and we already suffer from a productivity issue. So we clearly need to attract more people to the country (especially higher rate ones). However, we will be charging them more tax than rest of the UK so this may put people off (yes potential better qualify of life which will mean some wont care but it will also mean some people will choose elsewhere). I dont think the level of tax increases needed to maintain the services can be done with the number of tax payers in the country. So you then need to borrow. However, we wont have any credit history so therefore are we going to be able to borrow enough? Cant imagine we will get the best rates due to this. This is all stuff that needs to be considered

Asking questions about how Independence would actually work, and do the SNP even need a 'plan' for it? Careful now 

 

[Antlion]

7 minutes ago, Jedi said:

Asking questions about how Independence would actually work, and do the SNP even need a 'plan' for it? Careful now 

 

We know how independence would work. We have hundreds of examples of independent nation states. The question is whether it will be better or not than dependence, which we can demonstrably see isn’t working, and the future of which seems to be based on some vague “maybes” and “ifs” and “wait and sees”. We don’t even know who will be in charge of the current UK government in a week’s time, never mind how UK borders are going to work, how UK immigration policy is going to affect Scotland, etc.

[Granny Danger]

8 minutes ago, Antlion said:

We know how independence would work. We have hundreds of examples of independent nation states. The question is whether it will be better or not than dependence, which we can demonstrably see isn’t working, and the future of which seems to be based on some vague “maybes” and “ifs” and “wait and sees”. We don’t even know who will be in charge of the current UK government in a week’s time, never mind how UK borders are going to work, how UK immigration policy is going to affect Scotland, etc.

I’ve been to Iceland (the country, not the freezer shop) and it works.  I’ve been to Sweden and it works.  Belgium too.

I’ve been to a number of other countries too and they all work, but some people think that Scotland might not work for reasons that they cannot explain.

[microdave]

Yeah, there's definitely loads of 2014 Yes voters who will vote No next time around.  

There's actually one in my office who would do just that. He was a dyed in the wool snp voter for years but turned away from them when Nicola Sturgeon became leader as he's a huge fucking misogynist who doesn't think women should get the vote, let alone be the leader of a party/ country.

[Guest Jedi]

Do Sweden, Iceland and Belgium all have their interest rates set by and lender of last resort in another country?

Do they all have fairly high taxes (comparatively) to invest in public services? I believe they do. Do the SNP want higher taxes? No, rather they want that low tax, high foreign investment, low public spending economy.

[Granny Danger]

4 minutes ago, Jedi said:

Do Sweden, Iceland and Belgium all have their interest rates set by and lender of last resort in another country?

Do they all have fairly high taxes (comparatively) to invest in public services? I believe they do. Do the SNP want higher taxes? No, rather they want that low tax, high foreign investment, low public spending economy.

An Independent Scotland will not have a low tax/low public spending economy because there is zero evidence that the people of Scotland want that.  So when elections are called following Independence any party or parties advocating that approach will not get public support.

Therefore whatever your perception of existing SNP policy is is totally irrelevant.

[Antlion]

11 minutes ago, Jedi said:

Do Sweden, Iceland and Belgium all have their interest rates set by and lender of last resort in another country?

Do they all have fairly high taxes (comparatively) to invest in public services? I believe they do. Do the SNP want higher taxes? No, rather they want that low tax, high foreign investment, low public spending economy.

Hard to get scared by this when dependence means Scotland having its interest rate set outside of Scotland with no Scottish input, and the Tories’ approach to tax is currently schizophrenic enough to qualify as rogue state status (in addition to being low tax, high foreign investment, low public spending).

[Guest Jedi]

Its not really a perception when its all there in the Scot Govt's own documents though is it (all be it in fairness they did copy and paste a fair bit from existing New Zealand proposals).

The SNP have a pretty much built in 40-45% of the vote....more than enough to always end up with a majority in any forthcoming elections. How that is likely to 'change' over the first period of Independence, I'm still not sure.....yes, you 'get the govt you vote for, vote for whoever you like, its all about getting there' etc.

Why would a majority vote 'Yes' (on the basis of the SNP's fiscal model for Independence), and then reject that model at subsequent elections?

