So Farewell then Scottish Independence.....

[Stuart Dickson]

A very good article written by Kevin Hague today for the Daily Record does appear to bury the Independence argument once and for all. It's hard to argue with the economics of it.  So what I'd like to know is what would all those Scottish Independence fanatics on here do to bridge the huge 9.7% of GDP budget deficit that Scotland would face if we went Independent? What services would you cut? How much would you have to raise taxes? 

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/kevin-hague-scotland-faces-challenge-8509361#rlabs=5 rt$category p$2#eUfW5u2Akmo2VlrC.97

[faraway saint]

This is going to be a cracker..............................

Or maybe very similar to the other umpteen threads already running? 

[Stuart Dickson]

2 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

This is going to be a cracker..............................

Or maybe very similar to the other umpteen threads already running? 

I'm hoping, probably against hope, that maybe one of those nationalists can present a positive case for Independence. You know, the kind of thing that perhaps shows a bit of thought and a bit of credibility instead of the usual "Tory Toff" shite they usually come away with. Lets see if they can actually think about how they would balance an economy and detail what existing public services they would plan to cut to balance the books. 

It should be an interesting read if it goes the right way. I might even unblock Slarti so I can read about how he'll finance the growing debt by getting pensioners to gamble a few quid on the new Scottish equivelent of premium bonds

[Bud the Baker]

Nothing new here as Faraway says, anyway you can see I've answered the same question on the big thread less than a month ago - is your memory really that short Stuart?

On ‎05‎/‎07‎/‎2016 at 11:32 PM, Bud the Baker said:

See what you can do when you refrain from name calling.

 

Both the BBC & Guardian articles you've quoted on this page are out of date as they're from March of this year - prior to the UK's decision to leave the EU. However I'll address the points that Scotland can't afford independence because of the budget deficit and the public spending subsidy we receive - neither are ideal at present but whether they are insurmountable problems is a matter of interpretation.

 

1. Budget Deficit - It's true you can't run a budget deficit continuously but as a Keynesian I adhere to the theory that the budget should be balanced over the course of an economic cycle. In the good years you bank the surplus and use it to fund the deficit in the bad years - this was the dominant economic theory in the West from the recovery of the 1930's and again after WW2 until the oil crisis and stagflation of the 1970's (I'd argue the theory goes back even further and that Joseph's Dream in the Bible is a classic example of Keynesianism).

It's true that Scotland's current deficit is worryingly high at present but as a Nationalist I'd argue that this is largely due to us being a region of the UK and that post-independence a Scottish government would work towards a more balanced and stable economy. No sane Nationalist wanted an IndyRef2 this early but the prospect has been forced on us by the EU Referendum result and depending on the price of oil and the state of the world economy in general we may not be in a strong enough financial position to become independent outwith a bigger organization like the EU or EFTA. Unless all the factors continue to be against us and the cost is prohibitively high I would much prefer independence to remaining in the UK with the likelihood of a perma-Conservative government run by Monetarists.

 

2. Public Spending - It's true Scotland does receive a disproportionately high amount of Public Spending due to the Barnett Formula but this is because it was understood that most of the administrative jobs were located in England and that this constituted a hidden subsidy, even the Thatcher government accepted this while simultaneously playing the subsidy junkie card. With the current and likely ongoing Conservative governments at Westminster looking increasingly likely to whittle down or even eliminate this rebate to appease UKIP voters again I think we face greater economic uncertainty by remaining UK than leaving.

 

Again I'll not try to deny that there are problems that will have to be addressed before Scotland can become independent from the UK but I believe if these are addressed successfully then we have a better future financially and culturally outwith the UK and within the EU - I for one remain optimistic that I will see an independent Scotland.

Since then Theresa May has become Prime Minister and as I predicted selected an ultra-right wing cabinet and Westminster has voted for the white elephant that is Trident and that's before you consider Hinkley C (it clearly wasn't only Alex "Badman" Salmond who got things wrong).

