Scottish Independence

[weecounty hibby]

Its interesting that you and most if the msm have used that picture of that particular individual to have a go at NS and the SNP. He probably dislikes the SNP as much as you. Well, maybe not😂

[grunt]

Load of ***** man made borders on a map, there's good ***** and bad ***** in every nation
Well true, but we're currently on page 675 and more than 20,000 posts into a discussion about borders on a map, so seemingly many on here feel it to be worth talking about.

[Stairway 2 7]

Here's a different take on events https://medium.com/@msm_monitor/absolute-chaos-on-the-streets-of-perth-35836850e39

Thankfully the first minister and the union don't agree with that biased piece.

NUJ Scotland
@NUJScotland
We deplore the way in which James Cook was treated, and we commend the professional and courteous way in which he conducted himself despite extreme provocation. No journalist - and no worker - should be subjected to this at their place of work

[Stairway 2 7]

Well true, but we're currently on page 675 and more than 20,000 posts into a discussion about borders on a map, so seemingly many on here feel it to be worth talking about.

I want independence mainly because the tories and a chance of a fairer system. I'm not more connected to an Edinburgh private school attendee than I am a football fan from Liverpool or Munich.

[weecounty hibby]

Thankfully the first minister and the union don't agree with that biased piece.

NUJ Scotland
@NUJScotland
We deplore the way in which James Cook was treated, and we commend the professional and courteous way in which he conducted himself despite extreme provocation. No journalist - and no worker - should be subjected to this at their place of work
I am not condoning anything said to Cook but he seemed pretty determined to be the story. Not everyone there were indy protestors. There were many different groups there. I also think that some of the pictures actually seem to show one of "A Force for Good" in the crowd where the abuse was coming from. Certainly not indy fans. Wonder what he could have been doing there🤔

[lapsedhibee]

It all looked quite good natured :-)

https://inews.co.uk/news/scotland/scottish-independence-nicola-sturgeon-condemns-protesters-bbc-reporter-1800294

Strange no mention of spitting in that report, whereas the previous report you linked to was at pains to emphasise that spitting at/on Tories took place. Funny that.

[Kato]

Here's a different take on events https://medium.com/@msm_monitor/absolute-chaos-on-the-streets-of-perth-35836850e39Has Cook apologised for his lies?

Can't see any assault there.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

Strange no mention of spitting in that report, whereas the previous report you linked to was at pains to emphasise that spitting at/on Tories took place. Funny that.

As someone that used to work a couple of minutes walk from Horsecross, where the hustings took place, and having seen numerous images and videos, it would be impossible, as the barriers and crowd control measures are so far away, for anyone to be spat upon. Yes the odd egg might be thrown from across the road, but the protesters were separated from the delegates by the width of the road at a minimum.

[grunt]

Thankfully the first minister and the union don't agree with that biased piece.
Have you ever considered it strange that you view the article you linked to to be true, but you view the article I linked to to be biased?

Have you ever wondered whether you might be being conned by the sources you rely on?

[lapsedhibee]

As someone that used to work a couple of minutes walk from Horsecross, where the hustings took place, and having seen numerous images and videos, it would be impossible, as the barriers and crowd control measures are so far away, for anyone to be spat upon. Yes the odd egg might be thrown from across the road, but the protesters were separated from the delegates by the width of the road at a minimum.

Yes, but you can only say that because you're in possession of facts. You can't expect a national news organisation with an agenda to get bogged down in that sort of stuff.

[Stairway 2 7]

Have you ever considered it strange that you view the article you linked to to be true, but you view the article I linked to to be biased?

Have you ever wondered whether you might be being conned by the sources you rely on?

I never linked an article. I linked the union supporting him and said the first minister supported too. I suppose they could be poor sources but I trust them

[wookie70]

Have you ever considered it strange that you view the article you linked to to be true, but you view the article I linked to to be biased?

Have you ever wondered whether you might be being conned by the sources you rely on?

I view it that way too as I have looked at the video evidence and images. There isn't anything to suggest that anything particularly newsworthy took place. Cook definitely hung around more than he needed and clearly instigated the discussion. That doesn't excuse calling him **** etc but he was looking for a story. The stories from the Tory side all all very similar as if they were all from a single source and then spread. The stories from the protesters side just sound like their view of the event.

The big news were the two little far right demons deciding how many poor people to kill to get a few votes from people with blue rinses. That story didn't receive as much coverage.

[James310]

I think that's all the major pollsters showing No leading now after this drop in support for Independence.

Scottish Independence Voting Intention:

NO: 51% (+2)
YES: 49% (-2)

Via @Panelbase,
Changes w/ 29 June-1 July.

Despite all the favourable conditions for the SNP and the formal rejection of another S30 (which according to some would increase support) we see support dropping.

Which makes this article ring very true and the approach to the Supreme Court. From someone who worked for the SNP in negotiating the 2014 referendum.

“A piece of theatre designed to disguise how the SNP has failed nationalists.”

“the Salmond, Sturgeon and Swinney era will end in ignominy…They made promises to the party they knew they could not keep”

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-point-of-sturgeons-legal-push-is-to-hide-the-snps-failure-nc3dgmrkz

[Ozyhibby]

I think that's all the major pollsters showing No leading now after this drop in support for Independence.

Scottish Independence Voting Intention:

NO: 51% (+2)
YES: 49% (-2)

Via @Panelbase,
Changes w/ 29 June-1 July.

Despite all the favourable conditions for the SNP and the formal rejection of another S30 (which according to some would increase support) we see support dropping.

Which makes this article ring very true and the approach to the Supreme Court. From someone who worked for the SNP in negotiating the 2014 referendum.

“A piece of theatre designed to disguise how the SNP has failed nationalists.”

“the Salmond, Sturgeon and Swinney era will end in ignominy…They made promises to the party they knew they could not keep”

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-point-of-sturgeons-legal-push-is-to-hide-the-snps-failure-nc3dgmrkz

Same poll showed Yes on 52% if Truss wins. You really are a troll.[emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

Same poll showed Yes on 52% if Truss wins. You really are a troll.[emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wow a whole 52%. 1% more than the last poll before this one. I get you are annoyed as you said support for Indy would increase after the rejection of the S30, when it actually fell.

[Ozyhibby]

Wow a whole 52%. 1% more than the last poll before this one. I get you are annoyed as you said support for Indy would increase after the rejection of the S30, when it actually fell.

Who said I’m upset? The poll is good for those who support Indy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

It's clearly close

[James310]

Who said I’m upset? The poll is good for those who support Indy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A poll in 2019 had support for Indy at 53% if Boris Johnson became Prime Minister. How did that work out.

[Ozyhibby]

It's clearly close

All within the margin of error of a 50/50 split. Progress since 2014, most likely in line with demographic change. The good thing for Yes is that support for Indy increases when it’s being talked about in the news. And in the run up to a vote, there will be little else in the news.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lapsedhibee]

The good thing for Yes is that support for Indy increases when it’s being talked about in the news. And in the run up to a vote, there will be little else in the news.

Unless the news media boycotts coverage of the vote, when No voters decide it's not for them.

[Jones28]

All within the margin of error of a 50/50 split. Progress since 2014, most likely in line with demographic change. The good thing for Yes is that support for Indy increases when it’s being talked about in the news. And in the run up to a vote, there will be little else in the news.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It’s still a bit disheartening as a pro independence family that despite all the shortcomings of the Westminster government we find ourselves a toiling to pull away from No in any meaningful way.

[grunt]

“A piece of theatre designed to disguise how the SNP has failed nationalists.”

“the Salmond, Sturgeon and Swinney era will end in ignominy…They made promises to the party they knew they could not keep”

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-point-of-sturgeons-legal-push-is-to-hide-the-snps-failure-nc3dgmrkz
Bell has been saying these things for almost 10 years, since he quit working for Salmond a year before the 2014 referendum.
He's just a bitter man, with some deeply held but unspecified grievance against the SNP and Sturgeon in particular.

If he was posting on here I'd put him on ignore.

[Ozyhibby]

It’s still a bit disheartening as a pro independence family that despite all the shortcomings of the Westminster government we find ourselves a toiling to pull away from No in any meaningful way.

Older voters are very attached to the union and are afraid any change might affect their wealth. Younger voters don’t have the same attachment and can’t build wealth now anyway.
Older voters are dying off and new young voters are being created every year. It’s only going in one direction and I can’t see it changing.
Happy to be patient for now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

Older voters are very attached to the union and are afraid any change might affect their wealth. Younger voters don’t have the same attachment and can’t build wealth now anyway.
Older voters are dying off and new young voters are being created every year. It’s only going in one direction and I can’t see it changing.
Happy to be patient for now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Isn't the opposite of patience going to court to force a referendum, a referendum where Nicola Sturgeon has already given a date for in just over 12 months time? Isn't the opposite of patience then saying the next General Election will become a de facto referendum in the next 2 to 3 years?

It's contradictory, you are happy with the current approach but happy with a patient approach as well?

You also say support for Indy increases as it's in the news, the same day a poll shows a drop of 2% in support for Indy and coverage on Independence has ramped up with the court action and the release of a series of papers on Independence.

[He's here!]

Older voters are very attached to the union and are afraid any change might affect their wealth. Younger voters don’t have the same attachment and can’t build wealth now anyway.
Older voters are dying off and new young voters are being created every year. It’s only going in one direction and I can’t see it changing.
Happy to be patient for now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The Angus Robertson approach eh? Just wait for those pesky old people to die off...what wisdom could they possibly bring to the table after all? Just hurry up and shuffle off.

Bit of a generalisation to suggest all elderly Scottish voters are wealthy. If that were true why all the concern about them paying for their heating?

[Callum_62]

If someone said 10 years ago we would be sitting at 50/50 in the polls before any meaningful campaigning, the indy side would be delighted and the union side would be bricking it

Weird how perception can be altered

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

The Angus Robertson approach eh? Just wait for those pesky old people to die off...what wisdom could they possibly bring to the table after all? Just hurry up and shuffle off.

Bit of a generalisation to suggest all elderly Scottish voters are wealthy. If that were true why all the concern about them paying for their heating?

In general, older people tend to be wealthier than younger people. I don’t think that’s to much of a generalisation. It’s just a fact. There are of course, poor older people and wealthy young people. Doesn’t make what I said untrue.
The point about the demographics is true, no matter how much you may wish it not to be. People under 55 have much less attachment to the union. The haven’t worked in nationalised industries because they are all gone. There are no UK wide services that they are particularly attached to these days. That’s the thing about small govt, the public start to feel they don’t need it. Everything is in the hands of the private sector anyway.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

If someone said 10 years ago we would be sitting at 50/50 in the polls before any meaningful campaigning, the indy side would be delighted and the union side would be bricking it

Weird how perception can be altered

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

Think the last indyref was announced with Yes at about 27% in the polls. Doubt we could match that performance again but we only need a few percent.
It’s a bit like in rugby when teams seem able to get up the whole pitch fairly easy but getting over the last 5 metres is very difficult.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

The Angus Robertson approach eh? Just wait for those pesky old people to die off...what wisdom could they possibly bring to the table after all? Just hurry up and shuffle off.
Nice way to misrepresent what I think is an established uncontested fact, that younger voters are more pro-indy than the older sections of the population.

[Ozyhibby]

Nice way to misrepresent what I think is an established uncontested fact, that younger voters are more pro-indy than the older sections of the population.

They prefer to do that than actually go out and persuade young people of the merits of the union.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://twitter.com/timesscotland/status/1561605530933682176?s=21&t=W4mphZWfOCL-QE-9duGMyw

72% of Scots want a return to the EU. That’s a great starting point for the Yes campaign to work towards. These people are persuadable in my opinion.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JeMeSouviens]

If someone said 10 years ago we would be sitting at 50/50 in the polls before any meaningful campaigning, the indy side would be delighted and the union side would be bricking it

Weird how perception can be altered

Sent from my VOG-L29 using Tapatalk

Actually for all the trolling bravado - I think both sides are bricking it.

[lucky]

Arguing over polls or starting positions 10 years ago is irrelevant. Once a legal referendum campaign starts then both side will have the opportunity to put a positive/negative case forward. The world has changed a lot since the last referendum and who knows where how the U.K. will be in a years time. But one thing for sure the antics of whose on extreme edge of Nationalism or Unionism put the undecided off from supporting one side or another. The debate should be about the possibility of change for the better not shouting down the other side because you disagree with them.

