SCOTLAND

[Paul T]

I have many friends in Scotland - from Crieff up to Buckie - and all are voting no. Views of Alex Salmond are also united insofar as they all think he's an egotistical nutter and only out to get the best he can for himself. I was surprised really, but the concern from them all is that the voting age is 16 and many will be sticking their cross in a box without fully understanding the consequences...

[AVB]

Up to a few years ago, possibly even months, the English didn't really think much about Scotland. A bit of banter and that was all. But hearing all of the recent sob stories as to how we have repressed the Scots and how we are the cause of all of the problems in Scotland, along with the perceived unfairness of how Scottish MP's can vote on English affairs but English MP's can't vote on Scottish affairs has definitely hardened attitudes. I suspect that at the grass roots most English people would be happy to see the Scots go.

 

Why is there such a clamour by the politicians to keep the Union? Again a number of factors I think. 1) nobody wants to be the administration in charge when the Union broke up 2) nobody really know what the short term (20 year) impact will be 3) the cost of the separation will be a massive drain on both countries for many years.

 

I don't have a vote so what I think doesn't matter but if I did my head would tell me to vote no for 2 & 3 above. My heart would say "please go and shut up moaning".

[Flashman]

How much time is the UK in general wasting on the SNP's blackmail plot to extract yet more money out of the of the UK?

 

If they vote "yes," the first thing the rest of us should do is build the long conveyor belt heading North to dump back the Scotch MP's at Westminster and the drunk tramps and dole scroungers littering London. Heading the other way, all the civil service jobs and private sector jobs that will suddenly head South.

 

In five years Scotland will resemble North Korea - a bankrupt country relying on hand-outs from the South.

[Nial]

You talk utter balderdash.

 

Does he?

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11079296/Anti-English-racists-terrorising-the-No-campaign-in-Scotland.html

[islandgun]

it seems to me that those who are most outraged by this bid for independence are the very same that show the most dislike of all things Scottish, surely they should be happy not outraged,

 

I cant imagine how much the most vociferous amongst us must have suffered at the hand of the scots but it seems to have left a lasting impression.

 

If this thread was about eastern Europeans it would have been locked

 

Have a nice day

[Nial]

 

I don't doubt more is spent but is more collected?

 

 

Laird,

 

On the surface this might be correct but the fact that this puts NI in #2 totally blows any credibility it has out of the water.

 

NI is very heavily dependent on the civil service and government money to keep the economy going. A large proportion of NI tax take is

funded by the British Government. Scotland has proportionally more civil servants per head of population than we should too so

this also has to be taken into condsideration.

 

 

Nial

[grrclark]

 

Laird,

 

On the surface this might be correct but the fact that this puts NI in #2 totally blows any credibility it has out of the water.

 

NI is very heavily dependent on the civil service and government money to keep the economy going. A large proportion of NI tax take is

funded by the British Government. Scotland has proportionally more civil servants per head of population than we should too so

this also has to be taken into condsideration.

 

 

Nial

 

I believe that more than 50% of the Scottish population is employed via the public service, either directly through employment or indirectly through sub contracted public service contracts.

 

That is my single biggest fear around Scottish independence, that the current ratio of public to private income is not sustainable.

[Mark L]

How much time is the UK in general wasting on the SNP's blackmail plot to extract yet more money out of the of the UK?

 

If they vote "yes," the first thing the rest of us should do is build the long conveyor belt heading North to dump back the Scotch MP's at Westminster and the drunk tramps and dole scroungers littering London. Heading the other way, all the civil service jobs and private sector jobs that will suddenly head South.

 

In five years Scotland will resemble North Korea - a bankrupt country relying on hand-outs from the South.

 

Well I think you are very wrong Scotland are more than capable of standing on there own two feet. If were such a drain on England why are they so desperate to keep us, you never no it might be you English lot are looking for handouts from the north in a few years time !!!!

[Gordon R]

PS do you really think you subsidise us that much?

 

 

The figures for 2012-13 show that the difference between what was spent and what was raised in Scotland was £17.6 billion - subsidy.

 

Probably small beer to multi-posters.

[grrclark]

 

The figures for 2012-13 show that the difference between what was spent and what was raised in Scotland was £17.6 billion - subsidy.

 

Probably small beer to multi-posters.

 

That particular year is artificially higher due to issues within oil and gas production and tax offsets against capital investment and paints a far bleaker picture, notwithstanding of course that there would still be a structural fiscal deficit and that O&G is a volatile commodity and will always be subject to economic shock.