********************

Anyway you pays your economist and you gets the economic report you want, here are a couple that contradict the one you posted, I won't post them in full just the explanation as to why you get different results -

https://fullfact.org/economy/public-spending-scotland-lower-uk-average/

Quote

The reason why the Scottish Government has produced statistics that are at variance with other estimates is because it has assumed that Scotland earns a greater share of money from North Sea oil. If tax receipts are allocated 'geographically', the Scottish Government argues that Scotland earns some 90% of the revenue from this resource. If, on the other hand, tax receipts are distributed equally among the UK nations (on a so-called 'per capita' basis), then Scotland claims a smaller share.

https://fullfact.org/economy/do-scots-contribute-more-taxes-rest-uk-13582/.

*********************

.......and let's not forget that for every "Tory Toff" post you or one of your compadres respond with a SNPbad one.

Edited July 29, 2016 by Bud the Baker

[Ayrshire Saints]

It was posted by Dicko - what more convincing does anyone need ?

[salmonbuddie]

It was posted by Dicko and quoted the Daily Record - what more convincing does anyone need ?

FIFY

[emoji4]

[Stuart Dickson]

Nothing new here as Faraway says, anyway you can see I've answered the same question on the big thread less than a month ago - is your memory really that short Stuart?

https://fullfact.org/economy/do-scots-contribute-more-taxes-rest-uk-13582/.

*********************

.......and let's not forget that for every "Tory Toff" post you or one of your compadres respond with a SNPbad one.

That report is from 2013 when the oil price was high and tax revenues matched it. Since then the oil price has collapsed and to support the oil industry we're taxing them less on a far lower level of revenue. The oil price is unlikely to ever recover to pre 2014 levels. The argument about who gets what share of it is almost completely moot these days, Scotland is now being heavily subsidised and does not pay its way.

So what services would you cut?

[Guest TPAFKATS]

Kevin Hague Hahahahaha
Kevin does like his graphs
Kevin doesn't like the SNP or Scotland being Independent
Kevin runs his own petfood supply company

Quite why the Daily Record feels his views are newsworthy is anyones guess, they'd be as well asking dicko to write an article

Great thread tho...

Sent fae ma fone

[nosferatu]

Stuart - economics and reality doesn't come into it.

FFS, the Leave vote won in the EU referendum!

When you have folk like Slarti not even knowing how the public debt is funded, how on earth would you expect your average punter to know what they were voting for?

Look at Tony Soprano, he's so clueless that its laughable.

Scottish independence is inevitable.

 

[Bud the Baker]

2 hours ago, Stuart Dickson said:

 

 

That report is from 2013 when the oil price was high and tax revenues matched it. Since then the oil price has collapsed and to support the oil industry we're taxing them less on a far lower level of revenue. The oil price is unlikely to ever recover to pre 2014 levels. The argument about who gets what share of it is almost completely moot these days, Scotland is now being heavily subsidised and does not pay its way.

So what services would you cut?

As I said in point two of my post of July 5th it's not a subsidy it's an acknowledgement of hidden administrative costs. That's twice you've either not read it or not understood it.

Quote

2. Public Spending - It's true Scotland does receive a disproportionately high amount of Public Spending due to the Barnett Formula but this is because it was understood that most of the administrative jobs were located in England and that this constituted a hidden subsidy, even the Thatcher government accepted this while simultaneously playing the subsidy junkie card.

I mentioned it in my previous post but I'll say it again I'll say one area where Scotland can save money is by pulling out of the Trident program whose economic benefit to Scotland has been greatly exaggerated . An independent Scotland has nothing to fear in the long run as even politicians like ex-First Minister (presumably ex-Unionist too) Henry McLeish admit now. Who knows what options will be put before us and what the economic conditions will be if (and I believe when) IndyRef2 happens but as I've said before unless everything is stacked against us then I'll be voting for Independence again.

***************

Anyway no matter how bad this SNP government is (and there's plenty to criticize) they're better than the crew down south who have just scuppered the current Hinkley point deal their predecessors agreed to, betcha whatever new deal is agreed will end up being worse for the taxpayer than the previous one. Like The Cap'n says Scottish Independence is inevitable.

 

Edited July 29, 2016 by Bud the Baker

[Bud the Baker]

56 minutes ago, nosferatu said:

Stuart - economics and reality doesn't come into it.

FFS, the Leave vote won in the EU referendum!

When you have folk like Slarti not even knowing how the public debt is funded, how on earth would you expect your average punter to know what they were voting for?

Look at Tony Soprano, he's so clueless that its laughable.

Scottish independence is inevitable.

 

It certainly is Cap'n - our latest recruit is the bifftastic and totally bonkers ex-Falkirk & Falkirk West MP Eric Joyce.

http://ericjoyce.co.uk/from-no-to-yes-scot/

[Stuart Dickson]

Kevin Hague Hahahahaha
Kevin does like his graphs
Kevin doesn't like the SNP or Scotland being Independent
Kevin runs his own petfood supply company

Quite why the Daily Record feels his views are newsworthy is anyones guess, they'd be as well asking dicko to write an article

Great thread tho...

Sent fae ma fone

Ah yes the usual Nats defence. Look up the author, see what a former games designer and acerbic cybernetic blogger thinks of him and then throw it back word for word. Don't ever try to deal with the fact based material in the content cause you just make your case look damned stupid.

At least you didn't let me down Tony

[Stuart Dickson]

Stuart - economics and reality doesn't come into it.

FFS, the Leave vote won in the EU referendum!

When you have folk like Slarti not even knowing how the public debt is funded, how on earth would you expect your average punter to know what they were voting for?

Look at Tony Soprano, he's so clueless that its laughable.

Scottish independence is inevitable.

 

There is a difference though. I understand the leave vote. First the economic argument to remain was ridiculously over played, especially when most experts acknowledge the UK would be able to negotiate new trade deals that could be more beneficial in the long run. Secondly I can understand the sentiment in the less considered vote. Having lived in fairly small communities as an incomer all my adult life I can understand how it can feel for an indigenous population to feel threatened by the rate of change within their community over a period of one generation.

You can't translate either of those into the Scottish Independence debate. Scots have had 400 years of living with the rest of the UK and we've got all the evidence we need to know absolutely that it's been incredibly beneficial to our economy.

All the polls seem to be showing that the SNP support is on the wane. Indeed if you look at approval ratings alone Ruth Davidson would win a Scottish Presidential style election by an absolute landslide at the moment.

[Stuart Dickson]

I mentioned it in my previous post but I'll say it again I'll say one area where Scotland can save money is by pulling out of the Trident program whose economic benefit to Scotland has been greatly exaggerated . An independent Scotland has nothing to fear in the long run as even politicians like ex-First Minister (presumably ex-Unionist too) Henry McLeish admit now. Who knows what options will be put before us and what the economic conditions will be if (and I believe when) IndyRef2 happens but as I've said before unless everything is stacked against us then I'll be voting for Independence again.

***************

Anyway no matter how bad this SNP government is (and there's plenty to criticize) they're better than the crew down south who have just scuppered the current Hinkley point deal their predecessors agreed to, betcha whatever new deal is agreed will end up being worse for the taxpayer than the previous one. Like The Cap'n says Scottish Independence is inevitable.

 

I've read it several time and I appreciate your argument. Personally I believe an Independent Scotland funding our own HMRC, Welfare, Health Service etc would cost us more...not less...because we'd have no one to share the administration costs with.

However regardless of your view on that argument you admit there is a huge deficit. Scotlands share of Trident wouldn't cover the cost of having to build our own defence force to fulfill our NATO commitments - and that's before you factor in the cost of rebuilding and retraining the local community. So what services would you cut to balance the books

[Stuart Dickson]

It certainly is Cap'n - our latest recruit is the bifftastic :boxingand totally bonkers ex-Falkirk & Falkirk West MP Eric Joyce.[emoji38]
http://ericjoyce.co.uk/from-no-to-yes-scot/

Oh dear. When you've got Tommy Sheridan and Eric Joyce fighting your corner you must know you've chosen the wrong side.

[Bud the Baker]

11 minutes ago, Stuart Dickson said:

 

 

I've read it several time and I appreciate your argument. Personally I believe an Independent Scotland funding our own HMRC, Welfare, Health Service etc would cost us more...not less...because we'd have no one to share the administration costs with.

However regardless of your view on that argument you admit there is a huge deficit. Scotlands share of Trident wouldn't cover the cost of having to build our own defence force to fulfill our NATO commitments - and that's before you factor in the cost of rebuilding and retraining the local community. So what services would you cut to balance the books

 

You obviously don't appreciate the argument, the Barnett Formula is there to address the hidden subsidy that Scotland pays by remaining in the UK - it's not charity and only politicians like Nigel Farage have suggested it should be removed.

You said the case for Scottish independence is dead and asked someone to make a "positive case for independence" so I did - three weeks before you asked.

We've been over all this before and what you fail to grasp, yet again, is that there are different Economic Theories about how to manage economies and different models of how the split would've been implemented had Scotland voted for independence in 2014 and that's before you factor in the recent Brexit vote which TM and her cronies seem intent on delaying and eventually avoiding.

Who knows what options will be put before us and what the economic conditions will be if (and I believe when) IndyRef2 happens but as I've said before unless everything is stacked against us then I'll be voting for Independence again.

You're the one who's not prepared to admit there might be circumstances where you would vote for independence, I'm prepared to admit there might be circumstances where it is not economically advisable although in that scenario I'd not expect NS to call one.

9 minutes ago, Stuart Dickson said:

 

 

Oh dear. When you've got Tommy Sheridan and Eric Joyce fighting your corner you must know you've chosen the wrong side.

 

I believe the term is whooshed!  

Edited July 29, 2016 by Bud the Baker

[salmonbuddie]

Ah yes the usual Nats defence. Look up the author, see what a former games designer and acerbic cybernetic blogger thinks of him and then throw it back word for word. Don't ever try to deal with the fact based material in the content cause you just make your case look damned stupid.

At least you didn't let me down Tony

Says the man who dismisses WOS and refuses to read it because he doesn't like the interpretation of the facts the person he believes is the sole author puts on things.

[Guest TPAFKATS]

Ah yes the usual Nats defence. Look up the author, see what a former games designer and acerbic cybernetic blogger thinks of him and then throw it back word for word. Don't ever try to deal with the fact based material in the content cause you just make your case look damned stupid.

At least you didn't let me down Tony

All my own words dicko, i didn't need to look up others opinions of Kevin Hague. I am familiar with his work

Tell me more about this 'fact based material' - please bear in mind that stats and opinion aren't fact ;-)

Sent fae ma fone

[Stuart Dickson]

3 hours ago, Bud the Baker said:

You obviously don't appreciate the argument, the Barnett Formula is there to address the hidden subsidy that Scotland pays by remaining in the UK - it's not charity and only politicians like Nigel Farage have suggested it should be removed.

You said the case for Scottish independence is dead and asked someone to make a "positive case for independence" so I did - three weeks before you asked.

We've been over all this before and what you fail to grasp, yet again, is that there are different Economic Theories about how to manage economies and different models of how the split would've been implemented had Scotland voted for independence in 2014 and that's before you factor in the recent Brexit vote which TM and her cronies seem intent on delaying and eventually avoiding.

Who knows what options will be put before us and what the economic conditions will be if (and I believe when) IndyRef2 happens but as I've said before unless everything is stacked against us then I'll be voting for Independence again.

You're the one who's not prepared to admit there might be circumstances where you would vote for independence, I'm prepared to admit there might be circumstances where it is not economically advisable although in that scenario I'd not expect NS to call one.

I believe the term is whooshed!  

I appreciate your attempts Bud. Just look at the comments from the rest of the rabble. Nationalists cannot grasp the economic argument, and they certainly cannot answer any of the points put to them on the subject because if they did understand it they'd never vote for Independence without having to admit they were deliberately damaging the lives of millions of Scots. Hardly a patriotic thing to do. 

I get there are different economic theories, but surely you've got to admit that when your deficit as a percentage of GDP rivals only that of Greece as one of the worst in Europe the last thing you want to do is increase government expenditure through borrowing even more, whilst cutting taxes. Especially when the case being put forward for "Independence" is so we can stay in the same EU that has imposed heavy punitive sanctions and austerity beyond all of our worst nightmares on Greece. 

Whoops - just found out the Greek deficit as a percentage of GDP is 7.2%, the Scottish deficit as a percentage of GDP is 9.7%. I don't think borrowing more and cutting taxes is a viable option really - do you? 

So what services would you cut? 

Edited July 29, 2016 by Stuart Dickson
To add GDP figures

[Stuart Dickson]

1 hour ago, tony soprano said:

All my own words dicko, i didn't need to look up others opinions of Kevin Hague. I am familiar with his work

Tell me more about this 'fact based material' - please bear in mind that stats and opinion aren't fact ;-)

Sent fae ma fone
 

The figures are all from the Scottish Governments on GERS report. Is that fact based enough for you? Or has the SNP Government made up those figures.....:rolleyes: 

[Guest TPAFKATS]

GERS isn't an accurate reflection of Scotland's finances, even Tories recognise that.

Sent fae ma fone

[Bud the Baker]

1 hour ago, Stuart Dickson said:

I appreciate your attempts Bud. Just look at the comments from the rest of the rabble. Nationalists cannot grasp the economic argument, and they certainly cannot answer any of the points put to them on the subject because if they did understand it they'd never vote for Independence without having to admit they were deliberately damaging the lives of millions of Scots. Hardly a patriotic thing to do. 

I get there are different economic theories, but surely you've got to admit that when your deficit as a percentage of GDP rivals only that of Greece as one of the worst in Europe the last thing you want to do is increase government expenditure through borrowing even more, whilst cutting taxes. Especially when the case being put forward for "Independence" is so we can stay in the same EU that has imposed heavy punitive sanctions and austerity beyond all of our worst nightmares on Greece. 

Whoops - just found out the Greek deficit as a percentage of GDP is 7.2%, the Scottish deficit as a percentage of GDP is 9.7%. I don't think borrowing more and cutting taxes is a viable option really - do you? 

So what services would you cut? 

Well the problem is you refuse to accept the validity of the Barnett Formula which has been accepted by just about every mainstream UK politician for 40 years (and I'm being generous with Farage) so we're going round in circles but you should at least be willing to accept that even your political heroine Margaret Thatcher accepted the Barnett Formula as valid so in this case it's just you and Nigel holding hands and whispering sweet nothings.

Economics is not a hard science it's a mixture of political theory, gathering statistics and guesswork because you're rarely comparing like with like. I'll say it again - I don't think services will need to be cut in an independent Scotland but one area where savings will be made is defence when Trident is scrapped. I've heard the "Greece without the sun"  comparison before it comes from the CPS the monetarist ultras of the Conservative Party, it was a neat headline but even they admitted it was an "impertinent comparison".

Like I said in the first paragraph we're going round in circles. I'm a Keynesian and like I said three weeks ago am prepared to accept a budget deficit so long as it balances out over the economic cycle. Unless you come up with something new or a way to compare apples to apples and not whisky to retsina then we'll just have to agree to disagree. 

[Guest TPAFKATS]

Greece you say?

Sent fae ma fone

[Stuart Dickson]

2 hours ago, tony soprano said:

 

Edited July 29, 2016 by Stuart Dickson
Can't get rid of this by any other means

[Stuart Dickson]

13 minutes ago, tony soprano said:

Greece you say?

Sent fae ma fone
 

I'm not sure what you are getting at. Do you have a solution to this? Perhaps an economic plan that will create more highly paid jobs and greater profitability in Scotland? So far all I've seen from the SNP is their support for an expansion plan at the RBS which bankrupted the bank, their withholding of orders from Fergusons so they could force the closure of the last ship yard on the Clyde, before selling it to their political ally, and a strong demand that Trident be scrapped along with all of the well paid jobs that go along with it. And in terms of investment? Well they gave Amazon some huge tax breaks so they could open a few minimum wage, temporary job distribution centres.