Maboza
-
Posts
543 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Maboza
-
-
Why? Just because you are so against it you think everyone is? I don't know a single person who is particular against Faslane staying in Scotland (and I dont mean people who work here).
There may be other job opportunities in the area but there aren't very many jobs in the same or similiar industry or anywhere the near the salaries. You say the skills are transferrable, but trust me.. a large percentage of the poeple working at Faslane and Coulport have done so their whole careers and have very specific nuclear experience and qualifications so would need to either move down south or to Aberdeen for the oil industry to get a job.
The MOD police and guards you mentioned wouldn't be required if the base lost the subs and was only kept for surface ships. You think a normal naval base needs the same security and protection as a nuclear site and a base where they hold nuclear weapons?
Personally, I dont really care either way as I'm young and not planning on working here my whole career and it would take the best part of a decade to build a suitable replacement in England and decomission HMNB Clyde.
Genuine question,..... how many people work directly at Faslane? and what percentage do you think have 'very specific nuclear experience' that you mention?
-
A tale of 2 speeches
One of the following speeches is talking of a positive future of Scotland as an outward looking small independent nation.
The other is talking in terms such as “forces of darkness” , the “cataclysmic” effect of independence, ‘international turmoil’ and “rivers of blood”.
Regardless of any of our views on independence – I think it’s important to recognise this somewhat sinister campaign tactic from Westminster which is now being deployed and question whether this is assisting the debate.
Speech 1
http://www.brookings...=united kingdom
Speech 2
-
Campbell is very, very raw and has been very ineffectual from much of what I have seen.
Magennis also does nowhere near enough.
Neither are the answer.
I'd have preferred we had kept Sam Parkin.
-
Some stuff you might not have read in the mainstream media...
- Every year the Westminster Treasury deducts a sum from Scotland’s block funding grant to pay for a share of the UK’s rising debt, none of which Scotland ran up. In the latest figures the amount removed from Scotland budget was £4.02bn or 33% of Scotland’s deficit in 2012/13.
- If Scotland had been an independent country for the past 33 years (as the UK debt mountain grew) Scotland’s higher revenues would have meant that we would not have had to borrow a single penny. In fact Scotland would by now have a cash surplus of at least £50bn. All of the UK debt was generated outwith Scotland.
- Over 33 years Scotland has subsidised the rest of the UK by paying interest on loans we didn’t take out. This enormous subsidy from Scotland adds up to nearly 72 thousand million pounds (at the point of writing this blog) and that subsidy is growing at approximately £127.00 per second (see above).
The press have ignored this, but there is no debate about the figures; they have been sourced from official government reports. Business for Scotland and the Jimmy Reid Foundation have published research linking to these reports that proves these figures to be correct.And to take that 1 step further for the even more astounding info that certainly will go ignored by the press....
£375bn of the (£1.38tn) debt is owed to our own Bank of England which holds UK government bonds/gilts which they bought through Quantitative Easing. That equates to approx 27% of the UK national debt.
So from the £4.02bn removed from Scotland's account this year for servicing debt - approx. £1.08bn went to our own Bank of England. This cash has been accumulating in an account called APF and the BoE is then feeding this cash surplus back into..... HM Treasury. In other words - the Scottish tax-payer gets skinned again.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/changes-to-cash-management-operations
-
I'm going to Amsterdam for 6 months on 2nd September this year.
Can I still vote somehow despite not being in the country?
You will be able to vote if you are still registered as living in Scotland, on the electoral roll and with the council for council tax purposes.
If you are not fulfilling the criteria above and instead registering officially (even for 6 months) as a resident in Amsterdam then you will not be able to vote.
-
As has been previously discussed the UK Treasury has guaranteed all bonds issued in Sterling, but the Scottish government would have to issue government bonds bought by the UK Government to take on their share of the debt. If they didn't then Scotlands credit rating would likely be hammered as would any individual who tries to walk away from a divorce without paying their debts.
You just made all of that up didn't you.
-
Is it an advanced fare ticket or a friends fare ticket ?
Friends fare ticket..... we bought 8.
-
How much do you want for it.
£30
-
Posted on the matchday thread as well....
I have a spare return ticket for Glasgow-Inverness-Dingwall for Saturday if anyone is interested.
Leaving Queen Street @ 10.10am.
Cost £22 in total.
PM me if anyone is interested or wants the full train times.