 

Taken in isolation it does paint a bad picture, put into context then Scotland's economic performance is no different to the rest of the UK's, it is slightly favourable, albeit still with a deficit !!! In both cases Scotland and the rest of the UK is 'subsidised' through borrowing.

 

England is living well beyond its means currently too and assuming that things remained at the level they currently are that will continue unchanged post independence, there is no English subsidy to Scotland, the subsidy for both (and Wales an NI too) comes from the international money markets.

 

The problem is that it is almost impossible to unravel the financials behind everything, the numbers that you have quoted from doesn't reflect VAT raised via sale of goods/services in/from Scotland, that is paid directly to the treasury, so in that case the rest of the UK numbers are bolstered by that.

 

Equally it is impossible to identify what level of tax income in Scotland comes from public service contracts that might disappear in event of independence, so to just rely on a tax contribution per head of population is false as it is equally false to simply rely on public spending per head of population.

 

Scottish exports do currently contribute favourably to the UK balance of payments and also effect the ratio of UK income from the rest of the world to UK spend in the rest of the world. Just now that is unfavourable, the UK has a negative ratio of debt to income in that respect. The loss of Whisky and Oil income to the treasury would make that ratio poorer, potentially impacting on the rate of borrowing.

 

There is also the share of the assets in the rest of the world, currently the UK has a greater level of assets than debt which offsets the unfavourable ratio of income to expenditure , but apportioning the share of those to Scotland could again effect that ratio unfavourably resulting in a higher cost of borrowing.

 

The long and the short of it is that the economics of Scotland is deeply entwined with the rest of the UK and there is not a simple answer, or a favourable answer for either side post a Yes vote.

 

If Scotland was to go it alone with a more right wing and economically hard nosed government and substantially reduce the level of public spending then Scotland does indeed have the potential to be a very successful and prosperous small country. Regrettably the current ideology of Scotland is the opposite of that and is one that favours higher levels of social subsidy and an increased public state and to my way of thinking that leads to a very much poorer outcome.

 

There is not so much difference in real terms between Scotland and England, Scotland's primary focus would be on the single market of O&G where as England has a focus on financial services in the city. In both cases that is disproportionate and skews the picture and creates an imbalance elsewhere.

[Laird Lugton]

 

Laird,

 

On the surface this might be correct but the fact that this puts NI in #2 totally blows any credibility it has out of the water.

 

NI is very heavily dependent on the civil service and government money to keep the economy going. A large proportion of NI tax take is

funded by the British Government. Scotland has proportionally more civil servants per head of population than we should too so

this also has to be taken into condsideration.

 

 

Nial

Nial,

 

Ok fair point, that was from an Indy site I took the picture. however here is one from the IFS which shows things slightly differently but still makes the point.

 

http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/6881

 

[Laird Lugton]

Whatever the merits of the campaign - this comment about underestimating Alex Salmond made the laugh. He is out of his depth.

 

The wheel is still turning, but the hamster has left.

 

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/scottish-independence/scottish-independence-westminster-is-talking-down-our-economysays-salmond-9688641.html

 

"Alex Salmond is a formidable debater and a capable politician….."

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-independence/11011914/Alex-Salmond-v-Alistair-Darling-who-will-win-the-independence-TV-debate.html

 

"Alistair Darling faces a formidable opponent in Salmond. He has been speaking and debating in Parliament consistently all his career and now has seven years under his belt as First Minister. Salmond is a confident debater, a skilful and witty performer."

 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/06/david-cameron-scottish-independence-debate

 

"It says that Mr Salmond, a formidable debater, would simply trounce Britain's prime minister."

 

"The first rule in Scottish Politics is never underestimate Salmond…."

 

Out of his depth? I think not.

 

I could go on with more…..

 

Laird Lugton - you have been quite prolific on this thread and cast the odd snide remark my way. I have seen nothing in your posts to say that your opinion is worth a bean. Bit like Salmond.

 

It's worth a few beans more than yours. Yes I have been prolific but then I have a very keen interest in the result…..

[Gordon R]

Despite your many posts, I doubt whether many have been persuaded by your "facts" or challenging style, or should I say, lack of it. :lol:

[Laird Lugton]

Despite your many posts, I doubt whether many have been persuaded by your "facts" or challenging style, or should I say, lack of it. :lol:

 

 

Well at least I haven't been slapped down twice on the the same page

[Nial]

Gordon, if you disagree with what he's saying come up with the 'evidence' to back it up.

 

I think that looking at the big picture the graphic above is fairly accurate, Scotland's tax take including oil is above the UK

average, without it's a bit lower. I think the SE/London is the only area where the tax take per head is higher, but as

above civil service / government sponsored jobs have to be taken into account.

 

It's _very_ difficult to get a straight picture but I think on the whole what Scotland gets back is roughly fair.

 

Free prescriptions might annoy English posters. I thought this was ridiculous, we can easily pay for them and I was happy to, but I read that it

was costing more to administer than making them all free so this looks like a sensible move all round.

 

At the end of the day we are _much_ better off together, it terrifies me what could happen to the place.

Edited September 8, 2014 by Nial

[Nial]

MartynGT4, on 07 Sept 2014 - 9:37 PM, said:

I wonder how many companies are planning an exodus from Scotland if they split, I know mine is, the plan has already been drawn up.

 

 

Yawn

 

 

Don't be so bloody stupid....

 

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/what-impact-would-independence-have-on-scotlands-defence-industry/

 

I work as a contractor for one of the companies mentioned in that article. Much of our work comes from MOD orders and

being British allows us access to the American market through ITAR.

 

This would _all_ be lost with independence.

 

As a contractor I'd definitely be out. It would be a pain but I could cope, I am experienced and have other streams I can get

work through but there would be 100's of highly paid engineers/ technicians out of work and 100's of £millions lost from

Scotland's trade figures.

 

There's also the transfer of financial business/money that _would_ happen. This isn't scare mongering, it is a fact.

 

The _only_ thing that might get better, apart from oil with its reducing revenues, is tourism, but this won't be enough

to cover the massive shortfalls elsewhere.

 

It's going to be very hard to create a 'fairer' society with the economy disappearing down a black hole.

 

Yes voters are condemning us to years of depression, not something i want for my daughters.

 

 

Nial

[grrclark]

 

MartynGT4, on 07 Sept 2014 - 9:37 PM, said:

 

 

 

 

Don't be so bloody stupid....

 

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/what-impact-would-independence-have-on-scotlands-defence-industry/

 

I work as a contractor for one of the companies mentioned in that article. Much of our work comes from MOD orders and

being British allows us access to the American market through ITAR.

 

This would _all_ be lost with independence.

 

As a contractor I'd definitely be out. It would be a pain but I could cope, I am experienced and have other streams I can get

work through but there would be 100's of highly paid engineers/ technicians out of work and 100's of £millions lost from

Scotland's trade figures.

 

There's also the transfer of financial business/money that _would_ happen. This isn't scare mongering, it is a fact.

 

The _only_ thing that might get better, apart from oil with its reducing revenues, is tourism, but this won't be enough

to cover the massive shortfalls elsewhere.

 

It's going to be very hard to create a 'fairer' society with the economy disappearing down a black hole.

 

Yes voters are condemning us to years of depression, not something i want for my daughters.

 

 

Nial

 

 

That is the whole point Nial, there is absolutely nothing in the white paper or any other agenda put forward that actually details how the society would be 'fairer'.

 

It is a specious argument by the Yes campaign designed to do nothing other then drum up support on emotion and rhetoric.

[Nial]

Fairer in that we'll all be in the **** perhaps?

 

 

 

Nial.

[scolopax]

I have quoted this quote from another forum...........

 

 

BBC's Robert Peston, 1 hour ago, amid news that Standard Life, Lloyds and RBS shares are all down....

"You don't need telling, I know, that the longer the uncertainties persist, the more prolonged the UK will suffer from an elevated cost of finance, and the greater the harm there will be to economic growth - both sides of the border.

Or to put it another way, whatever the long term prospects for Scotland and the rest of the UK, both could pay a steep and immediate economic price, during the months and probably years it will take to firmly determine the distribution of assets north and south (and I haven't even got on to the further complications of determining how liabilities, such as the national debt , are shared)."

And we were just starting to climb out of the worst recession since the 1920's..........

The price of waking up "Free" on the 19th will be that everything is even more expensive than before, and will be for a Long time.

Just be sure you know what you're voting for.

[Gordon R]

Nial - there are a chunk of people who believe that the oil is "Scottish". It is very misleading, as it is not. Some of the "Scottish oil" area of the North Sea falls into "English" waters.

