Scottish Independence

**Beefster** · 28-08-2014 11:30 AM

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The tax revenue lost by a 3p cut..... vs 17% of Google's profits.

As I'm sure you're aware, 17% of Google's declared UK profits would come in around £5m tops. If cutting corporation tax by 15% costs less than that, we're ****ed.

***CropleyWasGod*** · 28-08-2014 11:37 AM

Originally Posted by Beefster

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

As I'm sure you're aware, 17% of Google's declared UK profits would come in around £5m tops. If cutting corporation tax by 15% costs less than that, we're ****ed.

I'm sure you mean "more than".

As I say, I can't see it happening in the short-term. Maybe later, to attract foreign companies, although that depends a lot on who's in power. I certainly don't see any move towards a "tax-haven" approach. That would be daft, IMO.

**Beefster** · 28-08-2014 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm sure you mean "more than".

As I say, I can't see it happening in the short-term. Maybe later, to attract foreign companies, although that depends a lot on who's in power. I certainly don't see any move towards a "tax-haven" approach. That would be daft, IMO.

Pah, missed that. I'm still confusing myself trying to sort it out!

***allmodcons*** · 28-08-2014 12:02 PM

Better Together in good form yesterday.

On the one hand, we had 130 Business Leaders expressing their concerns about industry prospests in an iScotalnd and then we had Brown & Darling (apparently they've kissed and made up) telling us this:-

"The biggest beneficiaries of the SNP's tax policy are the shareholders and directors of the privatised energy companies in Scotland. The beneficiaries of an independent Scotland are not the ordinary people of Scotland but the richest directors of the most profitable, privatised companies in Scotland".

Somebody must be lying?

**Beefster** · 28-08-2014 12:08 PM

Originally Posted by allmodcons

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Somebody must be lying?

Why? The business leaders weren't referring to their own prospects AFAIK. They were talking about the businesses.

***allmodcons*** · 28-08-2014 12:22 PM

Originally Posted by Beefster

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Why? The business leaders weren't referring to their own prospects AFAIK. They were talking about the businesses.

Must have escaped your notice, but if businesses prosper and make money individual shareholders are usually the main beneficiaries.

**Beefster** · 28-08-2014 01:21 PM

Originally Posted by allmodcons

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Must have escaped your notice, but if businesses prosper and make money individual shareholders are usually the main beneficiaries.

So you're twisting it to suit your agenda. Fair enough.

PS If businesses prosper, the employees tend to prosper too.

***allmodcons*** · 28-08-2014 02:08 PM

Originally Posted by Beefster

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So you're twisting it to suit your agenda. Fair enough.

PS If businesses prosper, the employees tend to prosper too.

What utter nonsense. Why can't you just argue the point without reverting to type and suggesting that everything is twisted to suit an agenda or weighted against you?

Read my original post. Business is saying an iScotland would be bad for them and Brown is quoted directly as saying:-

The beneficiaries of an independent Scotland are not the ordinary people of Scotland but the richest directors of the most profitable, privatised companies in Scotland".

He is completely contradicating the letter from the businesses supporting a 'No' vote.

**Beefster** · 28-08-2014 02:17 PM

Originally Posted by allmodcons

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Read my original post. Business is saying an iScotland would be bad for them and Brown is quoted directly as saying:-

The beneficiaries of an independent Scotland are not the ordinary people of Scotland but the richest directors of the most profitable, privatised companies in Scotland".

He is completely contradicating the letter from the businesses supporting a 'No' vote.

"As job creators, we have looked carefully at the arguments made by both sides of the debate. Our conclusion is that the business case for independence has not been made."

One is saying the business/economic case hasn't been made.

One is saying that the rich will get richer.

Aren't they completely different things? Unless I'm missing some vital snippet of information that you have?

***allmodcons*** · 28-08-2014 02:28 PM

Originally Posted by Beefster

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

"As job creators, we have looked carefully at the arguments made by both sides of the debate. Our conclusion is that the business case for independence has not been made."

One is saying the business/economic case hasn't been made.

One is saying that the rich will get richer.

Aren't they completely different things? Unless I'm missing some vital snippet of information that you have?

Correct. You are missing something here.

**JeMeSouviens** · 28-08-2014 02:29 PM

Originally Posted by Beefster

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

"As job creators, we have looked carefully at the arguments made by both sides of the debate. Our conclusion is that the business case for independence has not been made."

One is saying the business/economic case hasn't been made.

One is saying that the rich will get richer.

Aren't they completely different things? Unless I'm missing some vital snippet of information that you have?

You think there is no correlation between business success and shareholder value?

Anyhow, business sentiment not entirely one way:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-...iness-28960729

**Beefster** · 28-08-2014 02:57 PM

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You think there is no correlation between business success and shareholder value?

Right, this is my last post on the matter because it's becoming an exercise in futility and, despite the repeated implications otherwise, my IQ is actually above 75.

The businesspeople who signed the letter yesterday said "As job creators...". It's therefore IMHO safe to assume that they are thinking, at least in large part, in terms of job creation/retention (unless anyone has hard evidence to the contrary).

On the other hand, from what ODS posted, it appears that Gordon Brown was referring to a small subset of business people/owners/directors.

Again, IMHO, its a very, very long stretch to claim that one or the other is lying because of the two statements.

**JeMeSouviens** · 28-08-2014 03:30 PM

Originally Posted by Beefster

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Right, this is my last post on the matter because it's becoming an exercise in futility and, despite the repeated implications otherwise, my IQ is actually above 75.

The businesspeople who signed the letter yesterday said "As job creators...". It's therefore IMHO safe to assume that they are thinking, at least in large part, in terms of job creation/retention (unless anyone has hard evidence to the contrary).

On the other hand, from what ODS posted, it appears that Gordon Brown was referring to a small subset of business people/owners/directors.

Again, IMHO, its a very, very long stretch to claim that one or the other is lying because of the two statements.

Seriously? I'm not saying business people aren't happy/proud to create jobs but if you think that even turns up on the same page of priorities as shareholder value (and almost always these days, leadership incentives) then I've got a bridge you might be interested in buying ...

***danhibees1875*** · 28-08-2014 03:43 PM

Originally Posted by Golden Fleece

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

A wee reminder of what is at stake in 3 weeks time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wqGF...=RDgApwpSWAhbQ

In the last 100 years Scotland's vote has determined the outcome of the UK elections twice.

I've had a long day, could someone explain to me what that means?

One part of the debate that I'd certainly like to know more about is the political divide that exists between Scotland and England and exactly how often we do get the government we vote for. Does anyone have these stats to hand?

How frequently does the "winning party" in Scotland get elected?
If you removed the entirety of the Scottish votes, would the outcome differ?
If everyone who voted in Scotland could retrospectively change their vote to the party who cane second, how often would the government be subsequently changed?

***snooky*** · 28-08-2014 03:49 PM

Originally Posted by danhibees1875

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

In the last 100 years Scotland's vote has determined the outcome of the UK elections twice.

I've had a long day, could someone explain to me what that means?

One part of the debate that I'd certainly like to know more about is the political divide that exists between Scotland and England and exactly how often we do get the government we vote for. Does anyone have these stats to hand?

How frequently does the "winning party" in Scotland get elected?
If you removed the entirety of the Scottish votes, would the outcome differ?
If everyone who voted in Scotland could retrospectively change their vote to the party who cane second, how often would the government be subsequently changed?

This is the fundamental question for all referendum voters to ask themselves. All the other issues only cloud this main one, IMO.
Think democracy.

**~~Peevemor~~** · 28-08-2014 03:50 PM

Originally Posted by snooky

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

This is the fundamental question for all referendum voters to ask themselves. All the other issues only cloud this main one, IMO.
Think democracy.

***danhibees1875*** · 28-08-2014 04:01 PM

Originally Posted by snooky

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

This is the fundamental question for all referendum voters to ask themselves. All the other issues only cloud this main one, IMO.
Think democracy.

Do you happen to know the answer then?

***snooky*** · 28-08-2014 04:06 PM

Originally Posted by danhibees1875

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Do you happen to know the answer then?

Naw, but I could have good guess

**Beefster** · 28-08-2014 04:11 PM

Originally Posted by danhibees1875

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

How frequently does the "winning party" in Scotland get elected?

In the last 20 years, 75% of the time.

**Stranraer** · 28-08-2014 04:21 PM

Originally Posted by Beefster

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

In the last 20 years, 75% of the time.

Do you ever question something the No campaign says? Ever?

**Beefster** · 28-08-2014 04:31 PM

Originally Posted by <3Morrissey

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Do you ever question something the No campaign says? Ever?

The No campaign said that?

In any case, which bit do you have a problem with?

To be honest, I don't pay any attention to much that either side says other than through the threads on here. I am enjoying the repeated attempts to question my intelligence/thinking ability though.

**Stranraer** · 28-08-2014 04:34 PM

Originally Posted by Beefster

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The No campaign said that?

In any case, which bit do you have a problem with?

To be honest, I don't pay any attention to much that either side says other than through the threads on here.

I don't really have a problem and it's none of my business really I just wondered. When the UK gov. said Scotland would have to renegotiate 14,000 treaties for example...?

**Beefster** · 28-08-2014 04:38 PM

Originally Posted by <3Morrissey

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't really have a problem and it's none of my business really I just wondered. When the UK gov. said Scotland would have to renegotiate 14,000 treaties for example...?

Never heard that before. When did they say that?