-
I have 1x spare return train ticket available for Dingwall if anyone is interested.
Leaving Glasgow Queen Street @ 10.10am and changeover in Inverness.
Ticket was £22 return in total.
PM me if interested.
-
Drew, 83 pages of this so-called debate is a challenge, I suggest, most contributors might body-swerve. Be that as it may, yes I have read a fair cross section of contributions and yes I do recognise polarised opinions.
As one poster said yesterday, I may well lean towards the Yesish side, but I'm greatly saddened by the quality of politician that will lead my country if the vote is for independence.
I did ask for non-condescension ........................apparently impossible for you, however I'll desist from personal attack and leave you to your apparent saltire coloured view from your blue-tinted spectacles and perhaps read some other medium for informed debate.
Bullying seems to become you!
I agree with you to an extent and have heard others say the same.
Genuine question though....
What is your opinion on the standard of politician at Westminster and feel free to name some (good/bad/whatever) so we can get an idea of your thoughts).
-
"Possibly worth pointing out for balance that in your worst case scenario of a Scottish banking crisis the UK most likely contribute to any bailout - whether that be within or outwith a currency union as can be seen by the £7bn+ UK bailout towards Ireland and £3.5bn+ which went towards the Icelandic crisis.
Also worth noting that the US Federal Reserve contributed $1tn / £640bn to bailout UK based banks of which Barclays (HQ, One Churchill Place, London) received approx £583bn.
Which leads to the fact that banks are bailed out by where they do business rather than strictly where their HQ is based. This can be further noticed by cross-border bail outs with Dexia and Fortis banks in Europe during the financial crisis."
Perhaps so Maboza, however that would very much depend on the Scottish Banks falling in line with the EU and UK Treasury policies as to how banks should act. Assuming they sign into that agreement, how would they be independent?
Whilst much of the reasoning behind the Icelandic banking collapse was linked to the property crash, particularly in the UK, there has been substantial discussion and disagreement between the countries as to compensation payments. Would that occur between the UK and the Scottish Banking system?
Once thing I have learned is never say "Never"!
Similar to Drew - I am beginning to get the impression that your only interest here is to muddy the waters and not particularly have reasoned debate given the highlighted points above but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt!
a. Scottish Banks falling in line with the EU
If we want to be in the EU, I think it is fairly clear we have to fall in line with EU. As we currently do.
b. UK Treasury policies .... how would they be independent?
Any restrictions imposed by HM Treasury would be implemented through negotiation. I think the broader independence argument highlights significant independence on a vast variety of issues and in simplest terms - we would now have the power to have direct influence on these.
c. there has been substantial discussion and disagreement between the countries as to compensation payments.
There has indeed been broad disagreement. Iceland refuse to reimburse UK and Netherlands but it doesn't change the fact that UK paid £3.5bn+ to them. Furthermore, Iceland has now overtaken the UK GDP per head:
http://countryeconomy.com/countries/compare/iceland/uk
For what it's worth, I think we should have our own currency. But that doesn't prevent me from recognising that there are significant benefits of a currency union for both sides.
There are 3 or 4 currency options/strategies available and there are plusses and minuses of each and every one so I have no major problem with what is being put forward. Suggesting that any one of these options suits everyone 100% would just be nonsense. The broader capabilities of independence reach well beyond the currency debate.
-
I can take brickbats, thick skinned am I!
To continue my apparently one-dimensional argument, tell me how the UK£ or those that support the UK£ after independence, i.e. England, Wales and Northern Ireland, would accept the risk of supporting the Scottish banking system and its independent routes of procuring business.
It's not too long ago for either Oaksoft or Drew to remember the slight mess that our dearly beloved RBofS or for that matter the BofS got into and how the UK treasury (i.e. the UK tax-payer) bailed them out.
Pray tell me either of you, without being condescending, why the rest of the UK i.e. England, Wales & NI, would accept the risk of allowing Scotland to keep the UK£ when they have no control over the Scottish banking system?
It has a little bit of feel like Cuba, where the tourist CUC is pegged basically to the apparently filthy US$, yet the internal Peso is something like 26.5 Cuban Pesos to the US$. God forbid we get into a dual currency arrangement.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So if its independence that you want, why not take on the full independence characteristics of a separate currency, then you have no tie to the UK economy and what they do, won't affect the Scottish Groat.
