Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 8

[Uppity]

technodup said:

Uppity said:

r11co said:

Uppity said:

no Bedroom Tax,

'So called' bedroom tax, you mean as there is no such thing...

UK Govt quote: The Welfare Reform Act 2012 determines that the amount of housing benefit paid to a claimant is reduced if the property they are renting is judged to have more bedrooms than necessary.

Good enough for you?

The bedroom tax is patently not a tax. It's a reduction in the amount of free money we give people to pay for inappropriate housing. Not to mention it's a pretty fair and reasonable solution to a problem. Why should the state be housing people for life in unsuitable and expensive housing? And the people who require said housing to be perpetually disadvantaged?

I understand the principle and, taken at face value, it seems to make sense. But it ignored the fact that those on Housing Benefit were already disadvantaged and need local friends/family/agencies to provide a degree of support, e.g shift workers needing babysitting support, ill people needing care and/or transport etc. It also ignored the fact that finding another house and moving costs money - money they had to find from somewhere.

If if had been implemented with relevant support, then that's a different story. But it wasn't

technodup said:

Uppity said:

Also known as acting as the first line of defence against the damage being caused by Tory austerity

There's not been any austerity. There's been a lot of talk about austerity, to make the hard of thinking believe we were cutting back, but we have spent more every year since the crash.

Eh?

The austerity programme was initiated in 2010 by the Con/Dem coalition government. In his June 2010 budget speech, the Chancellor George Osborne identified two goals. The first was that the current budget deficit would be eliminated and the second was that national debt as a percentage of GDP would fall.

The Govt's austerity programme affected many areas, usually at the lower end of the socio-economic scale, particularly benefits claimants and low paid workers. A prime example is the five million public sector workers whose pay was frozen between 2011 and 2013 (for those earning over £21 000) and with annual increases subsequently capped at 1% to 2020 in the 2015 budget.

It is true that the Govt has managed to increase the National Debt from 71% of UK GDP (2010) to 86% (2016) but Lord knows what they did with the money, because there were plenty of sectors hit by austerity measures

[Uppity]

Alpacaman said:

Uppity said:

Here's what I would genuinely like to understand. Seriously.

All party politics/allegiances aside, what is the benefit to Scotland of being in the United Kingdom?

Did we not go through all that in the two years running up to September 2014? Or did you miss that?

To many of us it goes far beyond the stability and financial strength we get as part of the Union, we are British, it is who we are. I don't identify as English, where I was born, or Scottish where I choose to live, or Welsh or Irish where many of my ancestors are from, I am British. We are a family and we stick together through good times and bad.

That's an argument driven by emotion, which I understand, and there are plenty of people who will agree. But it's not a compelling argument for those who don't feel the same way

Alpacaman said:

The anger and hate driven by nationalism is the one thing that would make me leave Scotland.

Could you expand on that - I'm sure it's a view shared by others and I would like to understand it better

[Rollin]

Uppity said:

My view is that Scotland should be a member of the EU, pretty much as we are now.

Scotland isn't a member of the EU.

Check the list here. HTH

https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/countrie...

[Uppity]

technodup said:

Uppity said:

Here's what I would genuinely like to understand. Seriously.

All party politics/allegiances aside, what is the benefit to Scotland of being in the United Kingdom?

I'll leave it for others to make the list, but for me it boils down to what you think Scotland is. I think of Scotland as a constituent part of a larger entity, not a wannabe self determining area desperate to free itself from the shackles of a foreign power.

What I find staggering is the independence army who want to join the EU. Do they seriously think that is an improvement over the UK?

The big difference between the UK and the EU from a Scotland perspective is that Scotland cannot influence UK policy. It is practically impossible for us to do so as we only have 59 MPs out of 650. Whatever England votes for is the Parliament we get - if England as the country with the largest number of seats votes Labour, we all get Labour. Ditto Tories. That's just simple arithmetic

If we are members of the EU, we have the power of Veto. And that would give us far more political clout than we have at present (and there are plenty of examples of countries using the veto to good effect)

However, we digress. Regardless of the pro/anti EU case, the point is that Scotland as an independent country could make up its own mind. Something it cannot do at present.

[The Dangerous Elk]

And then YOU have power over the smaller group, they should be able to claim veto over you. City States?

[Rollin]

Veto powers will be long gone when Scotland would qualify for EU membership.
Pointless discussion anyway....

[Uppity]

andy_s said:

Uppity said:

Here's what I would genuinely like to understand. Seriously.

All party politics/allegiances aside, what is the benefit to Scotland of being in the United Kingdom?