[JeMeSouviens]

In general, older people tend to be wealthier than younger people. I don’t think that’s to much of a generalisation. It’s just a fact. There are of course, poor older people and wealthy young people. Doesn’t make what I said untrue.
The point about the demographics is true, no matter how much you may wish it not to be. People under 55 have much less attachment to the union. The haven’t worked in nationalised industries because they are all gone. There are no UK wide services that they are particularly attached to these days. That’s the thing about small govt, the public start to feel they don’t need it. Everything is in the hands of the private sector anyway.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The locus of politics in Scotland moved from Westminster to Holyrood post devolution. The House of Commons seems an increasingly far off and increasingly weird place.

[Ozyhibby]

Actually for all the trolling bravado - I think both sides are bricking it.

I agree, the stakes are very high for both sides. The Yes side want to make sure they are totally prepared for when it happens, the NO side are trying to make sure it never happens.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JeMeSouviens]

That panelbase poll is quite funny:

Standard question: Y49 N51
If Truss becomes PM: Y52 N48
If Sunak becomes PM: Y51 N49

:confused:

[Ozyhibby]

That panelbase poll is quite funny:

Standard question: Y49 N51
If Truss becomes PM: Y52 N48
If Sunak becomes PM: Y51 N49

:confused:

Maybe people prefer the current situation where nobody is running the country?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JeMeSouviens]

Maybe people prefer the current situation wher nobody is running the country?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There's probably a couple of % hoping for an asteroid strike as a way out for all of us.

[Jack]

There's probably a couple of % hoping for an asteroid strike as a way out for all of us.

If its torys then it could be they want Boris back as PM!

[Just Alf]

Actually for all the trolling bravado - I think both sides are bricking it.
I agree, the stakes are very high for both sides. The Yes side want to make sure they are totally prepared for when it happens, the NO side are trying to make sure it never happens.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkNot really wanting to use the 'once in a generation ' phrase as you just know some will latch onto that and ignore anything else that's said... but.... :greengrin

I think the yes side know this next referendum will be the last for a really good while, there doesn't appear to be any game changers on the horizon that would make a mockery of remain campaigning points in the way Brexit did.

[Jack]

Not really wanting to use the 'once in a generation ' phrase as you just know some will latch onto that and ignore anything else that's said... but.... :greengrin

I think the yes side know this next referendum will be the last for a really good while, there doesn't appear to be any game changers on the horizon that would make a mockery of remain campaigning points in the way Brexit did.

If it wasn't for Brexit and IF the tory government was in any way seen to be reasonable I doubt we'd be discussing a second referendum. This thread would be in the archives.

[Ozyhibby]

If it wasn't for Brexit and IF the tory government was in any way seen to be reasonable I doubt we'd be discussing a second referendum. This thread would be in the archives.

Agree totally. I certainly wouldn’t be ready to go again. I think a minimum of 10 years is reasonable but Brexit represents a massive change in the UK’s constitutional arrangements that it’s perfectly legitimate to be going for a 2nd referendum now.
The UK is going to fall massively behind European living standards and we have a chance to stop that happening in Scotland. We should take it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[He's here!]

Nice way to misrepresent what I think is an established uncontested fact, that younger voters are more pro-indy than the older sections of the population.

That's not the issue. I just think the 'we'll simply wait for the annoying no-voting oldies to die off' line is crass and disrespectful. Their votes are no less meaningful than anyone else's and for a good many will be underpinned by a wisdom not necessarily shared by a number of bandwagon-jumping younger voters.

[grunt]

That's not the issue. I just think the 'we'll simply wait for the annoying no-voting oldies to die off' line is crass and disrespectful. Their votes are no less meaningful than anyone else's and for a good many will be underpinned by a wisdom not necessarily shared by a number of bandwagon-jumping younger voters.
Very well, but that's not what he was saying. He was saying that independence is inevitable, it's coming, because the younger voters want it. It wasn't a knock against the oldies, just highlighting the inevitability of Scottish independence.

[Skol]

I have always thought the demographics strategy was kind of last gasp hoping if all else fails

When I was younger I used to enjoy SNP victories and could easily have voted yes. As I grew older though my views have changed. There is no guarantee that todays youth retain the same views in ten years time.

I still think two key things missing are the effective use of devolution and putting forward a solid economic case fir independence. Those two things will make a change. Simply pointing at the poor tories record and asking for the case fir the union are not enough.

[JeMeSouviens]

That's not the issue. I just think the 'we'll simply wait for the annoying no-voting oldies to die off' line is crass and disrespectful. Their votes are no less meaningful than anyone else's and for a good many will be underpinned by a wisdom not necessarily shared by a number of bandwagon-jumping younger voters.

Nice evening up of the crass disrespect there, HH. :wink:

[Ozyhibby]

I have always thought the demographics strategy was kind of last gasp hoping if all else fails

When I was younger I used to enjoy SNP victories and could easily have voted yes. As I grew older though my views have changed. There is no guarantee that todays youth retain the same views in ten years time.

I still think two key things missing are the effective use of devolution and putting forward a solid economic case fir independence. Those two things will make a change. Simply pointing at the poor tories record and asking for the case fir the union are not enough.

It’s not a strategy? Where is it said it’s a strategy?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220822/f99075b6a141aeaa49613516294a6ae9.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Just Alf]

I have always thought the demographics strategy was kind of last gasp hoping if all else fails

When I was younger I used to enjoy SNP victories and could easily have voted yes. As I grew older though my views have changed. There is no guarantee that todays youth retain the same views in ten years time.

I still think two key things missing are the effective use of devolution and putting forward a solid economic case fir independence. Those two things will make a change. Simply pointing at the poor tories record and asking for the case fir the union are not enough.Ironically, re your 2nd paragraph... I've gone the opposite.

I guess we cancel each other out! :greengrin

[Skol]

Ironically, re your 2nd paragraph... I've gone the opposite.

I guess we cancel each other out! :greengrin

Yep that’s my point. Peoples views do change and to say demographics makes independence inevitable is just wishful thinking.

The other irony is ozy is right. There is no strategy

[Ozyhibby]

Yep that’s my point. Peoples views do change and to say demographics makes independence inevitable is just wishful thinking.

The other irony is ozy is right. There is no strategy

My point originally was that we have moved from 45/55 to 50/50.
That’s could be down to the yes side persuading more people to join them than No are managing or it could be down to the demographic change over the last 8 years. It could be a combination of the two.
Either way, it’s not good for unionists. The move in the long term appears to be towards Yes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

Yep that’s my point. Peoples views do change and to say demographics makes independence inevitable is just wishful thinking.

The other irony is ozy is right. There is no strategy

The strategy is drag it out as long as possible for the time being so Nicola Sturgeon and her husband can get their exit. The Supreme Court thing will fail and there will be no vote in October 2023 and then it's vote SNP for IndyRef2 at the next election which is the same thing that is said before every single election.

If the SNP/Greens/Alba get 51% at the general election then guess what is still required.....a referendum.

While polls continue they way they are then it's just groundhog Day. Vote SNP at the next Scottish Elections to deliver a mandate for IndyRef2 in 2027 or something like that.

[Since90+2]

My point originally was that we have moved from 45/55 to 50/50.
That’s could be down to the yes side persuading more people to join them than No are managing or it could be down to the demographic change over the last 8 years. It could be a combination of the two.
Either way, it’s not good for unionists. The move in the long term appears to be towards Yes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's down to Brexit and, less so, Boris Johnson.

[Ozyhibby]

The strategy is drag it out as long as possible for the time being so Nicola Sturgeon and her husband can get their exit. The Supreme Court thing will fail and there will be no vote in October 2023 and then it's vote SNP for IndyRef2 at the next election which is the same thing that is said before every single election.

If the SNP/Greens/Alba get 51% at the general election then guess what is still required.....a referendum.

While polls continue they way they are then it's just groundhog Day. Vote SNP at the next Scottish Elections to deliver a mandate for IndyRef2 in 2027 or something like that.

Make your mind up James. Usually you are claiming NS is obsessed with independence, now it’s all about her exit from politics. [emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

My point originally was that we have moved from 45/55 to 50/50.
That’s could be down to the yes side persuading more people to join them than No are managing or it could be down to the demographic change over the last 8 years. It could be a combination of the two.
Either way, it’s not good for unionists. The move in the long term appears to be towards Yes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think 50/50 is wishful thinking. The latest poll results for Yes with don't knows removed is:

46%
48%
39%
44%
45%
38%

Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_on_Scottish_independence#:~:text=P olls%20in%20the%20run%2Dup,an%20overall%20turnout% 20of%2084.6%25.

That's the polls after the 2022 Scottish local elections.

[James310]

Make your mind up James. Usually you are claiming NS is obsessed with independence, now it’s all about her exit from politics. [emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

She is obsessed but also I think knows her time is coming to an end, she has achieved not very much in her time as FM so wants to leave with her claiming she has done all she can in respect to Indy.

Not the patient approach you seem to be advocating with demographics. The opposite infact.

[JimBHibees]

Just imagine what the polls would be with a relatively balanced media.

[Ozyhibby]

I think 50/50 is wishful thinking. The latest poll results for Yes with don't knows removed is:

46%
48%
39%
44%
45%
38%

Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_on_Scottish_independence#:~:text=P olls%20in%20the%20run%2Dup,an%20overall%20turnout% 20of%2084.6%25.

That's the polls after the 2022 Scottish elections.

Less than 24 hours ago you posted a result with yes higher than what you posted there.[emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

She is obsessed but also I think knows her time is coming to an end, she has achieved not very much in her time as FM so wants to leave with her claiming she has done all she can in respect to Indy.

Not the patient approach you seem to be advocating with demographics. The opposite infact.

So she is no longer obsessed?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[James310]

Less than 24 hours ago you posted a result with yes higher than what you posted there.[emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Why the laughing emojis all the time, that poll was with don't knows. The above was without.

Your claim of 50/50 is baseless.

[Skol]

Just imagine what the polls would be with a competent Scottish government and a compelling case for independence.

The fact that with Brexit and the worst Tory government ever and by some distance has shown so little movement suggests to me there is no call for change

Neither side is confident enough for a win but also neither can contemplate failure

[Ozyhibby]

I think 50/50 is wishful thinking. The latest poll results for Yes with don't knows removed is:

46%
48%
39%
44%
45%
38%

Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_on_Scottish_independence#:~:text=P olls%20in%20the%20run%2Dup,an%20overall%20turnout% 20of%2084.6%25.

That's the polls after the 2022 Scottish local elections.

Just checked your own source and it doesn’t even say what you said it does. [emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DaveF]

Just imagine what the polls would be with a competent Scottish government and a compelling case for independence.

The fact that with Brexit and the worst Tory government ever and by some distance has shown so little movement suggests to me there is no call for change

Neither side is confident enough for a win but also neither can contemplate failure

Surely the case will be made as and when a referendum is granted. If it happened now, you would probably be on here complaining about the SG wasting time and energy on Independence rather than govt.

[Keith_M]

So what's the biggest complaint of today?


Sturgeon not really delivering on Independence Referendum, it's all a sham!

OR

Sturgeon needs to concentrate on the day job!

[He's here!]

Very well, but that's not what he was saying. He was saying that independence is inevitable, it's coming, because the younger voters want it. It wasn't a knock against the oldies, just highlighting the inevitability of Scottish independence.

He said older voters are dying off and he's happy to be patient ie once they've finally shuffled off we can head for the promised land.

Does that really even hold true? Older voters have been passing away every year since 2014 and the sea change stubbornly refuses to happen.

[He's here!]

Nice evening up of the crass disrespect there, HH. :wink:

You know, as I typed that I thought I bet somebody like JMS will pick up on it ;-)

[Mon Dieu4]

Yep that’s my point. Peoples views do change and to say demographics makes independence inevitable is just wishful thinking.

The other irony is ozy is right. There is no strategy

Historically people gained more wealth as they got older and became more conservative, the world has changed now, people in their 20s and 30s with a normal job have pretty much zero chance of getting on the housing ladder and all their pensions will be *****, changed days now imo, only have to look at the fact every age group is for independence apart from the over 54s

[degenerated]

Why the laughing emojis all the time, that poll was with don't knows. The above was without.

Your claim of 50/50 is baseless.You're all over the place here. Different people working the account?