Take a leaf out of Iceland's book, (however just bear in mind their complete Banking collapse and also that their banking system is actually proportionally less than the like-for-like Scottish ratio of the GDP) and go for independence without ties to the EU and then you can set your own fishing policies, your own defence arrangements and also your own currency not tied to anything else.
Now that MIGHT appeal, however the sh*t scared politicians know they can't take that leap as they enjoy the relative security of European and UK shelter that the grants and financial aid that is thrown at 'poor' EU states.
Sorry to say the debate is VERY POOR and the quality of those on both sides is reflective of that debate.
Possibly worth pointing out for balance that in your worst case scenario of a Scottish banking crisis the UK most likely contribute to any bailout - whether that be within or outwith a currency union as can be seen by the £7bn+ UK bailout towards Ireland and £3.5bn+ which went towards the Icelandic crisis.
Also worth noting that the US Federal Reserve contributed $1tn / £640bn to bailout UK based banks of which Barclays (HQ, One Churchill Place, London) received approx £583bn.
Which leads to the fact that banks are bailed out by where they do business rather than strictly where their HQ is based. This can be further noticed by cross-border bail outs with Dexia and Fortis banks in Europe during the financial crisis.
-
I've read above that yes the £ in your Scottish pocket would be worth the same as the English £ so on your theoretical Welsh holiday it would be worth the exact same. Sorry I don't get that one - if you follow Alex Salmond's theory that we would all be better off, then the Scottish £ will actually buy you more and the stronger Scottish pound will be say 5% stronger than the UK £. I would then theoretically use my Scottish £ notes and pay 5% less for my Welsh holiday!............................................ Balderdash.
Show me where that is suggested please.
-
wee query for the economists among you... re the economy of an Independent Scotland.
As far as I can tell, the Yes campaign say we will be better off as an independent country.
If that is the case, and we retained the pound... surely my pound would increase in value. England, Wales and Northern Ireland presumably would also retain the pound as their currency. Without the wealth of the North sea oil and all Scotland contributes it would presumably reduce in value... at best stay the same.
So a Scottish pound is worth £1.20... a UK (minus Scotland) pound is worth 95p.
I go to Wales on holiday and take a fiver spending money... what is it worth?
I really can't see how an economic union would be in Scotland's best interests... surely it would hold us back? Is it not a good thing that it has been rejected by the other parties? What is plan B?
Well, actually you couldn't have got that more wrong.
£1 = £1 , so for your holiday to Wales scenario your £5 = £5.
As for us being better off - this is not suggested to be delivered by the value of the currency increasing (against England, Wales, NI) but rather the wider economic benefits and opportunites that independence brings. From a starting position of a higher GDP than the rUK (good), a higher tax take per head (good), a lower deficit than the rUK (good) means we're in a pretty decent starting position in comparison.
Worth noting that on your £1 you have already paid tax & national insurance from the initial figure of roughly £1.33 (depending on your level of earnings).
So it becomes a question of where those taxes go and do you get the benefit of it? i.e. will you be 'better off'.
When you consider that the SNP propose to keep the NHS firmly in public hands (compared with the privatisation of it in England through PFI), propose to keep free student tuition (as opposed to the £9k per year fees in England - incidentally those £9k fees come out of your £1's after they've taken the 33p taxes - I'd rather that they came out of the 33p taxes if you ask me). On top of that I would rather my taxes went towards other things such as transport, schools, universities, welfare policies (such as childcare) to provide opportunities make Scotland a fairer society and grow the economy rather than billions on Trident nuclear weaponry and illegal wars. Investments in the country to attract business and higher skilled jobs which provide the opportunity of more and higher paid jobs (which won't increase your value of pound but will increase the number of them that you have).
And going back to your holiday to Wales for another simple but significant thing - if you chose to fly Glasgow-Cardiff with FlyBe then you're flight will be cheaper with the reduction of Air Passenger Duty (tax) in Scotland which you would benefit from (and give you more £1's) - the wider scenario being that air fares to Scotland are cheaper which entices even more visitors to boost the tourism industry in Scotland (already worth £9bn) and this in turn contributes to making the economy go round.
So that ^ details the value of your pound and why it is so much more than that.