[Guest Jedi]

4 minutes ago, Antlion said:

Hard to get scared by this when dependence means Scotland having its interest rate set outside of Scotland with no Scottish input, and the Tories’ approach to tax is currently schizophrenic enough to qualify as rogue state status (in addition to being low tax, high foreign investment, low public spending).

You are absolutely spot on about the Tories being low tax, high foreign investment, low public spending, as well as their failure to react to interest rates which are of course set by the B of E. 

So, low tax, high foreign investment, low public spending for the UK is terrible (which it is), but it's okay in an Independent Scotland?

[Antlion]

1 minute ago, Jedi said:

Its not really a perception when its all there in the Scot Govt's own documents though is it (all be it in fairness they did copy and paste a fair bit from existing New Zealand proposals).

The SNP have a pretty much built in 40-45% of the vote....more than enough to always end up with a majority in any forthcoming elections. How that is likely to 'change' over the first period of Independence, I'm still not sure.....yes, you 'get the govt you vote for, vote for whoever you like, its all about getting there' etc.

Why would a majority vote 'Yes' (on the basis of the SNP's fiscal model for Independence), and then reject that model at subsequent elections?

You really couldn’t have picked a worse day to bang the “Scotland will be stuck with the SNP foreveeeeer whereas the UK is a bastion of choice” drum. You’re already off to a wrong start by claiming 40-5% would provide a majority; maybe for the decaying, Belarusian UK but not under the Scottish electoral system. 

If voting “Yes” means being stuck with the SNP’s fiscal model for independence, then voting “No” means being stuck with the Tories’ model of dependence. No thanks.

[Antlion]

3 minutes ago, Jedi said:

You are absolutely spot on about the Tories being low tax, high foreign investment, low public spending, as well as their failure to react to interest rates which are of course set by the B of E. 

So, low tax, high foreign investment, low public spending for the UK is terrible (which it is), but it's okay in an Independent Scotland?

I’d actually disagree with you on the SNP being just like the Tories when it comes to low tax, high foreign investment, and low public spending.

But if they were, I’m confused as to why you think it’s terrible for an independent Scotland, but it’s okay for a dependent Scotland.

[Guest Jedi]

I'm not saying its 'okay' for either....what I wouldn't want to see is an Independent Scotland simply making the same fiscal choices as Westminster (under the Tories) does.

In 2014 there was so much energy in the Yes campaign because it contained a variety of voices as to what the country could look like.

I don't disagree that Independence isn't just about the SNP (and it shouldn't be),..or indeed that you can 'vote for whoever you like in an iScotland),.... but over the past few years it has moved much more in their direction, and I don't hear many competing narratives now from more working class orientated groups. 

For Yes to win, I still reckon that it needs to become much broader and engage with these movements again. So many people were energized not just by Independence, but by politics in 2014, which was brilliant. That was as a result of feeling like they could hear from different views of what Independence could mean, and taking part in community groups up and down the country.

If the SNP set out the kind of prospectus, which they have adopted under the current leadership (not the 2014 version), I fear that, if there is a Ref next year, that it could result in a narrow No win, and that I think quite honestly would be both a great shame and a massive opportunity missed to really start to shape Scotland as a nation which can make different, and better choices than Westminster. As long as the fiscal outlooks of either London or Edinburgh aren't that different, you are only swapping 'dependence' on one hand, to see the same sort of policies as before implemented.

Edited October 20, 2022 by Jedi

[Antlion]

17 minutes ago, Jedi said:

 

If the SNP set out the kind of prospectus, which they have adopted under the current leadership (not the 2014 version), I fear that, if there is a Ref next year, that it could result in a narrow No win, and that I think quite honestly would be both a great shame and a massive opportunity missed to really start to shape Scotland as a nation which can make different, and better choices than Westminster. As long as the fiscal outlooks of either London or Edinburgh aren't that different, you are only swapping 'dependence' on one hand, to see the same sort of policies as before implemented.

Yet if we are independent, we as a nation can go in any direction if the majority so choose. If we are dependent, we can only hope that the rest of the UK will change direction for us. If you don’t think an independent Scotland is likely to return a party that will do other than institute “the same sort of policies as before”, what hope that the UK - which can’t even oust a government after two prime ministerial resignations and countless government resignations - will do so for us?

[Guest Jedi]

I think that the UK will oust the Tories the next time around, and then make different policy choices.

Have now read 'Building a New Scotland' policy paper. Admittedly a lot of good ideas in there- focus on a 'greener economy' with the proposed £20 billion of investment from an oil fund to provide funding for hydrogen, solar, wind and wave power, insulating homes, and creating green jobs in the process while lowering energy bills and aiming for net zero.....all good. (and all left wing) Admittedly the same as Labour's 'Green New Deal' but all good.

I like the immigration proposals, to tailor this to suit Scotland's needs, makes sense, and yes, is (rightly) more open than the UK model.

Setting a decent minimum (and living) wage-good

Legislate to end hire and fire, end zero hours contracts, have workers represented on company boards, guarantee sick pay for all, Fair Pay Commission......all good (and also all Labour policy as well).

Then we have the retention of sterling, the admission of the B of E continuing to set interest rates etc...(and yes, the eventual move to a Scottish currency 'or' the Euro). An awful lot of talk about stringent fiscal rules on borrowing and public investment, (and keeping these low as a starting point), as well as many mentions of encouraging innovators and...there it is again 'entrepreneurs'. Then we come to 'Scotland must be a dynamic hub for foreign direct investment'

Like I say, it a decent starting point for discussion, (and in fairness it provides a lot of answers on borders, currency, finance, and more....not sure its for the 'casual' reader though), with further papers to come....it is certainly better than the Growth Commission (although largely retaining its fiscal model), and yes, there is a lot of good there on a Green Economy, workers rights, and immigration.

Does it make a fair case for Independence (as the SNP see it)?....absolutely....and is it in the territory Labour are proposing for the UK? (Brexit aside)...pretty much.

 

Edited October 20, 2022 by Jedi

[carpetmonster]

 

[renton]

7 hours ago, Jedi said:

Do Sweden, Iceland and Belgium all have their interest rates set by and lender of last resort in another country?

Do they all have fairly high taxes (comparatively) to invest in public services? I believe they do. Do the SNP want higher taxes? No, rather they want that low tax, high foreign investment, low public spending economy.

Well, Belgium uses the Euro, so depending on your mileage for how closely the ECB aligns to the old Bundesbank and whether or not the ECB is more or less concerned with protecting anything other than German concerns then you could argue that any number of European nations actually use another nation's de facto lender of last resort.

On the other hand given the paper does talk about a 5 year period between a vote and independence then there probably is an opportunity to move to a Scottish currency before independence.

[renton]

6 hours ago, Jedi said:

I

Does it make a fair case for Independence (as the SNP see it)?....absolutely....and is it in the territory Labour are proposing for the UK? (Brexit aside)...pretty much.

 

Brexit isn't exactly a minor fucking detail.

And as importantly, independence is about the processes and mechanisms we put in place to protect Scottish democracy and policy choices, instead of hoping that the eccentricities of England's mood occasionally aligns with our needs.

[Aufc]

I’ve been to Iceland (the country, not the freezer shop) and it works.  I’ve been to Sweden and it works.  Belgium too.
I’ve been to a number of other countries too and they all work, but some people think that Scotland might not work for reasons that they cannot explain.

True. I would need to look it up but how does the age of these countries compare to Scotland? We have an ageing population so means our welfare costs are only going to go up and will need to be serviced by a smaller pool. What’s the plan for this?

There is no doubt Scotland could be independent but what kind of country are we going to be? We keep talking about Scandinavian countries as examples. Our GDP per capita lags significantly behind all the Scandinavian countries which, as I have said previously, indicates there is a massive productivity issue which needs addressed.

You mentioned Sweden. They have to pay for their healthcare. Their welfare system is also designed to keep people in work (both of these policies are similar to tories I would say?). It is also a very high tax environment.

Nicola sturgeon talks about using the oil money to create a fund like Norway. However, it’s a declining resource and if she is using that money to create a fund, how is she filling the gap to meet existing commitments (considering we are already apparently operating at a large deficit).

It’s all well and good naming other independent countries but there are a lot of factors to consider

What about trident? She has said absolutely that she doesn’t want this in Scotland. I don’t think it will be as simple as her saying that as it will cost the UK billions and take years to find an alternative location for it. I doubt very much she is going to get away with not paying anything and simply discarding it. Is she happy to continue with having the nuclear deterrent in the Uk (especially in the current climate) but not wanting to contribute to it?