[DaveF]

Historically people gained more wealth as they got older and became more conservative, the world has changed now, people in their 20s and 30s with a normal job have pretty much zero chance of getting on the housing ladder and all their pensions will be *****, changed days now imo, only have to look at the fact every age group is for independence apart from the over 54s

Won't be too long before I'm in that group to help bump up the yes numbers.

[Just Alf]

The strategy is drag it out as long as possible for the time being so Nicola Sturgeon and her husband can get their exit. The Supreme Court thing will fail and there will be no vote in October 2023 and then it's vote SNP for IndyRef2 at the next election which is the same thing that is said before every single election.

If the SNP/Greens/Alba get 51% at the general election then guess what is still required.....a referendum.

While polls continue they way they are then it's just groundhog Day. Vote SNP at the next Scottish Elections to deliver a mandate for IndyRef2 in 2027 or something like that.To be clear, the intention is that if Westminster don't allow the Scottish Government to carry out a referendum then the next Scottish election isn't to yet again have another mandate for Ref 2 but it's a defacto indy vote. A yes majority = Scotland's voted for independence it's then up to Westminster to argue against democracy.

[James310]

You're all over the place here. Different people working the account?

In what way? I still don't see where I was wrong. Did I get a number wrong?

[James310]

To be clear, the intention is that if Westminster don't allow the Scottish Government to carry out a referendum then the next Scottish election isn't to yet again have another mandate for Ref 2 but it's a defacto indy vote. A yes majority = Scotland's voted for independence it's then up to Westminster to argue against democracy.

So the SNP get 51%, a referendum is still needed?

[He's here!]

To be clear, the intention is that if Westminster don't allow the Scottish Government to carry out a referendum then the next Scottish election isn't to yet again have another mandate for Ref 2 but it's a defacto indy vote. A yes majority = Scotland's voted for independence it's then up to Westminster to argue against democracy.

I thought it was the next UK election they are planning to (somehow) claim as a de facto referendum?

[Moulin Yarns]

In what way? I still don't see where I was wrong. Did I get a number wrong?

You claimed that the the figures you quoted in polls were taking the don't knows out but the link you quoted include the don't knows. That's why people are laughing at you and saying that you are all over the place.

[Just Alf]

I thought it was the next UK election they are planning to (somehow) claim as a de facto referendum?Indeed, I think you're right....

[James310]

You claimed that the the figures you quoted in polls were taking the don't knows out but the link you quoted include the don't knows. That's why people are laughing at you and saying that you are all over the place.

The numbers I gave did not include don't knows. For example the first number I gave was 46%, if you look at the source it was 46% for Yes and 48% for No. This might be challenge for you but 46 + 48 is not a hundred, the source also shows don't knows at 6%. 46+48+6 equals 100.

I forgot this for good measure. 🤣👍. Enough of your negative energy for tonight though.

[Ozyhibby]

The numbers I gave did not include don't knows. For example the first number I gave was 46%, if you look at the source it was 46% for Yes and 48% for No. This might be challenge for you but 46 + 48 is not a hundred, the source also shows don't knows at 6%. 46+48+6 equals 100.

I forgot this for good measure. [emoji1787][emoji106]. Enough of your negative energy for tonight though.

I don’t know where to start.[emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CapitalGreen]

The numbers I gave did not include don't knows. For example the first number I gave was 46%, if you look at the source it was 46% for Yes and 48% for No. This might be challenge for you but 46 + 48 is not a hundred, the source also shows don't knows at 6%. 46+48+6 equals 100.

I forgot this for good measure. 🤣👍. Enough of your negative energy for tonight though.

He’s right though, you haven’t excluded undecideds, all you have done is not quote the undecided figure.

A 46/48 split with 6% undecided would be a 49/51 split if undecideds were properly excluded.

46/100 + 48/100 + 6/100 = 46% + 48% + 6% = 100%

excluding undecideds becomes

46/94 + 48/94 = 49% + 51% = 100%

[Kato]

Polls schmolls.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[lapsedhibee]

The numbers I gave did not include don't knows. For example the first number I gave was 46%, if you look at the source it was 46% for Yes and 48% for No. This might be challenge for you but 46 + 48 is not a hundred, the source also shows don't knows at 6%. 46+48+6 equals 100.

I forgot this for good measure. 🤣👍. Enough of your negative energy for tonight though.

You're claiming here that 48 + 6 = 54. If the No side can't get to 55 even by including all the don't knows and even with the state of Edinburgh's bins which is entirely Sturgeon's fault personally, how is it ever going to get to 60 which you claim would be necessary for an effective result? :dunno:

[Stairway 2 7]

All the polls this year
26143

[CapitalGreen]

All the polls this year
26143

Those polls with undecided excluded would be:

49Y 51N
51Y 49N
46Y 54N
49Y 51N
49Y 51N
48Y 52N
49Y 51N
47Y 53N
47Y 53N
46Y 54N
49Y 51N
54Y 46N
50Y 50N

Average of the above polls: 49Y 51N

*I didn’t included the YouGov polls on 31/03 or 23/05 as the figures listed don’t sum to 100%.

[Moulin Yarns]

The numbers I gave did not include don't knows. For example the first number I gave was 46%, if you look at the source it was 46% for Yes and 48% for No. This might be challenge for you but 46 + 48 is not a hundred, the source also shows don't knows at 6%. 46+48+6 equals 100.

I forgot this for good measure. 🤣👍. Enough of your negative energy for tonight though.

When polls excluded the don't knows they invariably add up to 100% you can spin it any way you want but you are 100% wrong, although I'll accept 60% if you prefer.

[CapitalGreen]

When polls excluded the don't knows they invariably add up to 100% you can spin it any way you want but you are 100% wrong, although I'll accept 60% if you prefer.

Correct.

For example, say you have 100 people (46 for YES, 48 for NO, 6 DONT KNOW) and you remove the 6 DONT KNOWs you are left with 94 people. Therefore when calculating the figures excluding DONT KNOWs, the denominator in the equation is 94 not 100 which results in:

46 people out of 94 for YES = 49%
48 people out of 94 for NO = 51%

[Stairway 2 7]

Those polls with undecided excluded would be:

49Y 51N
51Y 49N
46Y 54N
49Y 51N
49Y 51N
48Y 52N
49Y 51N
47Y 53N
47Y 53N
46Y 54N
49Y 51N
54Y 46N
50Y 50N

Average of the above polls: 49Y 51N

*I didn’t included the YouGov polls on 31/03 or 23/05 as the figures listed don’t sum to 100%.

Weird the you gov polls don't add up. Both quite weighed towards no. But generally it's clear a slight lead for no, but very slim and closer than pre referendum 1.

[lapsedhibee]

46 people out of 94 for YES = 49%
48 people out of 94 for NO = 51%

Think it's a bit misleading to describe this presentation, as pollsters do, as 'excluding the don't knows' because both the 49% and the 51% figures do actually include people who've said they don't know how they're going to vote. I think that might have been what James310 was getting at and, if so, with more than a little amazement I am finding myself in agreement with him. :shocked:

[CapitalGreen]

Weird the you gov polls don't add up. Both quite weighed towards no. But generally it's clear a slight lead for no, but very slim and closer than pre referendum 1.

It also suggests that a 50/50 split isn’t “wishful thinking” as suggested by another poster, especially when you take into account margins for error and look at the trend towards parity.

[CapitalGreen]

Think it's a bit misleading to describe this presentation, as pollsters do, as 'excluding the don't knows' because both the 49% and the 51% figures does actually include people who've said they don't know how they're going to vote. I think that might have been what James310 was getting at and, if so, with more than a little amazement I am finding myself in agreement with him. :shocked:

How so?

[Stairway 2 7]

It also suggests that a 50/50 split isn’t “wishful thinking” as suggested by another poster, especially when you take into account margins for error and look at the trend towards parity.

The trend on yougov is drifting away. At similar levels now to August 14
26144
26146

[lapsedhibee]

How so?

To present the voting intentions as being 51% - 49% (on the basis of a 48-46-6 split) includes imo an implication that those people who said 'Don't Know' will end up voting Yes or No in the same proportion as those who expressed a firm intention to vote Yes or No. I wonder, but don't know, whether this is a reliable assumption. I personally would prefer to see these polls presented with numbers for all those three groups rather than the three groups being so artificially compressed into two.

[lapsedhibee]

The trend on yougov is drifting away. At similar levels now to August 14


Not to worry. By September 14 people will have been exposed to a full week of PM Truss, which should be more than enough to shift the dial.

[CapitalGreen]

To present the voting intentions as being 51% - 49% (on the basis of a 48-46-6 split) includes imo an implication that those people who said 'Don't Know' will end up voting Yes or No in the same proportion as those who expressed a firm intention to vote Yes or No. I wonder, but don't know, whether this is a reliable assumption. I personally would prefer to see these polls presented with numbers for all those three groups rather than the three groups being so artificially compressed into two.

I agree but what the poster did previously was provide only the Yes figures and didn’t quote the don’t knows. They did so as a means of arguing that Yes was further away from 50%- it doesn’t make any statistical sense to present the Yes figures in that context unless they believe all don’t knows would fall to No.

[CapitalGreen]

The trend on yougov is drifting away. At similar levels now to August 14
26144
26146

I think the Wikipedia data is from a number of different pollsters.

[grunt]

I'm probably suffering from early onset paranoia but I have serious doubts about the validity of some of these polls.

[Stairway 2 7]

I think the Wikipedia data is from a number of different pollsters.

Yes it is, this is just sticking with yougov for a time steady comparison

[lapsedhibee]

I agree but what the poster did previously was provide only the Yes figures and didn’t quote the don’t knows. They did so as a means of arguing that Yes was further away from 50%- it doesn’t make any statistical sense to present the Yes figures in that context unless they believe all don’t knows would fall to No.

Yes, you're quite right. :aok:

[Stairway 2 7]

I'm probably suffering from early onset paranoia but I have serious doubts about the validity of some of these polls.

Not sure. You gov had yes on 47% on September 2014, not far off. It seems they say its drifting away a bit. I'm sure an official campaign will bump up the yes numbers though

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2022/06/14/where-do-scots-stand-independence-2022

[JeMeSouviens]

I'm probably suffering from early onset paranoia but I have serious doubts about the validity of some of these polls.

It's a tricky thing to pull off getting a properly representative sample of 1000 people. And even if you manage that there's still a +/-3% sampling error with a normal sized poll. There's a lot of fiddling goes on but in general I think the polling companies would far rather be accurate, thus making them more likely to get more business, than push results in a particular direction.

Over recent months, Yougov's methodology is pretty No-friendly, Ipsos-MORI tends to favour Yes and the others are somewhere in between.

[JeMeSouviens]

To present the voting intentions as being 51% - 49% (on the basis of a 48-46-6 split) includes imo an implication that those people who said 'Don't Know' will end up voting Yes or No in the same proportion as those who expressed a firm intention to vote Yes or No. I wonder, but don't know, whether this is a reliable assumption. I personally would prefer to see these polls presented with numbers for all those three groups rather than the three groups being so artificially compressed into two.

As you get close to a vote, it does become quite a reliable assumption that DKs who vote will split along the same lines as the decided.

But in other ways, the public are a notoriously unreliable bunch. Most pollsters downweight the young, for example, because they say they'll vote but lots don't bother. False recall is a big problem too. Pollsters try and weight their sample by how people report they voted in previous votes. So you'd like to have 45% 2014 Yes voters and 62% 2016 Remainers in your sample, for example. But you add the numbers who said they voted up and you always get to way more than the actual turnout, plus people might now be embarrassed to say they voted Leave etc.

[lapsedhibee]

Not sure. You gov had yes on 47% on September 2014, not far off. It seems they say its drifting away a bit. I'm sure an official campaign will bump up the yes numbers though


Depends what the Russian bots do. They were out in force in 2014 bumping up the Yes numbers to help destabilise and weaken the UK, but since they achieved all that in 2016 they might decide to sit this one out, put their feet up and have a cigar.

[Stairway 2 7]

@marcuscarslaw1
Interesting snippet from the latest
@Panelbase
poll.

35% of Scottish Labour voters would vote yes in a future independence referendum.