We don't need to spend much time on why the currency union is of benefit as simply put - there is currently a huge amount of trade/exports from Scotland -> UK and from UK -> Scotland. A currency union allows the simplest continuation of that relationship without any barriers to trade and associated transaction costs.There are a number of currency options but this is the preferred one for the above reason.
-
I just love the Natsi response. If they can't get to use the pound they'll not pay their debts. There goes the countries credit rating, interest rates will rocket and any argument that Scots will be better off will be blown away in seconds.
The fact is if Salmond can't get monetary union with the Euro now the whole independence debate is f**ked.
Apart from the obvious fact that in this scenario, Scotland doesn't actually have any debt to default on.
But, then, you already knew that.
-
Welcome to the club.
Fingers crossed for this one!!
-
McConnells wife is on the Commonwealth Games committee. McConnell is now a peer and doesn't stand for election for any party. Anyway don't you agree with the sentiment of his comments yesterday? Or is it only Irish politics that's to be kept out of sport?
Why isn't his wife in the photos above rather than 'Lord' McConnell?
PS. You've lost me on the Irish politics comment but quite frankly that's not surprising as I have no idea what relevance that is nor do I know what you are even referring to.
I'll refrain from getting dragged into your argumentative nonsense thanks now that I've made my point on the complete contradiction from McConnell but you will continue to argue anything and everything so youcan enjoy doing that with someone else.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/winterolympics2002/hi/english/curling/newsid_1841000/1841047.stm
-
On a different subject can I just say well done to Jack McConnell on his calls for a break in campaigning during the Commonwealth Games so that athletes can be put in centre focus without politicians trying to use their successes as part of their propaganda. There has been little more absurd in recent years than seeing the Nationalists trying desperately to put their stamp on Chris Hoy's and Andy Murray's successes and I'm sure athletes haven't spent all those years in training for a major event like this, only to find that all journalists want to know is how they are going to vote in the referendum.
Oh dear....
-
Newton hasn't been himself the last few games but I hardly think we can fault him for what he's added over the past 12 months. Over that piece he has been well worthy of his place and has spent the last few months stuck out at right-mid which I'd assume isn't his preference but also worth noting that this coincided with the up-turn in form as we re-jigged the formation and Teale got injured. I'd suggest that Newton has provided a decent attacking/defensive balance out there.
I'd love him to stay (assuming it's just a quick dip in form) but if he wants a Championship move then good luck to him!
-
Simple fact is that we don't have a strong enough bench. McLean and Teale already injured, McGinn going off injured and we're screwed I'm afraid. Harkins certainly hasn't worked out so far and I simply don't see anyone else on that bench that looks like coming off the bench to make an impact. We've done well with McGinn, McLean, Naismith and Kelly coming through. We need a few more to appear or for Danny to make better signings.
-
Samson's a knob, let 1 in ya cup winning c**t!!
Maybe we need someone who can shoot from outside the box.
-
YASSSSS!!
Was going to stick him on first scorer but Hills website didn't have him.
Mon the Saints!!
-
Jim Goodwin - St.Mirren cup winning legend.
He's an asset to our team and contributes greatly to allowing our more skilful players express themselves and win matches. i'll defend him to the hilt as he adds to our team and goes out on that park as someone fully determined to win the match for St.Mirren.
Challenges like this being highlighted may not be pretty but i honestly couldn't give two hoots.
Nothing is made of Mackay-Steven jumping into Sean Kelly leading with the arm in the first half when he was never getting anywhere near the ball and it was 10 yards in front of the linesman. Goodwin may well get a ban. It may well not be his last either but I'd rather have him than not. As others have said - plenty of other teams have them - Black, Lasley, McCulloch, and whoever else. These are the guys that everyone loves to hate. Simple fact is - we'd be weaker without Goodwin (Murray, Millen, Aber, etc.) and that may well have allowed Dundee Utd to stroll around the park to win the match the exact way McNamara wanted.
The Referendum Thread
in General Nonsense
Posted
Osbourne and the OBR estimates were over-optimistic at every turn.
One wonders exactly how much headway we're actually making as an economy given the mere modest reductions in overall UK deficit whilst selling off £3.2bn of Lloyds bank, another £4.2bn (Lloyds) and £2bn of Royal Mail. All the while the debt and associated interest payments continue to grow. Now paying interest of £43bn per yer.
How will the UK fund the deficit reduction and the huge growing interest payments when everything is sold off?
I suppose they might be banking on things like natural resources eh?!