[aris]

Well I think you are very wrong Scotland are more than capable of standing on there own two feet. If were such a drain on England why are they so desperate to keep us, you never no it might be you English lot are looking for handouts from the north in a few years time !!!!

 

Both sides will suffer in the event of a divorce - no question. As for England getting handouts from Scotland - I doubt it. If anything I can see plenty of Scots walking over the border, waving their UK passports, and getting a free ride on the British taxpayer. This really worries me - and I can see the UK government putting steps in place to prevent it.

 

South Africa have a character very similar to Alex Salmond - he's called Julius Malema. His rhetoric is all about how all your woes are due to past exploitation by white people, and how nationalising industries and natural resources will all help everyone get free stuff. Sound familiar?

[grrclark]

 

I have quoted this quote from another forum...........

 

 

BBC's Robert Peston, 1 hour ago, amid news that Standard Life, Lloyds and RBS shares are all down....

"You don't need telling, I know, that the longer the uncertainties persist, the more prolonged the UK will suffer from an elevated cost of finance, and the greater the harm there will be to economic growth - both sides of the border.

Or to put it another way, whatever the long term prospects for Scotland and the rest of the UK, both could pay a steep and immediate economic price, during the months and probably years it will take to firmly determine the distribution of assets north and south (and I haven't even got on to the further complications of determining how liabilities, such as the national debt , are shared)."

And we were just starting to climb out of the worst recession since the 1920's..........

The price of waking up "Free" on the 19th will be that everything is even more expensive than before, and will be for a Long time.

Just be sure you know what you're voting for.

 

 

Your sentiment is absolutely spot on, in a decision such as this people should be as sure as they possibly can be about the decision they are taking.

 

There are many people on the Yes side who do understand the economic arguments or lack of, but are voting based on other principles and ideology and you have to respect that, might disagree with it, but it is their considered choice.

 

The thing that has really alarmed me is that the debate has turned into a vote of dissatisfaction of current government policy should also equal a Yes vote, i think that is misleading.

 

Quite simply the comment you posted from Robert Peston's blog would be dismissed as scaremongering, the BBC are in the pocket of the Westminster elite and are just trying to frighten the oppressed Scot's into voting no. In fact all of the main stream media are considered the same. It is all a conspiracy to keep the Scot's down at heel.

 

Any business leaders speak out they are just feathering their own nests and are in the pocket of Westminster.

 

There are of course voters who will debate honestly, but sadly a massive amount of people do believe the conspiracy theory - nobody is immune from this, if anyone whether they be a political name, business name, celebrity, academic, etc speaks against the claims of the Yes side it is dismissed as scaremongering.

 

The irony is that the Yes side consider themselves the free thinkers, they are not sheep or brainwashed colonialists, they know it is all a campaign of bluff and bluster to keep the working classes toeing the line to the political and business elite. It would be laughable if it wasn't so serious.

[Laird Lugton]

Nial - there are a chunk of people who believe that the oil is "Scottish". It is very misleading, as it is not. Some of the "Scottish oil" area of the North Sea falls into "English" waters.

I don't think anyone on here has said all oil is exclusively Scottish.

 

The figures quoted above include the geographical split. The IFS is pretty impartial....

 

Edited for spelling.

Edited September 8, 2014 by Laird Lugton

[grrclark]

Nial - there are a chunk of people who believe that the oil is "Scottish". It is very misleading, as it is not. Some of the "Scottish oil" area of the North Sea falls into "English" waters.

 

Gordon, there is truth in that. The division of territorial waters is of course subject to agreement, but based on the most accepted process of maritime border disputes globally, it would draw a line that follows the natural line of the land border. This would place something like 90-95% of oilfields into Scottish waters and 95% of the gas only production fields into English waters.

 

The nationalists argue that the boundary should be drawn perpendicular to the land border, so 90' to the coast just north of Berwick which would bring some more of the gas fields into Scottish territory.

 

The IFS numbers recognise the first scenario.

Edited September 8, 2014 by grrclark

[Laird Lugton]

 

Quite simply the comment you posted from Robert Peston's blog would be dismissed as scaremongering, the BBC are in the pocket of the Westminster elite and are just trying to frighten the oppressed Scot's into voting no. In fact all of the main stream media are considered the same. It is all a conspiracy to keep the Scot's down at heel.

 

I agree with everything you say but on the above point I don't think Wesminster has helped by keeping the Mccrone report secret from the Scottish public. It certainly breeds distrust of the establishment.....

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCrone_report