No Voters - what say you?

[git-intae-thum]

37 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

 

Yes it would be. The data collection method specifies that exports are recorded via customer location not the destination of transport or port. The publication says:



Also, as you are making the assertion that the export statistics are wrong, you should really be providing the evidence of this.











 

 

They are not official export statistics though.

The Scottish government figures come from a publication called Export Statistics Scotland. Here is how the Scottish govt website describes the ESS

"Export Statistics Scotland (ESS) is based on the Global Connections Survey, an annual survey run by the Scottish Government, as well as other survey and administrative data sources. It produces estimates of the cash value of exports by destination and industry sector for all sectors of the Scottish economy including the primary, manufacturing and service sectors. This source should be used to obtain estimates of the cash value of exports."

 

The issue being that the ESS figures are drawn from a voluntary survey completed by firms themselves. There is no requirement to submit the figures in the first place, no supervision or scrutiny of results. Business being business I would suggest that completing these forms accurately will be low priority.

I think the point from my previous post stands. No one could say that container of Scotch is definitely through the books as a Scots export.

The unionist politicians and media know this....or should. Therefore they are being less than truthful in constantly banging on about these figures as fact.

I defintely concur that Scotlands trade with the rUK is and will continue to make up a substantial part of our exports. And so it should. This is perfectly normal between adjoining states.

Crucially....it works both ways. rUK of course has a large export market going to Scotland.

Edited March 14, 2017 by git-intae-thum

[welshbairn]

2 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

I dont follow this argument at all. If you accept finance jobs would "clearly" have moved South before why wouldnt they now? If European access puts them off London it would be just as easy to go to Dublin and still work in English. Dublin has absolute access to Europe not a vague hope for it which nobody can seriously expect to click in 10 seconds after rUK leaves surely? Even if the SNP can somehow deliver EU membership there will surely be a period out of it.

Schooling systems and exams would be easier to adapt to for their children, and easier for friends and relatives to visit. Only a few staff would have to move straightaway, the big firms would wait for the conclusion before moving lock stock and barrel. Edinburgh would be a much simpler option than Dublin, far less Frankfurt or Paris. And the fact that we already have a world class financial sector, despite a few black sheep.

[Mr Heliums]

5 minutes ago, Snakebite said:

We drink more than the Welsh and the Northern Irish (a lot),we are fatter than them, we are generally more likely to die from cancer. Glasgow has a much higher excess mortality rate than cities in the north like Manchester and Liverpool which both have similar levels of deprivation.The point is, even in comparison to these areas that aren't also particularly wealthy compared to the South, we have greater social issues, we just don't have a lot of our shit in order. 

But you're still skirting around the reason. What is it – a racial trait or circumstances? Are you saying we're genetically programmed to be obese, drink a lot and live short lives? Or can we do something about it? I know what I think, and that's the crux of Scotland's future.

Edited March 14, 2017 by Mr Heliums

[git-intae-thum]

5 minutes ago, Snakebite said:

We drink more than the Welsh and the Northern Irish (a lot),we are fatter than them, we are generally more likely to die from cancer. Glasgow has a much higher excess mortality rate than cities in the north like Manchester and Liverpool which both have similar levels of deprivation.The point is, even in comparison to these areas that aren't also particularly wealthy compared to the South, we have greater social issues, we just don't have a lot of our shit in order. 

Thats terrible. So what r we gonna do about it.

[Snakebite]

9 minutes ago, Mr Heliums said:

But you're still skirting around the reason. What is it – a racial trait or circumstances? Are you saying we're genetically programmed to be obese, drink a lot and live short lives? Or can we do something about it? I know what I think, and that's the crux of Scotland's future.

I don't think social issues that are so ingrained in our culture are going to change with independence, unless I'm missing an obvious reason which will stop people abusing substances in the number they do and living generally unhealthy lifestyles. 

Edited March 14, 2017 by Snakebite

[git-intae-thum]

26 minutes ago, Snakebite said:

I don't think social issues that are so ingrained in our culture are going to change with independence, unless I'm missing an obvious reason which will stop people abusing substances in the number they do and living generally unhealthy lifestyles. 

And these social issues are being....will be addressed in union? 

It is arguable that, at least in part, they are a consequence of the same.

[McSpreader]

6 hours ago, git-intae-thum said:

There are no official figures as such. They are based on an unofficial survey of business. This is riddled with holes. It does not stop unionist commentators continuing to make the claim though. The best description I have found re the complexities of measuring this is from the autonomy Scotland blog:

"If you run a hotel in Edinburgh and lease a room to someone coming from Liverpool, does that count as a transfer of money from rUK into Scotland?

If you run a haulage company in Manchester and buy fuel in Falkirk does that count?

If you produce goods in Edinburgh then ship them to France via an English haulage company and through an English port then how does the profit break down?

What happens if a company in Dundee create something but the final packaging and shipping to customers happens in England?

Say you run a business in Glasgow but the registered office is still your old address in Bristol?"

In effect unionist claims are bollox. No one knows the real figure, but it is likely to significantly undervalue Scots exports to outside the rUK.

 

 

Any claims referencing Scottish exports to rUK are bollox whether from Unionists or Nationalists because there is no requirement for companies to report such movement of goods or services.

I think the only fair thing to say is that our economies, communites and interactions are so complicated , intertwined and interdependent that to create new barriers and difficulties would be self -harming of the most extreme kind.

 

[Sloop John B]

This thread has been so wholesome and nice on the whole. Have a lovely week everyone!

[McSpreader]

Just now, git-intae-thum said:

And these social issues are being....will be addressed in union? 

It is arguable that, at least in part, they are a consequence of the same.

There is no argument that is so.

None whatsoever. 

[git-intae-thum]

Just now, McSpreader said:

Any claims referencing Scottish exports to rUK are bollox whether from Unionists or Nationalists because there is no requirement for companies to report such movement of goods or services.

I think the only fair thing to say is that our economies, communites and interactions are so complicated , intertwined and interdependent that to create new barriers and difficulties would be self -harming of the most extreme kind.

 

Thank you for the honesty of admitting the figures are bollox.

As for the second part of your post, I suppose it is kind of similar to the effect on Scottish business of the whole brexit thing. Unfortunately that was forced on us by decisions made elsewhere.

They kind of decisions, having substantial effect on Scotland and Scottish business need to be made in Scotland in the future.

[The_Kincardine]

1 hour ago, git-intae-thum said:

The past is of relevance because it shows the long term trends of Scotland in union. We have been shafted and will continue to be so.

When did 'Scotland in union' start being shafted by rUK?  If I ask you for a particular year I am interested rather than being awkward.  Start from 1707 and stop when your 'shaftometer' kicks in.

I'm all agog.

[git-intae-thum]

3 minutes ago, McSpreader said:

There is no argument that is so.

None whatsoever. 

Really. Have you ever walked through Methil or Blantyre or.........och a whole swathe of Scottish towns.

These were once wealthy industrious towns. With a hard working bustling population. Look whats happened to them. Where is the hope for them or their people under Tory Brexit Britain? The very economic policies that destroyed them are only going to intensify.

[git-intae-thum]

6 minutes ago, The_Kincardine said:

When did 'Scotland in union' start being shafted by rUK?  If I ask you for a particular year I am interested rather than being awkward.  Start from 1707 and stop when your 'shaftometer' kicks in.

I'm all agog.

See my above post. Lets try and stick to living history eh. There are very few of you left who can remember the empire games an all that.

[Snakebite]

9 minutes ago, git-intae-thum said:

And these social issues are being....will be addressed in union? 

It is arguable that, at least in part, they are a consequence of the same.

Is it someone in London's fault that people in Scotland choose to drink more than those in Wales or Northern Ireland? Or that we take more recreational drugs? If you want to point to UK administered poverty as a reason for choosing to drink or take drugs more, then does the possibility of jobs leaving the country as a result of independence address social issues? If anything it raises the risk of people wanting to drink out of boredom or depression unless they want to go with any relocation. 

[git-intae-thum]

2 minutes ago, Snakebite said:

Is it someone in London's fault that people in Scotland choose to drink more than those in Wales or Northern Ireland? Or that we take more recreational drugs? If you want to point to UK administered poverty as a reason for choosing to drink or take drugs more, then does the possibility of jobs leaving the country as a result of independence address social issues? If anything it raises the risk of people wanting to drink out of boredom or depression unless they want to go with any relocation. 

A) yes, in part, the economic and social policies of successive UK govts (who are obviously based in London) must take some responsibility. Policy has been geared towards ensuring the success of the service/financial sectors in certain areas of the country (you know where) at the expense of others. I include parts of Northern England, Wales and Northern Ireland in this as the social deprivation in some of these areas is every bit as bad as in parts of Scotland. Therefore the resultant linked societal problems are just as bad. 

B) Lets be honest, the overall job loss/gain figures with regards to independence cannot be known for definite until it happens. You are pessimistic. I am not and in time I think there would be a job gain. A Scottish government with full fiscal control and who prioritised Scotland, would target the right areas and industry, and thus enable economic growth in these places. Maybe a way out of the trap eh.

[git-intae-thum]

Anyways. It has been a pleasure debating with u gents in a civillised thread. Early start, so am aff tae bed.

[killiefan27]

I'm a Yes voter, but I do have some concerns with this idea of these big financial companies moving to Scotland post-Brexit (assuming we could stay in the EU or be fast-tracked in).