Economies of scale - in Scotland's favour - in terms of trade, civil structure, economic stability/volatility risk, employment migration ease/job market, defence, currency, welfare, pensions, energy, in fact almost all 'big government' aspects of life

They do seem like obvious benefits but any economy of scale can only work if it is designed for the benefit of those partaking in it. That means that these activities have to be performed or designed with at least some consideration of the benefit they would afford Scotland - and that takes us right back to the representation problem. With only 59 MPs out of 650, Scotland has no significant political role or weight within the current union.

andy_s said:

and of course Scotland has representation in Westminster to influence these aspects to their benefit as well as...

Nope - my point re representation refers. As an example, we need more migrants - never going to happen. Westminster needs to keep the anti-immigration element happy and Scotland's needs are irrelevant

andy_s said:

...Those powers and institutions that are already devolved give enough wriggle room (in my opinion) for bespoked national governance without the rupture of all of the above benefits - national parliament, tax [variance], police, criminal and civil law, education, social, housing, transport, environment, agriculture etc.

From a purely objective view, Scotland has their cake and can indeed eat most of it - and I don't have a problem with that, I think it's a mutually beneficial arrangement on the whole.

But they are only partially devolved in so much as powers are limited or will be overridden if the Scottish Government's policy conflicts with Westminster policy - as we have seen this week. As a country the same size as Denmark, Ireland, Slovakia, Norway, Finland we should be making all our own decisions for our own interest and we are not allowed to

---

andy_s said:

A few of the aspects that struck me during the vote was the SNP's complete lack of preparedness and thought on how to do it viably,

Agreed - I think the surge in the Yes vote caught them a bit flat footed and the case for Yes wasn't communicated very well. Allied to the negative fear campaign (you'll lose your pension etc), it was a genuine frustration

andy_s said:

At the end of the day I asked myself whether it would be a positive or negative thing for me and my family and immediate community - ...and have a credible and tangibly beneficial plan I may have another look, but till then...

You've obviously given this some serious thought, so let me suggest you have a look at A SHORT GUIDE ON HOW TO START A NEW COUNTRY: A PRACTICAL GUIDE FOR SCOTLAND. It's free and is a primer for a more in-depth book, which is available at the same site. And for those with an SNP-aversion, it is nothing to do with the SNP

[Kccv23highliftcam]

Uppity said:

Kccv23highliftcam said:

" That's what more and more people are seeing everyday"

I'll tell you what is REALLY happenning.

From the potting shed on Friday.

Bunch of seasonal workers and the two pernies looking at their wage slips.

Real disappointment and anger that those whose earnings are slightly above the minimum wage have been hit with a tax hike and reduced take home pay.

Leaving your anecdotal analysis aside, smartass answer (or facts, as they are otherwise known) coming up:






So unless your mates from the potting shed are on more than £33,000 per annum, they are better off under the Scottish tax system. And that's before you take into account that they and their families do not have to pay for:

University tuition (approx £9000 per annum min saving)
Prescription charges
Elderly home care
Free childcare for 3-4 year olds (2-4 year olds for low income households)
Lower Council Tax (approx £460 lower than the average in England)

Kccv23highliftcam said:

Not working in some office in front of a PC with a degree in media, but working class who go out and actually labour 8 hours a day in all weathers.

If there's a point to your disparaging remark on graduates, I've missed it

Kccv23highliftcam said:

Uppity, [or is it edinburgher?] you have NO IDEA of the ststorm that is brewing for the separatists. Everyone is absolutely sick of the SNP, their lies and what they have done to our country.

Election results and increasing membership of the SNP would suggest otherwise. Unless you have anything to support your point?

Kccv23highliftcam said:

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/16288646.Winter...

Got a smartass answer for that?

What the article actually says is that deaths in Scotland have hit a 32 year high for the first 3 months of 2018 due to people being killed by respiratory diseases, fatal flu cases, dementia and strokes. You cannot extrapolate a trend from 3 months of data

What is true - and the article states - is that austerity and cuts in public spending will have played a part in this spike. And it is the Tory policy of austerity that has had a knock-on impact on the Scottish Block Grant - between -3.5% to -9% depending on your source.

Could the Scottish Govt spend more on the NHS? Almost certainly, although on average NHS spending per head in Scotland has been around 15% higher than in England over the last 7 years (Source - British Medical Journal)

Kccv23highliftcam said:

The SNP Government are DIRECTLY responsible for the appalling state of the NHS in Scotland and indirectly have these deaths at their feet, as nicola would say, END OF STORY.

I'll just leave this here

thought the posting style was reminiscent.



It's 'burger time!


Oh BTW

"So unless your mates from the potting shed are on more than £33,000 per annum, they are better off under the Scottish tax system."


How can you be better off if your tax share & deductions $ have $ JUST INCREASED?


"Election results and increasing membership of the SNP would suggest otherwise. Unless you have anything to support your point?"




like the recent election[s] where the separatist vote collapsed perhaps?



But don't take my word for it. Ask pete wishart

Edited by Kccv23highliftcam on Sunday 17th June 19:33

[Garvin]

Uppity said:

My view is that Scotland should be a member of the EU, pretty much as we are now.

All party politics/allegiances aside, what is the benefit to Scotland of being a member of the EU?

[Uppity]

Garvin said:

All party politics/allegiances aside, what is the benefit to Scotland of being a member of the EU?

That's a very big question - but it isn't one that Scotland can ask or answer as part of the United Kingdom. Why? Because our answer doesn't matter. It doesn't matter what we think or want. Not in relation to membership of the EU. Or anything else where Westminster needs to worry about votes outside of Scotland.

It will always be this way. Scotland's interests will always be secondary and the Scottish Government will only ever be allowed to legislate as long as Westminster approves of what it is doing.That is just basic arithmetic and political necessity from a Westminster perspective.

The answer to whether Scotland should be in the EU can only be debated meaningfully and decided on within an independent Scotland. Anything else is empty chatter of no consequence.

[Troubleatmill]

Uppity said:

r11co said:

Before answering this, what is your position on Scotland as a member of the EU?

My view is that Scotland should be a member of the EU, pretty much as we are now.

And yet the EU says - it is just not possible.

The ultimate irony is that as much as Sturgeon wants independence - the very second it is in place - Scotland is out of the EU.


http://www.parliament.scot/S4_EuropeanandExternalR...

http://www.parliament.scot/S4_EuropeanandExternalR...

http://www.parliament.scot/S4_EuropeanandExternalR...

http://www.parliament.scot/S4_EuropeanandExternalR...



And of course the now fiscally challenged EU is just begging for more countries that can't balance their books to join up and get subsidies.

[Alpacaman]

Troubleatmill said:

Uppity said:

r11co said:

Before answering this, what is your position on Scotland as a member of the EU?

My view is that Scotland should be a member of the EU, pretty much as we are now.

And yet the EU says - it is just not possible.

The ultimate irony is that as much as Sturgeon wants independence - the very second it is in place - Scotland is out of the EU.


http://www.parliament.scot/S4_EuropeanandExternalR...

http://www.parliament.scot/S4_EuropeanandExternalR...

http://www.parliament.scot/S4_EuropeanandExternalR...

http://www.parliament.scot/S4_EuropeanandExternalR...



And of course the now fiscally challenged EU is just begging for more countries that can't balance their books to join up and get subsidies.

And somehow we are supposed to believe that as 5 million people we will have a bigger voice among 500 million than 60 million. I am sorry but I don't buy the guff about our voice not being heard in the UK.

[Ecosseven]

Uppity said:

r11co said:

Before answering this, what is your position on Scotland as a member of the EU?

My view is that Scotland should be a member of the EU, pretty much as we are now.

What are the requirements for being granted membership of the EU and how many would an independent Scotland meet? If I recall correctly a new member state needs a low budget deficit (less than 3% and reducing), a well established and stable currency, and agree to join the Euro at some point in the future. I'm sure others more knowledgeable than me will post up some others.

[Ecosseven]

Uppity said:

r11co said:

Before answering this, what is your position on Scotland as a member of the EU?

My view is that Scotland should be a member of the EU, pretty much as we are now.

What are the requirements for being granted membership of the EU and how many would an independent Scotland meet? If I recall correctly a new member state needs a low budget deficit (less than 3% and reducing), a well established and stable currency, and agree to join the Euro at some point in the future. I'm sure others more knowledgeable than me will post up some others.

[Troubleatmill]

Ecosseven said:

Uppity said:

r11co said:

Before answering this, what is your position on Scotland as a member of the EU?

My view is that Scotland should be a member of the EU, pretty much as we are now.

What are the requirements for being granted membership of the EU and how many would an independent Scotland meet? If I recall correctly a new member state needs a low budget deficit (less than 3% and reducing), a well established and stable currency, and agree to join the Euro at some point in the future. I'm sure others more knowledgeable than me will post up some others.

There is more chance of the Pope winning "Rabbi of the year" than Scotland meeting the EU requirements.

[r11co]

andy_s said:

On the campaign - adherence to political theory in spite of pragmatic reality [If they'd wanted to generate cash maybe reduce corp tax to 10% and become the Monaco of N Europe but that isn't a popular socialist view...], the will to power transcending principal and sense [i.e. this was more about keeping the SNP afloat than really benefiting Scottish people; this was 'hearts and minds' not 'facts and figures'], the divisive effect on the population [that generated increasingly polarised views where the noise generated increased inversely proportionally to the distance from the centre ground] and the lack of vision for me forestalled all support, confidence and credibility in the SNP and by extension their ideas on independence.

As a final caveat - don't worry - the SNP certainly don't hold the monopoly on stupidity in politics and I think have done some good things in certain areas, but as I said at the time - if they hold all the good ideas then let them implement them as best they can and show in reality that they're better in practise than their Westminster peers and have a credible and tangibly beneficial plan I may have another look, but till then...

That's the rub right there. The dangled carrot of another referendum is now nothing more than a vehicle for keeping the SNP in power, and an alleged 4 figure increase in membership after what the acolytes are trying to make out as a pivotal moment in the independence movement is in reality a pish in the ocean and is never going to sway anything. If they had made a sterling job of running Scotland in 10 years then independence would be a certainty.

Salmond tried to achieve it through stealth and guile. Sturgeon is trying to achieve it through mediocrity. The answer is a simple one, but in truth neither were up to the job of just being good at governing. The idea that they are being hamstrung by Westminster just isn't ringing true with the majority so it is senseless to keep repeating it, especially when Holyrood isn't exactly presenting itself as a hive of good ideas, consensus and advancement.

The list of SNP 'achievements' (which Uppity alluded to earlier) aren't achievements at all - they are just ScotGov dividing the cake differently (with a large part of the ingredients provided by rUK).

Edited by r11co on Sunday 17th June 23:01

[Murph7355]

Uppity said:

....
It is true that the Govt has managed to increase the National Debt from 71% of UK GDP (2010) to 86% (2016) but Lord knows what they did with the money, because there were plenty of sectors hit by austerity measures...

The national debt continued to increase because of the rather large deficit we were running and have been running for quite a long time.

We still have one. The National Debt and our deficit are different things.

What they have been doing with the money is what "they" have always been doing with the money. Only slightly less of it in an effort to cut the deficit, convert it to a surplus and start paying down the National Debt.

So either, despite the cuts, they haven't been cutting enough (my personal belief). Or they haven't been raising enough tax (not my personal belief as I believe there is evidence to note the tax take is high at present).

Regardless, we continue to live beyond our means and that is not sustainable. No matter how much we might all wish otherwise.

[Uppity]

Troubleatmill said:

Uppity said:

r11co said:

Before answering this, what is your position on Scotland as a member of the EU?

My view is that Scotland should be a member of the EU, pretty much as we are now.

And yet the EU says - it is just not possible.

The ultimate irony is that as much as Sturgeon wants independence - the very second it is in place - Scotland is out of the EU.


http://www.parliament.scot/S4_EuropeanandExternalR...

http://www.parliament.scot/S4_EuropeanandExternalR...

http://www.parliament.scot/S4_EuropeanandExternalR...

http://www.parliament.scot/S4_EuropeanandExternalR...

And of course the now fiscally challenged EU is just begging for more countries that can't balance their books to join up and get subsidies.

None of that matters. None of it. Why? Because Scotland does not have the power to make the decision. We could talk about the EU all day/week/month/year long and it would all be pointless, simply because Westminster has no political incentive to consider Scotland's needs. None.

As demonstrated so emphatically this week, Scotland is subjugate to Westminster in all things. Therefore the answer to whether Scotland should be in the EU (and numerous other issues, such as fracking) can only be debated meaningfully and decided on within an independent Scotland. Anything else is subject to the whims of Westminster and is empty chatter of no consequence.

[technodup]

Uppity said:

Eh?

The austerity programme was initiated in 2010 by the Con/Dem coalition government.

The Govt's austerity programme affected many areas,

It's really quite simple. Yes some departments got a budget cut, but that was just tinkering. We spent more year on year for every year since the crash. There were no overall cuts. That's a narrative that Labour used to make Tories look bad, and the Tories used to look competent.

Alpacaman said:

And somehow we are supposed to believe that as 5 million people we will have a bigger voice among 500 million than 60 million. I am sorry but I don't buy the guff about our voice not being heard in the UK.

SNP logic right there.

[Uppity]

Alpacaman said:

And somehow we are supposed to believe that as 5 million people we will have a bigger voice among 500 million than 60 million.

Member veto - I mention it in an earlier post

Alpacaman said:

I am sorry but I don't buy the guff about our voice not being heard in the UK.

Seriously, 59 Scottish seats out of 650 UK seats - and all North of the border. It would be insane for an English/Welsh/NI politician to expend their limited resources on them. Hence the lack of voice