How these voters respond to a potential “defacto referendum” will be pivotal for a successful independence majority. https://drg.global/wp-content/uploads/ST-Tables-for-publication-220822.pdf

[Ozyhibby]

https://twitter.com/georgeperetzqc/status/1562034157471031298?s=21&t=dLdJUc8xM_w1NEw6EnrKIQ

Interesting thread on Scotland’s declining influence in UK govt.
Scottish cabinet members and ministers are becoming increasingly rare. A Scottish PM looking very unlikely. UK govt looks a very English affair.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

https://twitter.com/georgeperetzqc/status/1562034157471031298?s=21&t=dLdJUc8xM_w1NEw6EnrKIQ

Interesting thread on Scotland’s declining influence in UK govt.
Scottish cabinet members and ministers are becoming increasingly rare. A Scottish PM looking very unlikely. UK govt looks a very English affair.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Explains why well. Due to most of our mps being from a party that wants away from Westminster. Fptp needs gone from Westminster but will never happen with either of the two chancers in charge

[JeMeSouviens]

@marcuscarslaw1
Interesting snippet from the latest
@Panelbase
poll.

35% of Scottish Labour voters would vote yes in a future independence referendum.

How these voters respond to a potential “defacto referendum” will be pivotal for a successful independence majority. https://drg.global/wp-content/uploads/ST-Tables-for-publication-220822.pdf

Also:

How pleased or upset would you be if ...Scotland left the UK and became an independent country?

Very pleased 38
Mildly pleased 9
Not bothered 7
Mildly upset 8
Very upset 34
DK 4

Which is pleased 47 vs upset 42. If you look at the underlying numbers to that, 527 said they'd be very or mildly pleased yet only 461 said they'd actually vote Yes. :confused:

People eh? bunch of bams. :rolleyes:

[Smartie]

Also:

How pleased or upset would you be if ...Scotland left the UK and became an independent country?

Very pleased 38
Mildly pleased 9
Not bothered 7
Mildly upset 8
Very upset 34
DK 4

Which is pleased 47 vs upset 42. If you look at the underlying numbers to that, 527 said they'd be very or mildly pleased yet only 461 said they'd actually vote Yes. :confused:

People eh? bunch of bams. :rolleyes:

Does it not say more about the significance of words and the way questions are phrased rather than anything about people?

[Ozyhibby]

Exciting day tomorrow for unionists when they celebrate how much poorer they have made us and tell us that we can’t now afford independence. Got to love GERS day. Woohoo.[emoji122][emoji106][emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Berwickhibby]

Exciting day tomorrow for unionists when they celebrate how much poorer they have made us and tell us that we can’t now afford independence. Got to love GERS day. Woohoo.[emoji122][emoji106][emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Used to be SNP’s day!! GERS figures were used to show how well they were running the country…until they weren’t

[hibsbollah]

Does it not say more about the significance of words and the way questions are phrased rather than anything about people?

:agree:
There needs to be a ‘dis-chuffed’,’ ‘phlegmatic’ and ‘pure ragin’’ options.

[Ozyhibby]

Used to be SNP’s day!! GERS figures were used to show how well they were running the country…until they weren’t

Maybe it still is? Maybe us constantly getting poorer in the union isn’t something unionists should be cheering so loudly?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://twitter.com/johnswinney/status/1562356554715635714?s=21&t=3XISif9FAdcdLNZ2iJ15cA

Early GERS takes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

Maybe it still is? Maybe us constantly getting poorer in the union isn’t something unionists should be cheering so loudly?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Is it getting richer in the union then after swinneys comments?

[Ozyhibby]

Is it getting richer in the union then after swinneys comments?

No, I think our deficit might be reducing due to higher oil and gas revenues but we are not getting richer because of it.
Does anyone feel any richer?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

No, I think our deficit might be reducing due to higher oil and gas revenues but we are not getting richer because of it.
Does anyone feel any richer?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We wouldn't be feeling richer if independent this year either to be fair, inflation would still be brutal

[Ozyhibby]

We wouldn't be feeling richer if independent this year either to be fair, inflation would still be brutal

Very true. There will be no quick fixes with Indy for anything. Just a slow March towards changing things to suit our own needs and preferences.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Stairway 2 7]

Very true. There will be no quick fixes with Indy for anything. Just a slow March towards changing things to suit our own needs and preferences.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think people need to be truthfully that it will probably be worse for 3 or 4 years before I believe we will leave them for dust.

If we don't the media will be highlighting every problem or financial difficulty and will be pushing for rejoining

[Ozyhibby]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220824/867e271899ee156dd803ab74c28bf4a7.jpg
We’ll done Scotland. Living on the highest handouts ever. So proud.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[degenerated]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220824/867e271899ee156dd803ab74c28bf4a7.jpg
We’ll done Scotland. Living on the highest handouts ever. So proud.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkWhat sort of person would revel in the portrayal of their own country as a mendicant nation. https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220824/9818b572a135b1d8aafcaf7a0e744ac2.jpg

[lapsedhibee]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220824/9818b572a135b1d8aafcaf7a0e744ac2.jpg

What sort of person would revel in the portrayal of their own country as a mendicant nation.
:top marks

[archie]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220824/867e271899ee156dd803ab74c28bf4a7.jpg
We’ll done Scotland. Living on the highest handouts ever. So proud.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That doesn't make any sense. Are you saying that an independent Scotland wouldn't distribute funds from richer to poorer areas? Also, issues such as rurality, population density etc. mean that this redistributive effect should be seen as economic and social justice.

[Ozyhibby]

That doesn't make any sense. Are you saying that an independent Scotland wouldn't distribute funds from richer to poorer areas? Also, issues such as rurality, population density etc. mean that this redistributive effect should be seen as economic and social justice.

This would not be needed at all if we had the power to make decisions for ourselves. Maybe then we could be as rich as Ireland or Denmark. Stay as we are and we’ll always be living on handouts and be poorer for it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lapsedhibee]

That doesn't make any sense. Are you saying that an independent Scotland wouldn't distribute funds from richer to poorer areas? Also, issues such as rurality, population density etc. mean that this redistributive effect should be seen as economic and social justice.

Levelling up all parts of the UK was part of the Tory manifesto in 2019. Now Ross is revelling in the unlevelness. A bit of a disconnect.

[archie]

This would not be needed at all if we had the power to make decisions for ourselves. Maybe then we could be as rich as Ireland or Denmark. Stay as we are and we’ll always be living on handouts and be poorer for it.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkBad news for the highlands and islands then.

[Ozyhibby]

Bad news for the highlands and islands then.

Lucky Ireland has no rural areas then.[emoji849]
The Highlands and Islands will certainly be missing some of those EU grants they used to get. Not as much as Ireland gets but then they had nobody in Brussels going into bat for them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[archie]

Lucky Ireland has no rural areas then.[emoji849]
The Highlands and Islands will certainly be missing some of those EU grants they used to get. Not as much as Ireland gets but then they had nobody in Brussels going into bat for them.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkThe whole point of the EU structural funds was to direct funding to areas that needed them. That's exactly why the fiscal transfer is a good thing. UK fiscal transfer redistributes funds from areas such as the south east to areas across the UK that need it. It's an incredibly Thatcherite view to argue that poorer areas should not have the benefit of redistribution from richer areas.

[Ozyhibby]

The whole point of the EU structural funds was to direct funding to areas that needed them. That's exactly why the fiscal transfer is a good thing. UK fiscal transfer redistributes funds from areas such as the south east to areas across the UK that need it. It's an incredibly Thatcherite view to argue that poorer areas should not have the benefit of redistribution from richer areas.

That’s not what I’m arguing. I’m saying there is no need for us to be poor in Scotland other than the Tories think it helps keep us in the union.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[weecounty hibby]

The whole point of the EU structural funds was to direct funding to areas that needed them. That's exactly why the fiscal transfer is a good thing. UK fiscal transfer redistributes funds from areas such as the south east to areas across the UK that need it. It's an incredibly Thatcherite view to argue that poorer areas should not have the benefit of redistribution from richer areas.
Can you point us to figures that show that redistribution is working. The only ones I’ve seen seem to show that areas in London have been favoured for levelling up more than anywhere else. Also the numbers being given by Westminster are way less than the EU funds

[archie]

That’s not what I’m arguing. I’m saying there is no need for us to be poor in Scotland other than the Tories think it helps keep us in the union.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkSo what are you arguing? On one hand you are praising the redistribution of funds across the EU while criticising the redistribution of funds across the UK as some sort of moral failing. No matter how rich a country is there needs to be a redistribution of funds from richer to poorer areas. Scotland should get this redistribution. It's bigger, more rural, and services cost more, especially in the highlands and islands. It is social and economic justice. Why would you oppose this?

[archie]

Can you point us to figures that show that redistribution is working. The only ones I’ve seen seem to show that areas in London have been favoured for levelling up more than anywhere else. Also the numbers being given by Westminster are way less than the EU fundsWhat do you mean by working? There are figures that show spending over tax take. Is that what you are getting at?

[weecounty hibby]

What do you mean by working? There are figures that show spending over tax take. Is that what you are getting at?

No, I believe this started about redistribution of wealth from better off area to poorer areas. What I have seen is that more money has been poured into areas of London than anywhere else. I do not disagree with redistribution at all but if you think that Tories will not screw folk over while helping their mates then you’ve not been paying attention

[Ozyhibby]

So what are you arguing? On one hand you are praising the redistribution of funds across the EU while criticising the redistribution of funds across the UK as some sort of moral failing. No matter how rich a country is there needs to be a redistribution of funds from richer to poorer areas. Scotland should get this redistribution. It's bigger, more rural, and services cost more, especially in the highlands and islands. It is social and economic justice. Why would you oppose this?

Denmark has a GDP per capita of about $60,000 compared to Scotland at about $37,000 per capita. If we could even get half way to matching Denmarks income we wouldn’t have a deficit at all.
And I bet the difference between Scotland and Denmark was a lot less than it is now in 2014. This is a worsening situation.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[archie]

Denmark has a GDP per capita of about $60,000 compared to Scotland at about $37,000 per capita. If we could even get half way to matching Denmarks income we wouldn’t have a deficit at all.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkExcept GDP is a notoriously tricky way of measuring wealth of a country. This Irish Times article looks at this for the Irish context https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/we-re-not-as-rich-as-we-have-been-told-to-think-we-are-1.4476247

[archie]

No, I believe this started about redistribution of wealth from better off area to poorer areas. What I have seen is that more money has been poured into areas of London than anywhere else. I do not disagree with redistribution at all but if you think that Tories will not screw folk over while helping their mates then you’ve not been paying attentionOK so that's a wider political issue. I was pushing back against the notion that redistribution of funds across a country was a bad thing. In my view it's not only a good thing but essential for a just society. I hate us being portrayed as beggars because spending is higher. That comes across to me as really Thatcherite.

[Ozyhibby]

Except GDP is a notoriously tricky way of measuring wealth of a country. This Irish Times article looks at this for the Irish context https://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/we-re-not-as-rich-as-we-have-been-told-to-think-we-are-1.4476247

I used Denmark, not Ireland as a comparator.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[archie]

I used Denmark, not Ireland as a comparator.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkYou did, though you previously mentioned how rich Ireland was. The point was about GDP as an indicator is not, in itself, reflective of the real economy. This article goes into the issue https://www.worldfinance.com/strategy/why-gdp-is-no-longer-the-most-effective-measure-of-economic-success

[ronaldo7]

The UK is holding us back.

https://thebottomline.scot/uks-failure-to-recover-from-the-financial-crisis/

The UK has been one of the poorest performing economies since the financial crisis. The economic shock of the financial crisis was greater than most other advanced economies and the UK took longer to recover and even before Covid-19 was considerably smaller than it would have been had it matched the recovery achieved by others.

The GDP and Tax Gap from Slow Recovery

Translating the UK underperformance to the Scottish economy, matching the 2007 to 2019 growth performance of the SAEs, would have added an additional £13 billion to the Scottish economy. In 2019 Scottish GDP (excluding North Sea oil and gas) would have been £181 billion instead of £168 billion[1]. In GDP per capita terms, this translates to £2,400.

This also matters for public services. Given that taxes raised in Scotland in 2019-20 were equivalent to 38.7% of GDP, the additional GDP would also have generated additional taxes, an additional £5 billion, increasing the tax revenues from £65 billion to £70 billion. This is very significant in the context of Scotland’s reported Current Budget Deficit of £11.9 billion in that year, demonstrating that the way to improve Scotland’s public finances is to boost economic growth, as the other SAEs have done.

[ronaldo7]

Happy Gers day. :greengrin

https://twitter.com/ScotNational/status/1562387015168958464

[degenerated]

Happy Gers day. :greengrin

https://twitter.com/ScotNational/status/1562387015168958464That's some really good insight from Richard Murphy

[archie]

That's some really good insight from Richard Murphy Detailed analysis https://fraserofallander.org/gers-2022-the-main-headlines-and-what-does-it-really-tell-us/

[degenerated]

Detailed analysis https://fraserofallander.org/gers-2022-the-main-headlines-and-what-does-it-really-tell-us/Detailed analysis of badly flawed data

[He's here!]

So what are you arguing? On one hand you are praising the redistribution of funds across the EU while criticising the redistribution of funds across the UK as some sort of moral failing. No matter how rich a country is there needs to be a redistribution of funds from richer to poorer areas. Scotland should get this redistribution. It's bigger, more rural, and services cost more, especially in the highlands and islands. It is social and economic justice. Why would you oppose this?

Good post.

The reason nationalists oppose it is because nothing positive that emanates from Scotland being part of the union can ever be acknowledged as a good thing.

[degenerated]

Good post.

The reason nationalists oppose it is because nothing positive that emanates from Scotland being part of the union can ever be acknowledged as a good thing.The nationalists I see on here seem to celebrate it, funny that.

[Moulin Yarns]

Good post.

The reason nationalists oppose it is because nothing positive that emanates from Scotland being part of the union can ever be acknowledged as a good thing.

The problem with the UK redistribution, compared to the EU is that rishi Sunak is wanting more of it to go to Tunbridge Wells rather than Tranent. Also the amount of UK redistribution is a good bit lower than the EU one.

[archie]

Detailed analysis of badly flawed dataReally? Examples?

[degenerated]

Really? Examples?Walk us through the 9 billion adjustment.

[archie]

Walk us through the 9 billion adjustment.
Please do as I'm not sure what you are referring to!

[degenerated]

Please do!I'm waiting on you explaining it, you are the one presenting this garbage as fact.

[archie]

I'm waiting on you explaining it, you are the one presenting this garbage as fact.OK. The people presenting GERS as fact are the Scottish Government. You're asking me to explain something that I don't know what you are referring to. If you walk me through it I'll give it a go.

[degenerated]

OK. The people presenting GERS as fact are the Scottish Government. You're asking me to explain something that I don't know what you are referring to. If you walk me through it I'll give it a go.They only publish them, they are presented as fact by the office for national statistics based on figures provided by the treasury. Much of them are assumptions, estimates and guesswork and no indication as to what level of tax receipts on UK government spend on Scotland's behalf amongst many other deliberately grey areas

There is a 9.6bn adjustment made to Scottish government expenditure with very little in the way of explanation as to what it was.

[archie]

Walk us through the 9 billion adjustment.
Is it this?

Q: What are accounting adjustments and why do they feature in the GERS
estimates?
A: Accounting adjustments are used to present revenue and expenditure on a
National Accounts basis, an international reporting standard used by governments.
They normally reflect non-cash items, such as depreciation or pensions liabilities. In
general, these adjustments do not affect the net fiscal balance or current budget
balance, as they are added to both revenue and expenditure. In 2021-22, accounting
adjustments added £7.5 billion to the estimate of Scottish public sector revenue and
£9.6 billion to the estimate of Scottish public sector spending, with the difference
primarily being due to coronavirus expenditure included in the accounting
adjustments. For more information on accounting adjustments and where they
appear in the revenue tables, see Table A.9. (Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland 2021-22 p9)

[archie]

Is it this?

Q: What are accounting adjustments and why do they feature in the GERS
estimates?
A: Accounting adjustments are used to present revenue and expenditure on a
National Accounts basis, an international reporting standard used by governments.
They normally reflect non-cash items, such as depreciation or pensions liabilities. In
general, these adjustments do not affect the net fiscal balance or current budget
balance, as they are added to both revenue and expenditure. In 2021-22, accounting
adjustments added £7.5 billion to the estimate of Scottish public sector revenue and
£9.6 billion to the estimate of Scottish public sector spending, with the difference
primarily being due to coronavirus expenditure included in the accounting
adjustments. For more information on accounting adjustments and where they
appear in the revenue tables, see Table A.9. (Government Expenditure and Revenue Scotland 2021-22 p9)

This is the relevant table. It's not clear to me how this is 'garbage'. But open to views
Table A.8: Expenditure Accounting Adjustment: Scotland 1998-99 to 2021-22
Table A.8: Expenditure Accounting Adjustment: Scotland 1998-99 to 2021-22

2021-22
Scottish total managed expenditure (TME) 97,502
Scottish total expenditure on services (TES) 87,945
Scottish accounting adjustment 9,557
Percentage of UK accounting adjustment 8.9%
of which current expenditure:
Central government capital consumption 3,035
Local government capital consumption 1,697
Current VAT refunds 1,738
Imputed subsidy from Local Authorities to the Housing Revenue Account1 275
Imputed flows for Renewable Obligation Certificates 2 747
Local authority pensions 0
Network Rail 0
Nigerian debt 0
British Transport Police Service Agreements 12
Covid-19 Grants to Local Authorities 1,397
Current expenditure residual -796
of which capital expenditure:
Capital VAT refunds 225
Network Rail 0
Royal Mail pension plan 0
Housing Associations 0
Student loans 253
Capital expenditure residual 974
1, 2 See notes to Table A.7

[Ozyhibby]

https://youtu.be/PzqezAV3x_8

Emily Maitlis on what the UK is becoming.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cabbageandribs1875]

https://scontent.fman1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/300780498_3393269890948042_1741706897513206862_n.j pg?_nc_cat=108&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=2xxy87ITAm4AX9YdNKQ&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-1.fna&oh=00_AT9lyGjUssjDnLLY8ySND-9XsFJoRDc9kUACNON0oApWKA&oe=630BE064

[Jack]

https://scontent.fman1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/300780498_3393269890948042_1741706897513206862_n.j pg?_nc_cat=108&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=2xxy87ITAm4AX9YdNKQ&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-1.fna&oh=00_AT9lyGjUssjDnLLY8ySND-9XsFJoRDc9kUACNON0oApWKA&oe=630BE064

Good luck with finding an accountant who would sign the GERS figures off as being a true and fair reflection of the state of the nations finances.

Maybe it would be a good question for our resident accountant examiner to put to his students.

[Ozyhibby]

Good luck with finding an accountant who would sign the GERS figures off as being a true and fair reflection of the state of the nations finances.

Maybe it would be a good question for our resident accountant examiner to put to his students.

They are handy for showing how Scotland keeps getting poorer while part of the union.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[danhibees1875]

They are handy for showing how Scotland keeps getting poorer while part of the union.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Out of interest, how do you define poor/poorer here? Simply the notional deficit?

The trends show revenue per head in Scotland going up and up, we seem to bring in roughly our population share of revenue to the UK (c8%).

Money spent on Scotland also trends up. It's here where we benefit from the union (with expenditure at 9.2% of UK's total spending) and are able to spend more on public services than we would be able to do otherwise (safe from overhauling our economy in a way that hugely increases our revenue base, or simply taking on a lot more debt).

Scotland's GDP continues to raise, that's about as good a textbook definition of not getting poorer as I can think of, but happy to hear an alternative. Our spending on public services continues to raise accordingly, with the additional benefits of added money we spend on account of reaping the financial benefits of being in the union.

[Moulin Yarns]

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2022/08/24/nicola-sturgeons-borrowing-bill-lower-englands-first-time-decade/


Scotland will be borrowing less than the UK next year according to the telegraph due to rise in oil and gas revenues 🤔


Is this the same Scotland that is limited in the ability to borrow by the devolution agreement?

[archie]

https://scontent.fman1-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t39.30808-6/300780498_3393269890948042_1741706897513206862_n.j pg?_nc_cat=108&ccb=1-7&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=2xxy87ITAm4AX9YdNKQ&_nc_ht=scontent.fman1-1.fna&oh=00_AT9lyGjUssjDnLLY8ySND-9XsFJoRDc9kUACNON0oApWKA&oe=630BE064

Good, non-partisan explanation here addresses many of the misconceptions https://fraserofallander.org/gers-2022-the-main-headlines-and-what-does-it-really-tell-us/

[Ozyhibby]

Out of interest, how do you define poor/poorer here? Simply the notional deficit?

The trends show revenue per head in Scotland going up and up, we seem to bring in roughly our population share of revenue to the UK (c8%).

Money spent on Scotland also trends up. It's here where we benefit from the union (with expenditure at 9.2% of UK's total spending) and are able to spend more on public services than we would be able to do otherwise (safe from overhauling our economy in a way that hugely increases our revenue base, or simply taking on a lot more debt).

Scotland's GDP continues to raise, that's about as good a textbook definition of not getting poorer as I can think of, but happy to hear an alternative. Our spending on public services continues to raise accordingly, with the additional benefits of added money we spend on account of reaping the financial benefits of being in the union.

GDP is likely only going up due to the pounds massive devaluation which is fuelling massive inflation. The UK govt has been printing money for the last decade to mask its failures. Still, if you think we are getting richer then good for you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

Good, non-partisan explanation here addresses many of the misconceptions https://fraserofallander.org/gers-2022-the-main-headlines-and-what-does-it-really-tell-us/

I wonder why you consider it 'non-partisan'?

https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2019/08/24/the-fraser-of-allender-is-failing-scotland-very-badly-when-it-comes-to-gers/

[archie]

I wonder why you consider it 'non-partisan'?

https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2019/08/24/the-fraser-of-allender-is-failing-scotland-very-badly-when-it-comes-to-gers/ Because it's an academic research institute that is very widely respected. I don't think you can call Richard Murphy non-partisan.

[archie]

GDP is likely only going up due to the pounds massive devaluation which is fuelling massive inflation. The UK govt has been printing money for the last decade to mask its failures. Still, if you think we are getting richer then good for you.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkI don't know if you analysis is right, but you quote GDP as a measure extensively. What's different about this example?

[Ozyhibby]

I don't know if you analysis is right, but you quote GDP as a measure extensively. What's different about this example?

No, you’re right we are all getting richer. Don’t know what I was thinking.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[archie]

No, you’re right we are all getting richer. Don’t know what I was thinking.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkI'm sorry, I don't understand your reply. I've suggested that GDP does not accurately reflect the economic well being of a society. You use GDP a lot in your arguments, but critique it here. That seems inconsistent, so I am trying to understand your position.

[Ozyhibby]

I'm sorry, I don't understand your reply. I've suggested that GDP does not accurately reflect the economic well being of a society. You use GDP a lot in your arguments, but critique it here. That seems inconsistent, so I am trying to understand your position.

GDP tells you about the size of an economy but not much about how it functions. Your argument seemed to be saying that you thought Scotland was getting richer? I personally don’t see that at all. I see that the govt is trying it’s level best to keep things running at Holyrood but that has come at a big cost in certain areas. Every time they have to mitigate a Westminster policy something has to be cut from another area. Usually local govt. Within in the confines of their fixed budget there is not much else they can do. Look around and would you say things are better now than 10 years ago? When you drive about Edinburgh does it feel and look more prosperous than 10 years ago? Do you think that things are about to get better with Truss? The UK is on a path towards cutting back the state to the bare bones year after year. That will continue. Personally I would rather take a different path.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[archie]

GDP tells you about the size of an economy but not much about how it functions. Your argument seemed to be saying that you thought Scotland was getting richer? I personally don’t see that at all. I see that the govt is trying it’s level best to keep things running at Holyrood but that has come at a big cost in certain areas. Every time they have to mitigate a Westminster policy something has to be cut from another area. Usually local govt. Within in the confines of their fixed budget there is not much else they can do. Look around and would you say things are better now than 10 years ago? When you drive about Edinburgh does it feel and look more prosperous than 10 years ago? Do you think that things are about to get better with Truss? The UK is on a path towards cutting back the state to the bare bones year after year. That will continue. Personally I would rather take a different path.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkI think you're mixing me up with another poster. I was merely asking about your citing of GDP which appears inconsistent.

[danhibees1875]

GDP is likely only going up due to the pounds massive devaluation which is fuelling massive inflation. The UK govt has been printing money for the last decade to mask its failures. Still, if you think we are getting richer then good for you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I just wondered what it was within the gers figures that translates to how we're getting poorer since you'd said it a couple of times. :dunno:

[Jack]

Does anyone else wonder why the mercenary torys are desperate to hold Scotland in the union when we are such a drain on their economy?

If we'd been publicly owned they'd surely have got shot of us decades ago.

Once free from the sponging Jocks rUK would without doubt be wealthy beyond its wildest dreams.

£9 point what billion? Stick that on the side of a bus!!!

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/scottish-public-divided-whether-treating-next-general-election-as-referendum-would-establish-mandate

Answers to questions nobody is asking? Weird set of polling questions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[archie]

https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/scottish-public-divided-whether-treating-next-general-election-as-referendum-would-establish-mandate

Answers to questions nobody is asking? Weird set of polling questions.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkPolling questions tend to reflect the interests of who is paying.

[Ozyhibby]

Polling questions tend to reflect the interests of who is paying.

No idea who commissioned it? Scotsman running an article on it now.

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/scottish-independence-yes-campaigners-face-uphill-battle-to-convince-voters-of-economic-case-poll-suggests-3818868


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JeMeSouviens]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220824/867e271899ee156dd803ab74c28bf4a7.jpg
We’ll done Scotland. Living on the highest handouts ever. So proud.[emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Apart from the "aren't we great spongers" vibe, which I agree with you about, he shouldn't be allowed to get away with saying everyone is £x better off, which is plainly *****.

[JeMeSouviens]

Does anyone else wonder why the mercenary torys are desperate to hold Scotland in the union when we are such a drain on their economy?

If we'd been publicly owned they'd surely have got shot of us decades ago.

Once free from the sponging Jocks rUK would without doubt be wealthy beyond its wildest dreams.

£9 point what billion? Stick that on the side of a bus!!!

You don't need to wonder, every so often they tell us when talking among themselves.

eg. Theresa May


the reality is: England needs the rest of the UK as well.
The United Kingdom has a seat on the Security Council of the United Nations. I doubt that England would have a seat on the Security Council of the United Nations, we need to think about the impact of this (Brexit).
Global Britain has a role to play on the world stage but in order to do that the government needs to ensure that we maintain the integrity of the United Kingdom.


Lord* Frost


It would be a humiliation if the UK were to be broken up by the Nationalists




* **** knows why?

[He's here!]

They only publish them, they are presented as fact by the office for national statistics based on figures provided by the treasury. Much of them are assumptions, estimates and guesswork and no indication as to what level of tax receipts on UK government spend on Scotland's behalf amongst many other deliberately grey areas

There is a 9.6bn adjustment made to Scottish government expenditure with very little in the way of explanation as to what it was.

They're produced by Scottish govt statisticians:

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/nicola-sturgeon-s-desperate-spin-on-the-scottish-deficit?utm_medium=email&utm_source=CampaignMonitor_Editorial&utm_campaign=LNCH%20%2020220825%20%20House%20Ads%2 0%20HT+CID_60f375db47e74097e5715344601e1dde

[archie]

They're produced by Scottish govt statisticians:

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/nicola-sturgeon-s-desperate-spin-on-the-scottish-deficit?utm_medium=email&utm_source=CampaignMonitor_Editorial&utm_campaign=LNCH%20%2020220825%20%20House%20Ads%2 0%20HT+CID_60f375db47e74097e5715344601e1dde For those who like their commentary 'closer to home' https://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2022/08/25/north-sea-contortions/

[ronaldo7]

Feeling the love Scotland?

Anti Scottish sentiment is normalised in England, especially GB News.

https://twitter.com/PhantomPower14/status/1562783164816207872

[He's here!]

For those who like their commentary 'closer to home' https://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2022/08/25/north-sea-contortions/

Should be renamed John Spinney.

[Stairway 2 7]

https://mobile.twitter.com/kevverage/status/1562823479996473345

Snp msp says gers is poor data. Its pointed out its compiled by scot gov statisticians and released by the choice of scot gov. Its compiled at St Andrews House using methodology they chose.

[Kato]

Feeling the love Scotland?

Anti Scottish sentiment is normalised in England, especially GB News.

https://twitter.com/PhantomPower14/status/1562783164816207872Will she be included if there is another referendum and they decide to "love bomb" us again.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[ronaldo7]

Will she be included if there is another referendum and they decide to "love bomb" us again.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

They normally fill a train up from London, and get marched through Glasgow to the tune of the Imperial march. I'm sure she will tag along.

[He's here!]

With Blackford holding court on how much he loves Westminster life and that he counts unionists among his best pals and then Sturgeon coming out with this are we witnessing some sort of reverse love bomb strategy?

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nicola-sturgeon-some-would-call-me-a-traitor-for-feeling-british-626x3hl0l

[Kato]

With Blackford holding court on how much he loves Westminster life and that he counts unionists among his best pals and then Sturgeon coming out with this are we witnessing some sort of reverse love bomb strategy?

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nicola-sturgeon-some-would-call-me-a-traitor-for-feeling-british-626x3hl0lOr maybe he made pals with some people at work. Westminster has a rep for it.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

With Blackford holding court on how much he loves Westminster life and that he counts unionists among his best pals and then Sturgeon coming out with this are we witnessing some sort of reverse love bomb strategy?

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/nicola-sturgeon-some-would-call-me-a-traitor-for-feeling-british-626x3hl0l

I certainly hope so. You are not going to win over soft NO voters by attacking them. [emoji106]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Since90+2]

I just wondered what it was within the gers figures that translates to how we're getting poorer since you'd said it a couple of times. :dunno:

I see you've had no response to this. Pretty poor to completely ignore it, if the poster doesn't know, should just put their hands up and say it.

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/scottish-public-divided-whether-treating-next-general-election-as-referendum-would-establish-mandate

Answers to questions nobody is asking? Weird set of polling questions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This from the ipsos polling is very interesting. I would not have thought that support for a referendum without Westminster approval would be so high?
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220826/35fa288ab7317b2e3d8851ad6355a64e.jpg
Shows the real danger in unionist tactic of boycotting the vote. The Scottish public believe it’s legitimate and will expect the result to be honoured.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

I see you've had no response to this. Pretty poor to completely ignore it, if the poster doesn't know, should just put their hands up and say it.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220826/3a36912dec9d6f394bf859569c29ef14.jpg

Biggest subsidy ever. Scrounging Scots.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[archie]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220826/3a36912dec9d6f394bf859569c29ef14.jpg

Biggest subsidy ever. Scrounging Scots.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkBoy this place is getting really Thatcherite. There is nothing wrong with richer areas supporting poorer areas. In fact it is an essential part of social and economic justice. In an independent Scotland would you talk about scrounging Highlanders?

[archie]

https://youtu.be/PzqezAV3x_8

Emily Maitlis on what the UK is becoming.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Worth reading the full lecture. It's more nuanced, with much of the focus on populist politicians and how they attack the media
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/we-have-to-stop-normalising-the-absurd

[Ozyhibby]

Boy this place is getting really Thatcherite. There is nothing wrong with richer areas supporting poorer areas. In fact it is an essential part of social and economic justice. In an independent Scotland would you talk about scrounging Highlanders?

You might want all of Scotland to be subsidised but I’d prefer we stood on our own two feet. Then if we need to subsidise some parts of the country it’s no problem.
Each to their own I suppose but I just want more for ourselves. I don’t want to bring up my kids explaining that we need a subsidy from England to survive. Not when I know deep down we don’t need it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[archie]

You might want all of Scotland to be subsidised but I’d prefer we stood on our own two feet. Then if we need to subsidise some parts of the country it’s no problem.
Each to their own I suppose but I just want more for ourselves. I don’t want to bring up my kids explaining that we need a subsidy from England to survive. Not when I know deep down we don’t need it.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkWhy are you so opposed to economic redistribution? It happens across the UK. It's not England subsidising Scotland. It's a fiscal transfer from the south east of England to various parts of the UK. This 'stand on your own feet' stuff is really Thatcherite. I don't think you mean it to be, but that's how it's coming across. Is that your vision for an independent Scotland? If so, it's pretty chilling.

[Ozyhibby]

Why are you so opposed to economic redistribution? It happens across the UK. It's not England subsidising Scotland. It's a fiscal transfer from the south east of England to various parts of the UK. This 'stand on your own feet' stuff is really Thatcherite. I don't think you mean it to be, but that's how it's coming across. Is that your vision for an independent Scotland? If so, it's pretty chilling.

I don’t mean to make you feel chilled.[emoji849]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[danhibees1875]

Boy this place is getting really Thatcherite. There is nothing wrong with richer areas supporting poorer areas. In fact it is an essential part of social and economic justice. In an independent Scotland would you talk about scrounging Highlanders?

I'm not really sure how the opposition to redistributing wealth can suddenly change in an iScotland. There's always going to be areas that are fiscal "winners" unless the end goal is a zero government state with no taxation or social spending.

[danhibees1875]

I see you've had no response to this. Pretty poor to completely ignore it, if the poster doesn't know, should just put their hands up and say it.

I think I know the answer. One doesn't show the other.

GERS shows how we'd be poorer as an independent country, without any tangible metric to show whether we are rich or poor. The "we're getting poorer" mantra is a simple catchy soundbite - shown to work in the past, to be fair.

[archie]

I'm not really sure how the opposition to redistributing wealth can suddenly change in an iScotland. There's always going to be areas that are fiscal "winners" unless the end goal is a zero government state with no taxation or social spending.Not just that there will be fiscal winners. There should be!

[Jones28]

Why are you so opposed to economic redistribution? It happens across the UK. It's not England subsidising Scotland. It's a fiscal transfer from the south east of England to various parts of the UK. This 'stand on your own feet' stuff is really Thatcherite. I don't think you mean it to be, but that's how it's coming across. Is that your vision for an independent Scotland? If so, it's pretty chilling.

I think you’ll have a hard time convincing English people of that notion.

[JeMeSouviens]

Why are you so opposed to economic redistribution? It happens across the UK. It's not England subsidising Scotland. It's a fiscal transfer from the south east of England to various parts of the UK. This 'stand on your own feet' stuff is really Thatcherite. I don't think you mean it to be, but that's how it's coming across. Is that your vision for an independent Scotland? If so, it's pretty chilling.

It's not a "fiscal transfer" in the sense you mean it. The UK has no structure to distribute money from richer to poorer areas. Barnett is essentially just divvying up per head of population to the devolved areas. We only get a "union dividend" because our population size has declined relative to England's. If the UK was properly organised we would get an appropriate level of funding based on needs, as would the N of England and Wales, who get properly shafted under the current arrangements. Hence the need for "levelling up" - how's that working out? :rolleyes:

[JeMeSouviens]

Anyway, all the chat about GERS, "deficit"s and "dividend"s ignores the fundamental issues at play.

The UK is a very rich country that produces a nice big money cake (albeit declining and will continue to decline) that the rich largely share among themselves and have deeply embedded a system where that unfairness will continue or get worse.

Scotland could be a slightly less rich country (and with good longer term prospects for growth) with a more than big enough cake that, if distributed fairly, could provide for all its citizens.

[archie]

I think you’ll have a hard time convincing English people of that notion.But it happens in England now.

[archie]

It's not a "fiscal transfer" in the sense you mean it. The UK has no structure to distribute money from richer to poorer areas. Barnett is essentially just divvying up per head of population to the devolved areas. We only get a "union dividend" because our population size has declined relative to England's. If the UK was properly organised we would get an appropriate level of funding based on needs, as would the N of England and Wales, who get properly shafted under the current arrangements. Hence the need for "levelling up" - how's that working out? :rolleyes:I don't know about your assertion as to why, but the effect is that Scotland's spending per head is higher. That's a good thing, isn't it?

[archie]

Anyway, all the chat about GERS, "deficit"s and "dividend"s ignores the fundamental issues at play.

The UK is a very rich country that produces a nice big money cake (albeit declining and will continue to decline) that the rich largely share among themselves and have deeply embedded a system where that unfairness will continue or get worse.

Scotland could be a slightly less rich country (and with good longer term prospects for growth) with a more than big enough cake that, if distributed fairly, could provide for all its citizens.If and could be doing a lot of heavy lifting there. I think you are describing capitalism there. Will that be different in Scotland? Also, there are some independence supporters on here who argue for a low tax approach post independence. How does that square with your vision?

[CropleyWasGod]

If and could be doing a lot of heavy lifting there. I think you are describing capitalism there. Will that be different in Scotland? Also, there are some independence supporters on here who argue for a low tax approach post independence. How does that square with your vision?

That "vision" would be tested by debate and the electorate after independence,no?

[JeMeSouviens]

I don't know about your assertion as to why, but the effect is that Scotland's spending per head is higher. That's a good thing, isn't it?

It is if you're happy with screwing the rest of the folk you're supposed to be "better together" with, including those most in need. Pretty Thatcherite way of looking at it. :wink:

[archie]

That "vision" would be tested by debate and the electorate after independence,no?But that's the dilemma. If it will all be sorted out after independence then what are you voting for beyond a principle that more decisions are made in Holyrood? In that case all of the stuff about fairness, pensions, how rich we'll be is just irrelevant noise. We've seen different views here among independence supporters: go to a low tax economy on the Irish model vs high levels of redistribution. Are you really saying the only vision is a different constitutional settlement? Is that really compelling?

[Since90+2]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220826/3a36912dec9d6f394bf859569c29ef14.jpg

Biggest subsidy ever. Scrounging Scots.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In what way does that support your claim that Scotland is getting poorer?

[JeMeSouviens]

If and could be doing a lot of heavy lifting there. I think you are describing capitalism there. Will that be different in Scotland? Also, there are some independence supporters on here who argue for a low tax approach post independence. How does that square with your vision?

It's all up for grabs.

But we will start with right wing parties in a much weaker position and an electoral system whereby they have to convince roughly half of the electorate to support them rather than the 35-40% that'll do at Westminster. If nothing else, that would see a much more moderate version of right wingery than that which prevails under fptp.

We should also be able to cobble together something of a constitution with wacky ideas like checks and balances rather than one where the likes of Johnson do absolutely wtf they please.

[JeMeSouviens]

But that's the dilemma. If it will all be sorted out after independence then what are you voting for beyond a principle that more decisions are made in Holyrood? In that case all of the stuff about fairness, pensions, how rich we'll be is just irrelevant noise. We've seen different views here among independence supporters: go to a low tax economy on the Irish model vs high levels of redistribution. Are you really saying the only vision is a different constitutional settlement? Is that really compelling?

Yes, absolutely it is. UK politics and constitution is ****ed, getting worse and frankly unfixable.

[archie]

It is if you're happy with screwing the rest of the folk you're supposed to be "better together" with, including those most in need. Pretty Thatcherite way of looking at it. :wink:How is that screwing people? Redistribution of funds from richer to poorer areas is the very opposite of Thatcherite thinking. It's social and economic justice. Why would you oppose this? I think part of the issue with these neo-capitalist responses that I keep seeing here is that some here frame it as a transfer from England. It's not, it's from the south east of England, where much of the wealth is generated. So I don't see how it is screwing these most in need. Would you argue an independent Scotland wouldn't see similar transfers from Edinburgh to Glasgow and the Highlands and Islands?

[lapsedhibee]

But that's the dilemma. If it will all be sorted out after independence then what are you voting for beyond a principle that more decisions are made in Holyrood? In that case all of the stuff about fairness, pensions, how rich we'll be is just irrelevant noise. We've seen different views here among independence supporters: go to a low tax economy on the Irish model vs high levels of redistribution. Are you really saying the only vision is a different constitutional settlement? Is that really compelling?
Very.

[archie]

Very.
Do you really think a focus on the constitution alone will energise voters?

[archie]

Very.


It's all up for grabs.

But we will start with right wing parties in a much weaker position and an electoral system whereby they have to convince roughly half of the electorate to support them rather than the 35-40% that'll do at Westminster. If nothing else, that would see a much more moderate version of right wingery than that which prevails under fptp.

We should also be able to cobble together something of a constitution with wacky ideas like checks and balances rather than one where the likes of Johnson do absolutely wtf they please.
We might have a different electoral system, but we don't know which model. We might have a constitution.

[JeMeSouviens]

How is that screwing people? Redistribution of funds from richer to poorer areas is the very opposite of Thatcherite thinking. It's social and economic justice. Why would you oppose this? I think part of the issue with these neo-capitalist responses that I keep seeing here is that some here frame it as a transfer from England. It's not, it's from the south east of England, where much of the wealth is generated. So I don't see how it is screwing these most in need. Would you argue an independent Scotland wouldn't see similar transfers from Edinburgh to Glasgow and the Highlands and Islands?

Example:

Scotland gets 22% more funding per capita than the E midlands of England despite being considerably richer.

By supporting the current settlement because you're happy with Scotland getting more money, you're happily screwing E midlanders.

Distribution of UK money is one of the many things that's needed fixed for decades but hasn't been and won't be.

[JeMeSouviens]

We might have a different electoral system, but we don't know which model. We might have a constitution.

We already have a different electoral system. It's possible it could be changed post-Indy. I would estimate there is 0% chance of getting something as ****ed as FPTP.

We will have a constitution. It's possible, indeed probable, that it might not be perfect. I would estimate there is 0% chance of getting something as ****ed as the current UK setup.

[Ozyhibby]

We already have a different electoral system. It's possible it could be changed post-Indy. I would estimate there is 0% chance of getting something as ****ed as FPTP.

We will have a constitution. It's possible, indeed probable, that it might not be perfect. I would estimate there is 0% chance of getting something as ****ed as the current UK setup.

I very much doubt they change the system at Holyrood? It works pretty well I think and broadly reflects what Scotland voted for.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[archie]

Example:

Scotland gets 22% more funding per capita than the E midlands of England despite being considerably richer.

By supporting the current settlement because you're happy with Scotland getting more money, you're happily screwing E midlanders.

Distribution of UK money is one of the many things that's needed fixed for decades but hasn't been and won't be.Why are you talking down Scotland? The comparison with the East Midlands makes no sense. The land area of Scotland is over 30,000 square miles. The East Midlands is just over 6,000 square miles. I'm not aware of the East Midlands having any islands. Population density is much higher in the East Midlands making it much easier to provide services. I don't think people in Scotland should be punished for living in Scotland, where it is more expensive to provide basic services. Your rationale would say that having a fixed price postage stamp is discriminating against people who live in cities. A fixed price bus ticket discriminates against people who travel short journies and so on. But there are wider societal benefits to these measures.

Also, the difference here is between taxes raised and public spending. It's not a measure of personal wealth. So poorer people will not be contributing in the way you are presenting. By all means argue for a different mechanism, but maybe tell us what that might be?

[archie]

I very much doubt they change the system at Holyrood? It works pretty well I think and broadly reflects what Scotland voted for.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Really - no second chamber?

[lapsedhibee]

We might have a different electoral system, but we don't know which model. We might have a constitution.

Going to go out on a limb here and predict that there will be no House of Lords in an independent Scotland.

[JeMeSouviens]

Why are you talking down Scotland? The comparison with the East Midlands makes no sense. The land area of Scotland is over 30,000 square miles. The East Midlands is just over 6,000 square miles. I'm not aware of the East Midlands having any islands. Population density is much higher in the East Midlands making it much easier to provide services. I don't think people in Scotland should be punished for living in Scotland, where it is more expensive to provide basic services. Your rationale would say that having a fixed price postage stamp is discriminating against people who live in cities. A fixed price bus ticket discriminates against people who travel short journies and so on. But there are wider societal benefits to these measures.

Also, the difference here is between taxes raised and public spending. It's not a measure of personal wealth. So poorer people will not be contributing in the way you are presenting. By all means argue for a different mechanism, but maybe tell us what that might be?

Hilarious you think there's a "rationale" behind UK spending. :greengrin

None of the things you mention are considered at all. My mechanism would be pretty much what you describe. The difference is that it would actually exist.

[Ozyhibby]

Really - no second chamber?

I’m 99.99% certain that if we have one it will be elected and that we will not use fptp.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[archie]

Hilarious you think there's a "rationale" behind UK spending. :greengrin

None of the things you mention are considered at all. My mechanism would be pretty much what you describe. The difference is that it would actually exist.I don't know why you think this is funny? This is extremely serious for vulnerable people and communities. Are you saying that the tax raised vs public spending isn't true?

[archie]

I’m 99.99% certain that if we have one it will be elected and that we will not use fptp.


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkBased on what?

[Ozyhibby]

Based on what?

Based on there being nobody who is suggesting or promoting that? Have you ever heard anyone say that an independent Scotland needs an unelected 2nd chamber? I doubt even the Scottish Tories would suggest that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[archie]

Based on there being nobody who is suggesting or promoting that? Have you ever heard anyone say that an independent Scotland needs an unelected 2nd chamber? I doubt even the Scottish Tories would suggest that?


Sent from my iPhone using TapatalkBit out of date, but there was a proposal here for a partially appointed second chamber in Scotland https://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2015/11/02/second-chamber-second-thoughts/?shared=email&msg=fail Commonweal also proposed a Citizen Assembly approach.

[JeMeSouviens]

I don't know why you think this is funny? This is extremely serious for vulnerable people and communities. Are you saying that the tax raised vs public spending isn't true?

I don't think it's funny at all other than the irony of you arguing for an unfair system using the very arguments as to why it's unfair. You're the one that wants to perpetuate the inequity. It's ok as long as Scotland is on the lucky side?

Don't understand the last q?

[archie]

I don't think it's funny at all other than the irony of you arguing for an unfair system using the very arguments as to why it's unfair. You're the one that wants to perpetuate the inequity. It's ok as long as Scotland is on the lucky side?

Don't understand the last q?
The tenor of responses to the GERS announcement on here is that it's wrong that Scotland has higher public spending. This seems to be because it is viewed that Scotland is a rich country and so shouldn't have higher public spending funded by UK taxes. This appears to be seen as a moral failing, as evidenced by memes of Scottish politicians begging. I know it's a response to GERS and all the noise that goes with that, but in doing so there were some pretty strange rabbit holes gone down, including ones suggesting that redistribution of spend was wrong. I think you agree with redistributive approches and, while we probably agree that there should be a different mechanism, I think it is legimatate to defend the higher levels of public spending in Scotland. The final question wasn't very well put. I was asking whether you acknowledged the position that public spending was higher in Scotland and exceeded tax take was true. Anyway, logging off to do other stuff.

[Smartie]

But if we don't have an unelected second chamber, how will we reward all the dodgy financial contributions given to our corrupt politicians whilst we charge around the world banging on about democracy?

Oh, we'll actually have politicians with some sort of moral code? Sounds a bit off.

[He's here!]

How is that screwing people? Redistribution of funds from richer to poorer areas is the very opposite of Thatcherite thinking. It's social and economic justice. Why would you oppose this? I think part of the issue with these neo-capitalist responses that I keep seeing here is that some here frame it as a transfer from England. It's not, it's from the south east of England, where much of the wealth is generated. So I don't see how it is screwing these most in need. Would you argue an independent Scotland wouldn't see similar transfers from Edinburgh to Glasgow and the Highlands and Islands?

It's not screwing people. Never has been. It just suits those who blame Westminster for our ills to claim it is.

[CropleyWasGod]

But that's the dilemma. If it will all be sorted out after independence then what are you voting for beyond a principle that more decisions are made in Holyrood? In that case all of the stuff about fairness, pensions, how rich we'll be is just irrelevant noise. We've seen different views here among independence supporters: go to a low tax economy on the Irish model vs high levels of redistribution. Are you really saying the only vision is a different constitutional settlement? Is that really compelling?

Me?

[JeMeSouviens]

The tenor of responses to the GERS announcement on here is that it's wrong that Scotland has higher public spending. This seems to be because it is viewed that Scotland is a rich country and so shouldn't have higher public spending funded by UK taxes. This appears to be seen as a moral failing, as evidenced by memes of Scottish politicians begging. I know it's a response to GERS and all the noise that goes with that, but in doing so there were some pretty strange rabbit holes gone down, including ones suggesting that redistribution of spend was wrong. I think you agree with redistributive approches and, while we probably agree that there should be a different mechanism, I think it is legimatate to defend the higher levels of public spending in Scotland. The final question wasn't very well put. I was asking whether you acknowledged the position that public spending was higher in Scotland and exceeded tax take was true. Anyway, logging off to do other stuff.

Oh, ok, yes, acknowledged.

Generally, I find most on both sides of the indy debate talk rubbish about GERS most of the time. If you think it's bad here, try twitter. Jesus wept.

The moral failing, as I see it, is from those who claim they support the union because "solidarity with our English comrades" but are happy with (and indeed proudly trumpet) disproportionate funding for Scotland based on nothing more than an accident. This is somewhat of a niche position, I concede, but at least I have my own logical consistency to cling to.

[archie]

Oh, ok, yes, acknowledged.

Generally, I find most on both sides of the indy debate talk rubbish about GERS most of the time. If you think it's bad here, try twitter. Jesus wept.

The moral failing, as I see it, is from those who claim they support the union because "solidarity with our English comrades" but are happy with (and indeed proudly trumpet) disproportionate funding for Scotland based on nothing more than an accident. This is somewhat of a niche position, I concede, but at least I have my own logical consistency to cling to.I see where you are coming from. I'm not sure I agree though! I don't post much on stuff here, but I've found the noise this week infuriating and dispiriting. I might post some thoughts on it for comment (big deal says the crowd)!

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/scottish-independence-former-yes-scotland-strategist-calls-for-compromise-on-indyref2-plans-3821788

Looking for a compromise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/scottish-independence-former-yes-scotland-strategist-calls-for-compromise-on-indyref2-plans-3821788

Looking for a compromise.

Interesting character. Seems to want a theological solution to independence, founded on love.


For the past seven years, I have been a member of the Society of Jesus - a Jesuit in Formation. Before that, I worked for almost 20 years in the world of Scottish politics, most recently as Chief Strategist for Yes Scotland during the 2014 Independence Referendum.


... I will seek to draw conclusions about how much devolution has delivered on “the promise of a new political culture”, and what might change if Scotland developed a political discourse where we are striving to always be more attentive, intelligent, reasonable and responsible and, if I can begin to bring in the theology, are also conscious that even those we disagree with are our neighbours, and worthy of compassion, respect and, dare I say it, also love.

[Stairway 2 7]

https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/scottish-independence-former-yes-scotland-strategist-calls-for-compromise-on-indyref2-plans-3821788

Looking for a compromise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think there's a huge chance a devo max would be voted in by the public. But everyone is rightly more than dubious after last time it was suggested. Brexit muddies the water further as Scotland would simply need and want to rejoin. I think we aren't far from independence anyway so it doesn't matter

[Skol]

He seems to have an idea on how to break the impasse. I also wonder if sturgeon and blackford statements earlier in the week are the start of a change in approach.

Trying to bring Scotland together is a good thing IMO

[Ozyhibby]

He seems to have an idea on how to break the impasse. I also wonder if sturgeon and blackford statements earlier in the week are the start of a change in approach.

Trying to bring Scotland together is a good thing IMO

Or is it just good strategy? Offer what looks like a great compromise that people in Scotland think looks very fair and reasonable only to see it rejected by Westminster?

In Scotland there would be a huge majority for Scotland gaining control of all revenue raising and paying money up the way for shared services like defence etc. Giving Scotland the freedom to join the SM and CU and full control of all domestic legislation.
It’s a good offer and would take away the risk of the UK losing our contribution to defence and other spending priorities.
It’s likely the UK will turn it down though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Skol]

Or is it just good strategy? Offer what looks like a great compromise that people in Scotland think looks very fair and reasonable only to see it rejected by Westminster?

In Scotland there would be a huge majority for Scotland gaining control of all revenue raising and paying money up the way for shared services like defence etc. Giving Scotland the freedom to join the SM and CU and full control of all domestic legislation.
It’s a good offer and would take away the risk of the UK losing our contribution to defence and other spending priorities.
It’s likely the UK will turn it down though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So we stick with the grievance policy. Sounds like it should work.

[Ozyhibby]

So we stick with the grievance policy. Sounds like it should work.

So if the SNP offer a compromise, they are looking for grievance?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[grunt]

Or is it just good strategy? Offer what looks like a great compromise that people in Scotland think looks very fair and reasonable only to see it rejected by Westminster?

In Scotland there would be a huge majority for Scotland gaining control of all revenue raising and paying money up the way for shared services like defence etc. Giving Scotland the freedom to join the SM and CU and full control of all domestic legislation.
It’s a good offer and would take away the risk of the UK losing our contribution to defence and other spending priorities.
It’s likely the UK will turn it down though.
Where is this suggested? The Noon article doesn't specify what 90% of independence would look like - are you just surmising?

Frankly I don't see the point in having SM/CU and full control of domestic legislation but still having to support Trident? Having SM/CU will require borders with England, no?

[Since90+2]

Where is this suggested? The Noon article doesn't specify what 90% of independence would look like - are you just surmising?

Frankly I don't see the point in having SM/CU and full control of domestic legislation but still having to support Trident? Having SM/CU will require borders with England, no?

What has membership of the SM/CU got to do with trident? There is a nuclear power itself in the EU.

The two have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

[Hibrandenburg]

Or is it just good strategy? Offer what looks like a great compromise that people in Scotland think looks very fair and reasonable only to see it rejected by Westminster?

In Scotland there would be a huge majority for Scotland gaining control of all revenue raising and paying money up the way for shared services like defence etc. Giving Scotland the freedom to join the SM and CU and full control of all domestic legislation.
It’s a good offer and would take away the risk of the UK losing our contribution to defence and other spending priorities.
It’s likely the UK will turn it down though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They'd definitely turn it down before any referendum but would definitely want it if yes prevails.

[grunt]

What has membership of the SM/CU got to do with trident? There is a nuclear power itself in the EU.
The two have absolutely nothing to do with each other.I didn't bring it up, they were combined in Ozy's post below. He suggested the offer of SM/CU would take away the risk of the UK losing our defence contributions. Please keep up. :wink:


In Scotland there would be a huge majority for Scotland gaining control of all revenue raising and paying money up the way for shared services like defence etc. Giving Scotland the freedom to join the SM and CU and full control of all domestic legislation.
It’s a good offer and would take away the risk of the UK losing our contribution to defence and other spending priorities.
It’s likely the UK will turn it down though.

[Since90+2]

I didn't bring it up, they were combined in Ozy's post below. He suggested the offer of SM/CU would take away the risk of the UK losing our defence contributions. Please keep up. :)

That's all very good, however, it doesn't relate to your post which said you don't see the point in having membership of SM/CU if we had to continue supporting trident. Which is a rather odd way to look at it.

You are conflating two different things. Do keep up :)

[grunt]

That's all very good, however, it doesn't relate to your post which said you don't see the point in having membership of SM/CU if we had to continue supporting trident. Which is a rather odd way to look at it.

You are conflating two different things. Do keep up :)Why would we want to contribute to UK defence spending, if that includes Trident? The SNP is avowedly anti nuclear weapons.

Think I'm keeping up just fine, thanks. :greengrin


The SNP has never and will never support the retention or renewal of Trident. We believe that nuclear weapons are immoral, ineffective and expensive.

In times of imposed austerity, the £205 billion which would be spent on a Trident replacement over the next 30 years could be far, far more effectively used on improving healthcare, childcare, education and building a better future for our children.

[archie]

Or is it just good strategy? Offer what looks like a great compromise that people in Scotland think looks very fair and reasonable only to see it rejected by Westminster?

In Scotland there would be a huge majority for Scotland gaining control of all revenue raising and paying money up the way for shared services like defence etc. Giving Scotland the freedom to join the SM and CU and full control of all domestic legislation.
It’s a good offer and would take away the risk of the UK losing our contribution to defence and other spending priorities.
It’s likely the UK will turn it down though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I hesitate to get involved, but:
- evidence this would be welcomed by Scots
- potential for Scots to be worse off
- how could we join the single market and customs union?
- SM and CU would need a hard border with ruk.

[Skol]

So if the SNP offer a compromise, they are looking for grievance?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It was you looking for the grievance. You said Westminster would reject whatever was suggested.

[grunt]

It was you looking for the grievance. You said Westminster would reject whatever was suggested.You think WM would agree to Scotland joining the SM/CU?

[ronaldo7]

You think WM would agree to Scotland joining the SM/CU?

We already asked to have a different settlement in the SM and CU, but they rejected us out of hand whilst giving it to NI.

They want to control us, as per their 3 word slogans.

Scots are indispensable.

[ronaldo7]

So we stick with the grievance policy. Sounds like it should work.

Why is it Scots, are the only ones with a grievance policy. Do people in England and Wales not have grievances?

[lapsedhibee]

Why is it Scots, are the only ones with a grievance policy.
Lazy, tabloid-level, labelling.

[Moulin Yarns]

Found this on Facebook, thought it worth sharing.

George, Andrew, David and Patrick share a flat. All employed and bring money in.

All four wages are paid into George's bank account. Only George has access to this account. From this account, George pays all communal domestic bills, plus draws his own personal living expenses.

George also gives Andrew, David and Patrick pocket money to pay for their own personal living expenses. The pocket money is considerably less than their respective wages.

There is quite a bit of disagreement in the flat, as George appears to be buying stuff for himself and his own bedroom, but claiming it to be for the mutual benefit of everyone in the flat, and therefore forms part of the communal bills.

George is also seriously overdrawn on his account. He has had to borrow money, and has run up debt on his credit card. He tells the other three that they are all responsible for a share of the debt, and that what they now owe is more than the pocket money he's giving them... that they are all living in debt.

Andrew in particular, is unhappy with arrangements, and is planning to leave and live independently. George keeps trying to frustrate Andrew's plans to leave, telling him that he couldn't afford to live on his own... that he's already living in debt in the flat, etc, etc. George's gaslighting of Andrew goes into overdrive at the mere suggestion.

In reality, I think Andrew, David, and Patrick all know the truth of the matter... that George is playing them for fools, fleecing all three of their hard earned cash in order to pay for his own personal extravagancies.
(George has a known history of doing the exact same thing to many other people over the years)

Actually, it's George who couldn't cope on his own. That's why he gets so arrogant and aggressive when anyone suggests moving out.

[lapsedhibee]

Found this on Facebook, thought it worth sharing.

George, Andrew, David and Patrick share a flat. All employed and bring money in.

All four wages are paid into George's bank account. Only George has access to this account. From this account, George pays all communal domestic bills, plus draws his own personal living expenses.

George also gives Andrew, David and Patrick pocket money to pay for their own personal living expenses. The pocket money is considerably less than their respective wages.

There is quite a bit of disagreement in the flat, as George appears to be buying stuff for himself and his own bedroom, but claiming it to be for the mutual benefit of everyone in the flat, and therefore forms part of the communal bills.

George is also seriously overdrawn on his account. He has had to borrow money, and has run up debt on his credit card. He tells the other three that they are all responsible for a share of the debt, and that what they now owe is more than the pocket money he's giving them... that they are all living in debt.

Andrew in particular, is unhappy with arrangements, and is planning to leave and live independently. George keeps trying to frustrate Andrew's plans to leave, telling him that he couldn't afford to live on his own... that he's already living in debt in the flat, etc, etc. George's gaslighting of Andrew goes into overdrive at the mere suggestion.

In reality, I think Andrew, David, and Patrick all know the truth of the matter... that George is playing them for fools, fleecing all three of their hard earned cash in order to pay for his own personal extravagancies.
(George has a known history of doing the exact same thing to many other people over the years)

Actually, it's George who couldn't cope on his own. That's why he gets so arrogant and aggressive when anyone suggests moving out.

Original arrangement should continue if and only if George has broad shoulders.

[Stairway 2 7]

I'll no link the sun, not really big news I suppose

GREEN SNUB Nicola Sturgeon only invited Scottish Green ministers to TWO out of 43 Cabinet meetings

HOLYROOD’s Green ministers were only invited to two of Nicola Sturgeon’s 43 Cabinet meetings during their first year in a coalition Government, we can reveal.

Joint party leaders Patrick Harvie and Lorna Slater joined the top table to discuss Holyrood business on April 26 and again on August 16.

Under a power-sharing deal with the Nats, the senior MSPs were to participate in summits “at least twice” annually, with insiders claiming it was assumed they’d be there “fairly regularly”.

But documents reveal the First Minister stuck to the minimum requirements when getting the pair involved between September 1, 2021, to the middle of this month.

Sources claimed the Greens were being kept “at a distance” because of their anti-capitalist views - which some senior SNP figures fear will spook floating indy voters