May has already hinted that she'll give the city of London a "sweetheart deal" post-Brexit. If she does so, what would we have to do to attract these companies? Less regulation? Huge cuts in corporation tax?

I worry it would lead to a race to the bottom, with the only beneficiaries being the big banks.

Good thread btw.

[Mr Heliums]

6 hours ago, killiefan27 said:

I'm a Yes voter, but I do have some concerns with this idea of these big financial companies moving to Scotland post-Brexit (assuming we could stay in the EU or be fast-tracked in).

May has already hinted that she'll give the city of London a "sweetheart deal" post-Brexit. If she does so, what would we have to do to attract these companies? Less regulation? Huge cuts in corporation tax?

I worry it would lead to a race to the bottom, with the only beneficiaries being the big banks.

Good thread btw.

I don't think an independent Scotland would join a race to the bottom. May would have to offer deals only to lessen the blow to London of losing at least some of its financial market that is dependent on EU membership. When looking around for alternative bases, Scotland's appeal would be simple, given its financial expertise and the possibility at least of rapid EU admittance. We wouldn't need to race.

How attractive that might be is another question, perhaps a moral one. I was only responding to the OP who was suggested that we would lose a lot of finance sector jobs. through independence. We're losing them already. I was suggesting that independence might at least stem that flow.

Edited March 15, 2017 by Mr Heliums

[Paco]

9 hours ago, killiefan27 said:

I'm a Yes voter, but I do have some concerns with this idea of these big financial companies moving to Scotland post-Brexit (assuming we could stay in the EU or be fast-tracked in).

May has already hinted that she'll give the city of London a "sweetheart deal" post-Brexit. If she does so, what would we have to do to attract these companies? Less regulation? Huge cuts in corporation tax?

I worry it would lead to a race to the bottom, with the only beneficiaries being the big banks.

Salmond proposed a 3p undercut of the UK corporation tax in the White Paper. I don't doubt at all they'd go for a similar move in the event of independence, but I expect they'll do their best to avoid mentioning it.

It's a valid concern, but there's a thin line between attracting business and allowing yourself to be shafted by it. 

11 hours ago, git-intae-thum said:

I think the point from my previous post stands. No one could say that container of Scotch is definitely through the books as a Scots export.

The unionist politicians and media know this....or should. Therefore they are being less than truthful in constantly banging on about these figures as fact.

I defintely concur that Scotlands trade with the rUK is and will continue to make up a substantial part of our exports. And so it should. This is perfectly normal between adjoining states.

Crucially....it works both ways. rUK of course has a large export market going to Scotland.

To be honest I'm not sure using the only figures that are available is unreasonable or less than truthful. They're entirely right to use them, regardless of how many anecdotal and impossible to define exports go to England before moving onto the EU.

With so much of the country's trade going into England, there's definite potential for a collision course now England are out of the EU. Business needs an open border and presumably no export tax. Is this compatible with EU regulations? I think this will end up being a significant hurdle for the Yes campaign. You're entirely right that it works both ways, but we'd be significantly more troubled by it than rUK.

Edited March 15, 2017 by Paco

[git-intae-thum]

52 minutes ago, Paco said:

Salmond proposed a 3p undercut of the UK corporation tax in the White Paper. I don't doubt at all they'd go for a similar move in the event of independence, but I expect they'll do their best to avoid mentioning it.

It's a valid concern, but there's a thin line between attracting business and allowing yourself to be shafted by it. 

To be honest I'm not sure using the only figures that are available is unreasonable or less than truthful. They're entirely right to use them, regardless of how many anecdotal and impossible to define exports go to England before moving onto the EU.

With so much of the country's trade going into England, there's definite potential for a collision course now England are out of the EU. Business needs an open border and presumably no export tax. Is this compatible with EU regulations? I think this will end up being a significant hurdle for the Yes campaign. You're entirely right that it works both ways, but we'd be significantly more troubled by it than rUK.

Well the numbers being quoted as fact by the unionist politicians and regurgitated as fact by the media are not correct.  If they do not know this they are incompetent. If they do know this they are being less than truthful in their portrayal of the figures.

As we now know them not to be correct, one must wonder what the hidden amount of Scotland/ rest of the world trade is. 

I definetely agree that the lowest possible tarrif conditions will be beneficial both ways, so it is in all parties interest for the rUK to get the best deal possible from the EU.

However should the rUK end up on wto rules then there are a number of ways Scotland could still benefit from this. It would not be ideal, but there would still be profit to be had.

Subtle threats that Scotland would suffer most from rUK trade tariffs are nonsense. Any attempt by the rUK to "punish" Scotland would backfire on them pretty quickly.

Edited March 15, 2017 by git-intae-thum