Who is bogging off after the YES vote?
Discussion
GoneAnon said:
As for us being subsidised for 300 years, show us the evidence or stop peddling twaddle.
One obvious example has been the provision of standardised postal costs across the uk. Mucher higher costs in Scotland have been offset by amortising it across the whole country. If Scotland were a separate country postage costs could be lower in the UK but would be much higher in Scotland.Gaspode said:
One obvious example has been the provision of standardised postal costs across the uk. Mucher higher costs in Scotland have been offset by amortising it across the whole country. If Scotland were a separate country postage costs could be lower in the UK but would be much higher in Scotland.
Sadly anything beyond Aberdeen is classed as Highlands and Islands in many delivery services, and you most certainly don't get next day delivery on anything! Despite being 14 miles from Aberdeen city centre.Gaspode said:
One obvious example has been the provision of standardised postal costs across the uk. Mucher higher costs in Scotland have been offset by amortising it across the whole country. If Scotland were a separate country postage costs could be lower in the UK but would be much higher in Scotland.
This isn't a great example. I doubt operating a mail service just in Scotland would be much different TBH. If it was going to be a problem the likes of Amazon would be raising the warning - and if they have then I've not noticed.The same goes for the phone charges argument. Currently I pay less than BT local charges to phone the other side of the world. If BT or any other 'official' telco say their charges would go up ..... well the evidence on call charges says 'international' calls from Scotland to UK would *down*.
What would be more serious from a postal point of view is if a separated Scotland was outside the EU. We've got used to not worrying about customs declarations on stuff sent to/from EU (and of course not needed within the UK).
Dryce said:
Gaspode said:
One obvious example has been the provision of standardised postal costs across the uk. Mucher higher costs in Scotland have been offset by amortising it across the whole country. If Scotland were a separate country postage costs could be lower in the UK but would be much higher in Scotland.
This isn't a great example. I doubt operating a mail service just in Scotland would be much different TBH. If it was going to be a problem the likes of Amazon would be raising the warning - and if they have then I've not noticed.Dryce said:
The same goes for the phone charges argument. Currently I pay less than BT local charges to phone the other side of the world. If BT or any other 'official' telco say their charges would go up ..... well the evidence on call charges says 'international' calls from Scotland to UK would *down*.
Presumably you are using VOIP for international. The issue would be more the provision of the line than the call charges.Dryce said:
What would be more serious from a postal point of view is if a separated Scotland was outside the EU. We've got used to not worrying about customs declarations on stuff sent to/from EU (and of course not needed within the UK).
Oh yes, the joy of VAT payable on import etc. etc. What you get when you buy from abroad.But the issue with standardised postal costs is the fact of it costing the same 62p to get a first class stamp anywhere in the UK. It costs them a fortune to get them to some bits of the country and not much to get it a mile or two down the road of a city. Scotland's geography has a lot more expensive bits to get to than the rest of the UK does.
HenryJM said:
Amazon? The company that now looks to do it's own distribution.
It uses various means and subciontractors - delivery is core to its business.So you'd think they would have some opinions on pricing.
Dryce said:
Presumably you are using VOIP for international. The issue would be more the provision of the line than the call charges.
Nope. The last 15 years has seen plenty of indirect telco services start up.Call charges by the likes of BT are an invention these days to encourage people to buy rental packages.
Why should my phone line cost me any more tomorrow than it does today?
Dryce said:
But the issue with standardised postal costs is the fact of it costing the same 62p to get a first class stamp anywhere in the UK. It costs them a fortune to get them to some bits of the country and not much to get it a mile or two down the road of a city. Scotland's geography has a lot more expensive bits to get to than the rest of the UK does.
But just as with the telcos and international calls I can send mail cheaper abroad by using a different mail service.Not long ago we were being told it was junk mail that kept the home mail delivery service going. Now if what they're really saying is that junk mail will reduce if you vote 'yes' ...... now there's a thing that might validly influence the referendum!
HenryJM said:
But the issue with standardised postal costs is the fact of it costing the same 62p to get a first class stamp anywhere in the UK. It costs them a fortune to get them to some bits of the country and not much to get it a mile or two down the road of a city. Scotland's geography has a lot more expensive bits to get to than the rest of the UK does.
Exactly my point, thank you Henry. Ever since 1840, the royal mail has offered a postal delivery service at uniform cost right across the UK. In order to do this, the price of delivering mail in areas like London where delivery costs are low has been used to subsidise delivery in Scotland, where costs are high. This isn't a problem, far from it, it's one of the advantages of being in a union, and something which is going to hit hard if Scotland were to become independent, as there are many fewer areas where costs are low and lots of places where costs are high.Dryce said:
HenryJM said:
Amazon? The company that now looks to do it's own distribution.
It uses various means and subciontractors - delivery is core to its business.So you'd think they would have some opinions on pricing.
Dryce said:
Dryce said:
Presumably you are using VOIP for international. The issue would be more the provision of the line than the call charges.
Nope. The last 15 years has seen plenty of indirect telco services start up.Call charges by the likes of BT are an invention these days to encourage people to buy rental packages.
Why should my phone line cost me any more tomorrow than it does today?
Dryce said:
Dryce said:
But the issue with standardised postal costs is the fact of it costing the same 62p to get a first class stamp anywhere in the UK. It costs them a fortune to get them to some bits of the country and not much to get it a mile or two down the road of a city. Scotland's geography has a lot more expensive bits to get to than the rest of the UK does.
But just as with the telcos and international calls I can send mail cheaper abroad by using a different mail service.Not long ago we were being told it was junk mail that kept the home mail delivery service going. Now if what they're really saying is that junk mail will reduce if you vote 'yes' ...... now there's a thing that might validly influence the referendum!
Humper said:
And I'm still waiting for someone to enlighten me as to why the three stooges were up here trying to keep us, promising loads of things that they've no intention of delivering.
He has no policies, other than to be the man that won independence.
This report should answer a lot of questions people on this thread are asking, quite a long read but a good contents page so you should be able to find the relevant part. http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/wp-content/up...
Ahh business for Scotland, the campaign group that represents very few business's.
Think I will skip it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-in...
I would be very interested where it's funding originates though.
Think I will skip it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-in...
I would be very interested where it's funding originates though.
Edited by barryrs on Wednesday 17th September 23:49
xr287 said:
This report should answer a lot of questions people on this thread are asking, quite a long read but a good contents page so you should be able to find the relevant part. http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/wp-content/up...
Gaspode said:
GoneAnon said:
As for us being subsidised for 300 years, show us the evidence or stop peddling twaddle.
One obvious example has been the provision of standardised postal costs across the uk. Mucher higher costs in Scotland have been offset by amortising it across the whole country. If Scotland were a separate country postage costs could be lower in the UK but would be much higher in Scotland.I can't be bothered retyping the whole thing as I've just got home from an extraordinary event in Perth where Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon got hero's welcomes and Nick Robinson from the BBC received some pantomime booing (which I didn't participate in and don't approve of even if he might deserve it).
I don't suppose you will bother to read the information in the link so I guess that would make the final question applicable to you too.
http://wingsoverscotland.com/brian-wilson-is-a-lia...
Oh well, less than 24 hours till it's all over bar the counting (and the shouting)
barryrs said:
Ahh business for Scotland, the campaign group that represents very few business's.
Think I will skip it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-in...
I would be very interested where it's funding originates though.
Of course people who run small businesses can't possibly understand finance and the economy, we should only listen to people in charge of large corporations and banks who have no vested interests at all, no direct links to government and simply want the best for the Scottish people. Apart from those who support yes like the chief executive of Aberdeen Asset Management the largest fund management company in Europe or Willie Walsh from International Airlines Group. Along with that you have Tesco and others that say claims of certain price rises were false, Shell says they will continue to invest the same regardless of the outcome and EnQuest said the current North Sea tax regime wasn't fit for purpose and they would welcome an overhaul and increase in stability as the SNP were proposing.Think I will skip it.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scottish-in...
I would be very interested where it's funding originates though.
Edited by barryrs on Wednesday 17th September 23:49
I find it slightly hilarious that people like RBS and Deutsche Bank are being hailed as economic experts whose warnings should be heeded when they didn't even foresee the crash that cost them billions whilst they helped cause it.
I usually don't reply to anybody on this thread, as it's not worth the time and effort to check the comments and prepare appropriate replies but I really dislike the fact that we seem to trust big businesss more than smaller businesses and suspend our belief that possibly they have their own interests to protect and further.
xr287 said:
This report should answer a lot of questions people on this thread are asking, quite a long read but a good contents page so you should be able to find the relevant part. http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/wp-content/up...
Well it has a point to make and presents the statistics in order to make them.The problem with the numbers in these documents is that they depend significantly on how you separate out Scotland's economy within the UK economy. And then you also have to make assumptions about how they would relate to any post-split setup. So there's lots of room for assumption.
And there in lies a huge problem when you start questioning the numbers and trying to make real sense of them.
As an example - financial services are a massive 'export' sector in Scotland. But how much of that is wholly dependent on Scotland's position in the UK? It's not clear - but this layperson would guess it's rather a lot. It's perhaps not real export but intra-UK operations - and it's currently under UK regulation. So the big numbers bandied about may have limited bearing on the reality of an independent future.
Then there's Ireland. It's a country with a supposed high GDP. And often used as a comparator. And yet it leaks people. It leaks its own people to other countries. Think about it. So the $$$ numbers might tell us one thing. But people voting with their feet for opportunity tell us quite another. Which do you trust to give you the real picture. Maybe per capita GDP is a bit of a con - even if it does make for nice tables.
xr287 said:
I find it slightly hilarious that people like RBS and Deutsche Bank are being hailed as economic experts whose warnings should be heeded when they didn't even foresee the crash that cost them billions whilst they helped cause it.
It's not hilarious at all because if that bubble was still growing then we'd walk into all the same trouble but bigger all over again. If it was after 2016 and a 'yes' vote then Scotland would be trying to join the Euro and enjoying the prestige of two major banks that towered over its economy .....Now we apparently all know better.
But do we really?
GoneAnon said:
Oh Gaspode, I think ou are my new favourite. Are you actually a YES campaigner in disguise, opening the door for this one?
I can't be bothered retyping the whole thing as I've just got home from an extraordinary event in Perth where Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon got hero's welcomes and Nick Robinson from the BBC received some pantomime booing (which I didn't participate in and don't approve of even if he might deserve it).
I don't suppose you will bother to read the information in the link so I guess that would make the final question applicable to you too.
http://wingsoverscotland.com/brian-wilson-is-a-lia...
Oh well, less than 24 hours till it's all over bar the counting (and the shouting)
I read the whole of the link. What's it got to do with the fact that since 1840 the Royal Mail has provided postage anywhere in the UK for a standardised price, using the reduced costs in cheap areas to subsidise the higher costs in other areas? Are you saying this hasn't happened?I can't be bothered retyping the whole thing as I've just got home from an extraordinary event in Perth where Alex Salmond and Nicola Sturgeon got hero's welcomes and Nick Robinson from the BBC received some pantomime booing (which I didn't participate in and don't approve of even if he might deserve it).
I don't suppose you will bother to read the information in the link so I guess that would make the final question applicable to you too.
http://wingsoverscotland.com/brian-wilson-is-a-lia...
Oh well, less than 24 hours till it's all over bar the counting (and the shouting)
MintyChris said:
You and us there again. I am a scot living in Scotland. So you are basically taking a gamble in order to get a pay rise? You'd be lucky to keep your job in the public sector if we go independent.
You clearly have zero understanding of what Independence means, the consequences and the positives that the UK brings. So by all means go back to your "I’m voting for Independence because I think I will get a rise rise..."
Genius....What could go wrong?
You clearly have zero understanding of what Independence means, the consequences and the positives that the UK brings. So by all means go back to your "I’m voting for Independence because I think I will get a rise rise..."
Genius....What could go wrong?
For the record, I was born here in Ayrshire, my parents are from London and Newcastle and my wife of 6 months is from Bognor Regis, and she, after being brainwashed for so many years that Thatcher was good and the north starts at Oxford, has, like me, no aspertions about 'us and them' and I apologise if I have implied that.
Yes I have issues with the pay freeze as all us NHS staff do, as we didn't create the problem but are made to pay for it via freezes and paycuts. So this is our chance to try and do something about it by having a vote that actually counts for once. My english wife with no real political interest or nationalistic influences sees this much clearer than I do.. Believe what you want, but I see this as the best way forward as difficult as it may be which is no problem to us Scots compared to how it was here before. I imagine that most of the posters on here have never worked under a system of income tax at the rate of 45% in the pound or witnessed the industrial and social deveastation wrought by the thatcher years first hand and that's maybe colouring their thoughts to reasons on supporting a No vote. Some of us see things a little differently.
There are no written guarantees, so if anyone really needs one, then I suggest buying themselves a toaster!
If you feel driven to reply and quote me, then try and do it in a more constructive and pleasant manner.. We all have our own politics and I have nothing but respect for the No's and wish them all the best, even though I want Yes to win.
Cheers..
exitwound said:
I imagine that most of the posters on here have never worked under a system of income tax at the rate of 45% in the pound or witnessed the industrial and social deveastation wrought by the thatcher years first hand and that's maybe colouring their thoughts to reasons on supporting a No vote. Some of us see things a little differently.
I remember the 60s and 70s reasonably well.People complain about austerity after the financial collapse in the last decade - but few have recollection of the IMF bailout of a bankrupted Britain and the industrial strife that followed as a result of the conditions imposed.
Very little of history turns on just one single key point or event - though the tendency is to label things as if that was the case or merge significant events together as if they were more closely associated.
Not long ago I had to correct a youngster who thought that the UCS work-in was part of the Thatcher years - when it was a decade before. Similarly you get some people who forget CND was a major campaign group decades prior to the Greenham Common protests.
Edited by Dryce on Thursday 18th September 14:18
Gassing Station | Scotland | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff