Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 7
Discussion
so all they need is 5 years a few budget cuts and they could easily wipe out the current deficit and cover the cost of setting up an independent Scotland?!?!?
all very well and good, but what about in 5 years time once the books are balanced:
years 0-5: massive cuts to public sector, hospitals get worse, education gets worse, might take a while but as Scotland slowly becomes a worse place to stay, the smart/ educated that can afford to start looking elsewhere to live. business start to look elsewhere, less and less cash for the government, reduced tax take, increases in taxation, more people start to leave as they are so much worse off in Scotland so take there skills else where.....
years 5-10: so we now have a country with poorly educated youngsters, a $hite health care system, businesses are now longer that fussed about investing as they cant get decent staff as they all bugger off to other countries. the government need to start borrowing to improve education/ healthcare etc..... and we end up a nation with a massive deficit as they try to improve things and encourage people to move back and invest.....
all very well and good, but what about in 5 years time once the books are balanced:
years 0-5: massive cuts to public sector, hospitals get worse, education gets worse, might take a while but as Scotland slowly becomes a worse place to stay, the smart/ educated that can afford to start looking elsewhere to live. business start to look elsewhere, less and less cash for the government, reduced tax take, increases in taxation, more people start to leave as they are so much worse off in Scotland so take there skills else where.....
years 5-10: so we now have a country with poorly educated youngsters, a $hite health care system, businesses are now longer that fussed about investing as they cant get decent staff as they all bugger off to other countries. the government need to start borrowing to improve education/ healthcare etc..... and we end up a nation with a massive deficit as they try to improve things and encourage people to move back and invest.....
technodup said:
My hope is we delay A50 as long as possible and in that time the EU suffers another crisis, exit or other scandal, leading to it's ultimate meltdown. Where's Sturgeon going then?
. She'll dust off Salmond's plan for a "Northern Arc of Prosperity". Of course let us not forget the massive oil find near Shetland that those lying English swine have kept under wraps.
Borghetto said:
She'll dust off Salmond's plan for a "Northern Arc of Prosperity". Of course let us not forget the massive oil find near Shetland that those lying English swine have kept under wraps.
Cobnapint said:
Cobnapint said:
mikal83 said:
Cobnapint said:
I'm curious Fluff. Just why is Sturgeon so desperate to stay in the EU...?
Cue the Abba song..............Money money money............ s2kjock said:
fluffnik said:
s2kjock said:
fluffnik said:
The EU does very, very little ruling whilst providing lots of services for its members for very low cost.
What services do the EU provide us with, and how do they manage it for such a low cost? Someone must be paying for it if members are getting such a great deal, or is it simply an issue of pooling resources and economies of scale?The EU model is a simple one whereby the rich countries with a net contribution subsidise the poorer countries - it is the socialist way. By this method the poorer countries may see an increase in the standard of living/infrastructure etc. but inexorably become more reliant on the central handouts. The lack of incentive to improve their own lot makes them evermore dependent on the centre. The centre, of course, determines what the handouts are to be spent on thereby exercising central control more and more by stealth. It is the socialist way. When things go wrong for the poorer country they cannot break free due to the dependency they have been lulled into and inevitably lose almost all control of their own destiny. Just ask Greece.
This model flies completely in the face of the SNP rhetoric. They want ever more control over the subsidy they receive from Westminster but are apparently quite happy to swap that subsidy for one from the EU where there will be less control not more. Indeed, in the drive for ever closer political and fiscal union the SNP control in an 'independent' Scotland within the EU will inexorably diminish. The arguments and policies of the SNP, including their staunch supporters - Fluff included - make no political or economic sense and rapidly fall apart under even the lightest of interrogation.
One is left with the inescapable conclusion that the SNP is driven solely by racism against the English. Bitter and twisted hatred - it will eventually be the destruction of Scotland.
s2kjock said:
Welshbeef said:
So, 5 years of increased austerity to fund investment in education, government capex, and tax cuts for business and we'd actually be fine if we left the EU?Is this Project Fear or Project Honesty?
Is this the sort of austerity the SNP vigorously campaign against or not?
I'm confused
Is this a ploy by the SNP to sow the seeds of back-tracking or will the SNP 'whistleblower' be reprimanded? We shall see. Whatever, the unraveling of the SNP rhetoric appears to have started. A good thing that the Scottish people are told the unsavoury truth. If they proceed to another independence referendum and go for it based on the fact that for a minimum of five years they will be into sack cloth and ashes then I will have a sneaking admiration for their bravery and stupidity in equal measure.
Cobnapint said:
Cobnapint said:
Cobnapint said:
mikal83 said:
Cobnapint said:
I'm curious Fluff. Just why is Sturgeon so desperate to stay in the EU...?
Cue the Abba song..............Money money money............ https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2016-07-20/d...
Angus Robertson wastes his time asking the same question twice at pmq's, don't think our new PM is going to put up with his crap.
Angus Robertson wastes his time asking the same question twice at pmq's, don't think our new PM is going to put up with his crap.
Reading the letters page on the link to the Scotsmans website, a very good question was asked.
"Would Nato allow Scotland to remove Trident from Faslane?"
Would the rUK/Nato decide to make Faslane a sovereign base like those in Cyprus. Given the number of EU countries in Nato, what could an SNP Scotland do about it. That would be a tricky negotiation for Sturgeon. Hope's of EU membership and exports to the US might be short lived, if Nato decides it's critical to keep Faslane. Perhaps they could send "Fat Eck" to negotiate with his best buddy President Trump.
"Would Nato allow Scotland to remove Trident from Faslane?"
Would the rUK/Nato decide to make Faslane a sovereign base like those in Cyprus. Given the number of EU countries in Nato, what could an SNP Scotland do about it. That would be a tricky negotiation for Sturgeon. Hope's of EU membership and exports to the US might be short lived, if Nato decides it's critical to keep Faslane. Perhaps they could send "Fat Eck" to negotiate with his best buddy President Trump.
fluffnik said:
The whole cost of the missile system and its maintenance.
We give a big wedge to the Yanks, the French get the highly profitable Ariane rocket as a by product.
What fresh nonsense is this? ESA and their rocket programme have 2/3rds of bugger all to do with the french nuclear deterrent.We give a big wedge to the Yanks, the French get the highly profitable Ariane rocket as a by product.
The lease cost of the missiles is at worst 10% of the Trident budget; the extra capital for DIY rocketry would be a lot more than the loss from exporting that revenue, so it's a moot point.
fluffnik said:
They provide, for example, standards bodies and the like, avoiding duplication of bureaucracies and multiple geographic variations of specifications.
These days the EU is a middleman for most of the international standards bodies, they produce the standards and the EU just rebrand them for internal consumption.Garvin said:
Cost savings? Not significant. Each country still maintains the infrastructure for its own regulation so the savings are marginal at best. Indeed, small businesses in UK oft complain about a number of EU directives that add unnecessary cost so any savings in government are probably nullified by the additional cost to businesses. But I suspect your enquiry was rhetorical anyway.
The EU model is a simple one whereby the rich countries with a net contribution subsidise the poorer countries - it is the socialist way. By this method the poorer countries may see an increase in the standard of living/infrastructure etc. but inexorably become more reliant on the central handouts. The lack of incentive to improve their own lot makes them evermore dependent on the centre. The centre, of course, determines what the handouts are to be spent on thereby exercising central control more and more by stealth. It is the socialist way. When things go wrong for the poorer country they cannot break free due to the dependency they have been lulled into and inevitably lose almost all control of their own destiny. Just ask Greece.
This model flies completely in the face of the SNP rhetoric. They want ever more control over the subsidy they receive from Westminster but are apparently quite happy to swap that subsidy for one from the EU where there will be less control not more. Indeed, in the drive for ever closer political and fiscal union the SNP control in an 'independent' Scotland within the EU will inexorably diminish. The arguments and policies of the SNP, including their staunch supporters - Fluff included - make no political or economic sense and rapidly fall apart under even the lightest of interrogation.
One is left with the inescapable conclusion that the SNP is driven solely by racism against the English. Bitter and twisted hatred - it will eventually be the destruction of Scotland.
100% this. Best post of the thread for me. Can't someone read it out in WM directly towards SNP?!The EU model is a simple one whereby the rich countries with a net contribution subsidise the poorer countries - it is the socialist way. By this method the poorer countries may see an increase in the standard of living/infrastructure etc. but inexorably become more reliant on the central handouts. The lack of incentive to improve their own lot makes them evermore dependent on the centre. The centre, of course, determines what the handouts are to be spent on thereby exercising central control more and more by stealth. It is the socialist way. When things go wrong for the poorer country they cannot break free due to the dependency they have been lulled into and inevitably lose almost all control of their own destiny. Just ask Greece.
This model flies completely in the face of the SNP rhetoric. They want ever more control over the subsidy they receive from Westminster but are apparently quite happy to swap that subsidy for one from the EU where there will be less control not more. Indeed, in the drive for ever closer political and fiscal union the SNP control in an 'independent' Scotland within the EU will inexorably diminish. The arguments and policies of the SNP, including their staunch supporters - Fluff included - make no political or economic sense and rapidly fall apart under even the lightest of interrogation.
One is left with the inescapable conclusion that the SNP is driven solely by racism against the English. Bitter and twisted hatred - it will eventually be the destruction of Scotland.
sirtyro said:
Garvin said:
Cost savings? Not significant. Each country still maintains the infrastructure for its own regulation so the savings are marginal at best. Indeed, small businesses in UK oft complain about a number of EU directives that add unnecessary cost so any savings in government are probably nullified by the additional cost to businesses. But I suspect your enquiry was rhetorical anyway.
The EU model is a simple one whereby the rich countries with a net contribution subsidise the poorer countries - it is the socialist way. By this method the poorer countries may see an increase in the standard of living/infrastructure etc. but inexorably become more reliant on the central handouts. The lack of incentive to improve their own lot makes them evermore dependent on the centre. The centre, of course, determines what the handouts are to be spent on thereby exercising central control more and more by stealth. It is the socialist way. When things go wrong for the poorer country they cannot break free due to the dependency they have been lulled into and inevitably lose almost all control of their own destiny. Just ask Greece.
This model flies completely in the face of the SNP rhetoric. They want ever more control over the subsidy they receive from Westminster but are apparently quite happy to swap that subsidy for one from the EU where there will be less control not more. Indeed, in the drive for ever closer political and fiscal union the SNP control in an 'independent' Scotland within the EU will inexorably diminish. The arguments and policies of the SNP, including their staunch supporters - Fluff included - make no political or economic sense and rapidly fall apart under even the lightest of interrogation.
One is left with the inescapable conclusion that the SNP is driven solely by racism against the English. Bitter and twisted hatred - it will eventually be the destruction of Scotland.
100% this. Best post of the thread for me. Can't someone read it out in WM directly towards SNP?!The EU model is a simple one whereby the rich countries with a net contribution subsidise the poorer countries - it is the socialist way. By this method the poorer countries may see an increase in the standard of living/infrastructure etc. but inexorably become more reliant on the central handouts. The lack of incentive to improve their own lot makes them evermore dependent on the centre. The centre, of course, determines what the handouts are to be spent on thereby exercising central control more and more by stealth. It is the socialist way. When things go wrong for the poorer country they cannot break free due to the dependency they have been lulled into and inevitably lose almost all control of their own destiny. Just ask Greece.
This model flies completely in the face of the SNP rhetoric. They want ever more control over the subsidy they receive from Westminster but are apparently quite happy to swap that subsidy for one from the EU where there will be less control not more. Indeed, in the drive for ever closer political and fiscal union the SNP control in an 'independent' Scotland within the EU will inexorably diminish. The arguments and policies of the SNP, including their staunch supporters - Fluff included - make no political or economic sense and rapidly fall apart under even the lightest of interrogation.
One is left with the inescapable conclusion that the SNP is driven solely by racism against the English. Bitter and twisted hatred - it will eventually be the destruction of Scotland.
And if you want them to understand it you'd be advised to get Oor Wullie breaking it down into small cogent lumps for Wee Eck
Welshbeef said:
Why would the UK now choose the much higher cost of R&D and fabricating from scratch over paying a margin to someone else who has an on the shelf option which is suitable to the requirements?
I would argue that the UK "independent" nuclear "deterrent" is unsuitable for anything.Welshbeef said:
Added to the fact it draws those bonds even closer with the USA
I would also consider that a Bad Thing.fluffnik said:
Welshbeef said:
Why would the UK now choose the much higher cost of R&D and fabricating from scratch over paying a margin to someone else who has an on the shelf option which is suitable to the requirements?
I would argue that the UK "independent" nuclear "deterrent" is unsuitable for anything.Welshbeef said:
Added to the fact it draws those bonds even closer with the USA
I would also consider that a Bad Thing.fluffnik said:
Welshbeef said:
Why would the UK now choose the much higher cost of R&D and fabricating from scratch over paying a margin to someone else who has an on the shelf option which is suitable to the requirements?
I would argue that the UK "independent" nuclear "deterrent" is unsuitable for anything.Welshbeef said:
Added to the fact it draws those bonds even closer with the USA
I would also consider that a Bad Thing.Very much like the SNP in fact.
Garvin said:
Cost savings? Not significant. Each country still maintains the infrastructure for its own regulation so the savings are marginal at best. Indeed, small businesses in UK oft complain about a number of EU directives that add unnecessary cost so any savings in government are probably nullified by the additional cost to businesses. But I suspect your enquiry was rhetorical anyway.
The EU model is a simple one whereby the rich countries with a net contribution subsidise the poorer countries - it is the socialist way. By this method the poorer countries may see an increase in the standard of living/infrastructure etc. but inexorably become more reliant on the central handouts. The lack of incentive to improve their own lot makes them evermore dependent on the centre. The centre, of course, determines what the handouts are to be spent on thereby exercising central control more and more by stealth. It is the socialist way. When things go wrong for the poorer country they cannot break free due to the dependency they have been lulled into and inevitably lose almost all control of their own destiny. Just ask Greece.
This model flies completely in the face of the SNP rhetoric. They want ever more control over the subsidy they receive from Westminster but are apparently quite happy to swap that subsidy for one from the EU where there will be less control not more. Indeed, in the drive for ever closer political and fiscal union the SNP control in an 'independent' Scotland within the EU will inexorably diminish. The arguments and policies of the SNP, including their staunch supporters - Fluff included - make no political or economic sense and rapidly fall apart under even the lightest of interrogation.
One is left with the inescapable conclusion that the SNP is driven solely by racism against the English. Bitter and twisted hatred - it will eventually be the destruction of Scotland.
Well, damn.The EU model is a simple one whereby the rich countries with a net contribution subsidise the poorer countries - it is the socialist way. By this method the poorer countries may see an increase in the standard of living/infrastructure etc. but inexorably become more reliant on the central handouts. The lack of incentive to improve their own lot makes them evermore dependent on the centre. The centre, of course, determines what the handouts are to be spent on thereby exercising central control more and more by stealth. It is the socialist way. When things go wrong for the poorer country they cannot break free due to the dependency they have been lulled into and inevitably lose almost all control of their own destiny. Just ask Greece.
This model flies completely in the face of the SNP rhetoric. They want ever more control over the subsidy they receive from Westminster but are apparently quite happy to swap that subsidy for one from the EU where there will be less control not more. Indeed, in the drive for ever closer political and fiscal union the SNP control in an 'independent' Scotland within the EU will inexorably diminish. The arguments and policies of the SNP, including their staunch supporters - Fluff included - make no political or economic sense and rapidly fall apart under even the lightest of interrogation.
One is left with the inescapable conclusion that the SNP is driven solely by racism against the English. Bitter and twisted hatred - it will eventually be the destruction of Scotland.
You've zero chance of getting a response from Fluff on this, but that says more than an irrelevant, illogical one liner ever could.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff