Leaving the EU could be achieved with limited near-term economic consequences. Instead we seem to be going for maximum economic damage.
Which is an act of criminal negligence by the current government, who should have outlined what leave meant and are expected to have plans for all eventualities. How is it we have detailed plans for accidents in nuclear power stations with chances down in the one in tens of millions, but we don't have even the most basic plan for what we do after a leave result in a referendum which forecasts never put below about a 20% likelihood.
Yes, but if they'd claimed Leave meant EFTA/EEA, then a huge number of people would have been up in arms about not being offered an option that restricted immigration.
I'm writing the next thread, can you confirm that EFTA/EEA means Freedom of Movement?
You have more flexibility in EFTA/EEA.
Some unilateral restriction on freedom of movement is allowed.
There is also more freedom to restrict benefits to EU citizens migrating here, and AIUI force them to take out health insurance.
To my mind the problem is caused by people who migrate either without jobs or to do low paid low skills jobs. Take housing benefit, tax credits and unemployment benefit away and bring in compulsory health insurance and the problem goes away.
Which is why I was Remain in both, although the Scottish vote I didn't really debate with anyone as I was not a voter.
True, they will have one definitely. But the SNP case on finances is awful, vague and downright mendacious......and at the same time as they criticise Boris et al.
There is nothing wrong with the finances of an Independent Scotland unless you deliberately include the UK membership fees of £200m a week that Scotland gets applied to its budget.
That's why Kevin Hague's chokkablog never ever looks at spending.
Thanks Malcolm. It really isn't just about economics. None of the Brexit models I've seen forecast the UK's GDP will fall - just that the trend growth rate drops by around 0.4%. p.a.
However, if you imagine a 25% absolute decline* (in constant currency), that would put the UK back to 1999, which I don't recall being a blasted, tortured wasteland of famine and despair.
The same concept applies to Scotland. I think an independent Scotland would have a terribly tough time economically in the short term. It couldn't meet the Euro criteria immediately, and I can't see the EU bending its rules again (*cough* Greece). But if that's what people want, there's no reason why it couldn't work in the medium term.
*I'm not being serious here, so pedants avaunt .
A 5% negative move in GDP would result in a 10-15% change in employment because productivity increases over time. You need c. 1.5% annual GDP growth to keep employment stable.
Is that what we saw during this recovery? I thought this time employment has increased and productivity has fallen. Employers kept wages low.
Does anyone know the timetable for the Con party sending ballot papers out to its members?
Assuming the MPs voting goes through 3 rounds - ie nobody withdraws - the final MPs ballot will be on Tuesday 12 July.
If the poll in The Sun is remotely accurate Leadsom needs there to be a delay of at least a few weeks whilst campaigning starts, she builds her profile and ideally she would probably also need a big high profile TV debate vs May.
However if ballot papers go out quickly after 12 July she is surely going to have almost no chance at all - as we know that most postal ballots get returned quickly and she just won't have had anything like enough of a chance to make an impression with members, many of whom will barely even know who she is.
If it this like last time, ballots should be sent out mid/last week of July.
IIRC the MPs stage ended mid October 2005, and I got my ballot papers second week of November
Thanks - on that basis I think it looks very difficult for her indeed.
Just found this, the schedule for the 2005 contest.
20th of October - Final ballot of MPs
3rd November - Question Time featuring David Cameron and David Davis
4th November - Ballot papers sent out to party members
The question is - can she get the BBC to do the same this time?
Additional problem for her is we are moving in to the summer when not only Parliament stops but also all the TV political programmes stop.
Also don't think the BBC did a QT Special for the Labour leadership vote last year.
The BBC did do something it was early evening show, with all four contenders taking questions from the audience, it led to to Liz Kendall's 'no, the country comes first' zinger to Burnham
We cannot have it both ways. There's no doubt that Brexit is daft on purely economic grounds - there's a price to be paid. That price will continue for several years.
Having made that decision, we can't now just turn on the Scots and tell them that they're committing economic suicide - that's just rerunning the old too puir, too wee, too daft crap that people have peddled for years.
Scotland should have a second Sindy referendum. I do think it would be wise to wait until we understand the UK's exit strategy. If it's going to be pure WTO, for example, I'd expect the Nationalists to win handily.
Is there any polling on whether the Scots think joining the Euro and Schengen is a price worth paying to get independence?
So we're talking about a net contribution óf £10m a week,
Works well for the strapline.
Being in the UK costs Scotland £200m a week.
Vote Yes in May 2017
I thought Scotland was a net beneficiary thanks to Barnet?
I assumed it was a joke....
Ha Ha Ha , your village is searching for you
Jog on and get a sense of humour you saddo
Oh, sorry yes, my fault entirely. I hadn't realised I was dealing with such an incredibly wise man. I humbly beg your forgiveness.
You are almost forgiven , at least you have realised the error of your ways.
No, no - my abrogation should observe no bounds. What all your followers (and all those you have insulted in the past) desire is a mere sign, a simple sign as to your magnificent wisdom.
My ways are your ways oh great malcolmg - these are infallible ways for in this you have vouched.
edit - you could also say that you were rather rude, and you apologise
Omnium , your first one was correct , your edit not so much but given you may not be au fait with my ways , I apologise unreservedly if you were upset by my sense of humour. I will however be unlikely to change in the future, you may well be on receiving end of Turnip of the Day Awards at some point.., then you will know you have made it
Pull yourself together man!
I wasn't upset even slightly by your sense of humour, but rather the failure of it. If the price of you're taking a second look at your posts and being a little less belligerent is being made Turnip of the Day then I would warmly embrace it.
Happily I can offer a better reward - you can consider yourself as PB Man-of-the-day if you just step back a moment, consider that you may have been a touch out-of-order, and give yourself a bit of a telling-off.
"We decide on something, leave it lying around and wait around to see what happens. If no one kicks up a fuss, because most people don't understand what has been decided, we continue, step by step, until there is no turning back."
The UK has just taken a monumental step back from the brink.
In a hotel in Breda The Netherlands this evening. The other occupants are the under 25 hockey teams from Netherlands and Belarus (who sing happy birthday in English and out of tune). Women's hockey, 40 fit young women. Sean, you would be in ecstacy!
Swimming pool or sauna? Hmm as I was up at five this morning I think boring old bed all on my own.
Indigo. Are you still optimistic for the UK's economic prospects in the short, medium and long term? Also what arrangement are you hoping the UK achieve with Europe post Brexit?
Until recently I had great faith in the British people to weather a short term downturn and make the best of the new world, making deals with countries outside the EU for a neutral medium term and improved long term. However given the amount of crying, naysaying and attempts to cling on to nurse I am now not quite so sure, the stiff upper lip and bulldog spirit appear to be long gone.
If I had any confidence that the people would be offered another look at the issue in a decade I could live with the EEA/EFTA approach for now and let people see how they feel about the immigration issue later on. My main concern is that politicians having been given a massive scare are not going to feel inclined to ask the people what they think in future, and so the question is not going to get asked.
I fear there will be increasing civil unrest in the medium term if we stay with Freedom of Movement because frankly politicians are not going to make the changes required to make it work, vis contributory benefits systems, and proper provision on health and schooling. The former because the left and wishywashy Tories will scream blue murder at the merest suggestion, and the later because the British public will never accept the tax rises required to fund it.
The thing is, there has been no planning for post a Leave vote by anyone.
There is no consensus about what Leave means.
There was no realisation that a long period of limbo would have economic consequences.
Before the vote, I repeatedly stated that the choice should be between two concrete proposals. I stated that - failing that - there should be a supplementary question on the ballot paper about the UK's future relationship with the EU.
Without this, anyone claiming to know the will of the British people is lying. No-one knows. And the longer we sit there, with future trade relationships unknown the longer businesses will sit on their hands.
Leaving the EU could be achieved with limited near-term economic consequences. Instead we seem to be going for maximum economic damage.
Which is why I was Remain in both, although the Scottish vote I didn't really debate with anyone as I was not a voter.
True, they will have one definitely. But the SNP case on finances is awful, vague and downright mendacious......and at the same time as they criticise Boris et al.
There is nothing wrong with the finances of an Independent Scotland unless you deliberately include the UK membership fees of £200m a week that Scotland gets applied to its budget.
That's why Kevin Hague's chokkablog never ever looks at spending.
We cannot have it both ways. There's no doubt that Brexit is daft on purely economic grounds - there's a price to be paid. That price will continue for several years.
Having made that decision, we can't now just turn on the Scots and tell them that they're committing economic suicide - that's just rerunning the old too puir, too wee, too daft crap that people have peddled for years.
Scotland should have a second Sindy referendum. I do think it would be wise to wait until we understand the UK's exit strategy. If it's going to be pure WTO, for example, I'd expect the Nationalists to win handily.
Is there any polling on whether the Scots think joining the Euro and Schengen is a price worth paying to get independence?
And giving back fisheries and farming rights having only just regained them.
I defy anyone to be able to really split out the economics in the UK, so much of our cash disappears into unknown buckets and is spent on Westminster follies who would know what the reality is. For sure if all the UK vanity projects were dumped we would be seriously better off than we are now deficit or not.
I doubt you will even read it, but go ahead and have a try at opening your mind for once. In one paragraph you make at least three wild claims with no actual basis to try and muddy the waters, after several hours of strawmanning people about "talking Scotland dooooooon!". If you are the typical SNP voter it explains much.
Kevin Hague is a lying propagandist.
Thats why he never once analyses spending.
LOL, he is really stupid if he thinks Hague can count beyond his fingers.
We cannot have it both ways. There's no doubt that Brexit is daft on purely economic grounds - there's a price to be paid. That price will continue for several years.
Having made that decision, we can't now just turn on the Scots and tell them that they're committing economic suicide - that's just rerunning the old too puir, too wee, too daft crap that people have peddled for years.
Scotland should have a second Sindy referendum. I do think it would be wise to wait until we understand the UK's exit strategy. If it's going to be pure WTO, for example, I'd expect the Nationalists to win handily.
Is there any polling on whether the Scots think joining the Euro and Schengen is a price worth paying to get independence?
Leaving the EU could be achieved with limited near-term economic consequences. Instead we seem to be going for maximum economic damage.
Which is an act of criminal negligence by the current government, who should have outlined what leave meant and are expected to have plans for all eventualities. How is it we have detailed plans for accidents in nuclear power stations with chances down in the one in tens of millions, but we don't have even the most basic plan for what we do after a leave result in a referendum which forecasts never put below about a 20% likelihood.
Yes, but if they'd claimed Leave meant EFTA/EEA, then a huge number of people would have been up in arms about not being offered an option that restricted immigration.
I'm writing the next thread, can you confirm that EFTA/EEA means Freedom of Movement?
You have more flexibility in EFTA/EEA.
Some unilateral restriction on freedom of movement is allowed.
There is also more freedom to restrict benefits to EU citizens migrating here, and AIUI force them to take out health insurance.
To my mind the problem is caused by people who migrate either without jobs or to do low paid low skills jobs. Take housing benefit, tax credits and unemployment benefit away and bring in compulsory health insurance and the problem goes away.
Some of those things were already in our power though....
We cannot have it both ways. There's no doubt that Brexit is daft on purely economic grounds - there's a price to be paid. That price will continue for several years.
Having made that decision, we can't now just turn on the Scots and tell them that they're committing economic suicide - that's just rerunning the old too puir, too wee, too daft crap that people have peddled for years.
Scotland should have a second Sindy referendum. I do think it would be wise to wait until we understand the UK's exit strategy. If it's going to be pure WTO, for example, I'd expect the Nationalists to win handily.
Is there any polling on whether the Scots think joining the Euro and Schengen is a price worth paying to get independence?
And giving back fisheries and farming rights having only just regained them.
Westminster will never give us any say in fisheries
We cannot have it both ways. There's no doubt that Brexit is daft on purely economic grounds - there's a price to be paid. That price will continue for several years.
Having made that decision, we can't now just turn on the Scots and tell them that they're committing economic suicide - that's just rerunning the old too puir, too wee, too daft crap that people have peddled for years.
Scotland should have a second Sindy referendum. I do think it would be wise to wait until we understand the UK's exit strategy. If it's going to be pure WTO, for example, I'd expect the Nationalists to win handily.
Is there any polling on whether the Scots think joining the Euro and Schengen is a price worth paying to get independence?
They wouldn't need to join Schengen, the EU treaties recognise both it and the Common Travel Area.
So we're talking about a net contribution óf £10m a week,
Works well for the strapline.
Being in the UK costs Scotland £200m a week.
Vote Yes in May 2017
I thought Scotland was a net beneficiary thanks to Barnet?
I assumed it was a joke....
Ha Ha Ha , your village is searching for you
Jog on and get a sense of humour you saddo
Oh, sorry yes, my fault entirely. I hadn't realised I was dealing with such an incredibly wise man. I humbly beg your forgiveness.
You are almost forgiven , at least you have realised the error of your ways.
No, no - my abrogation should observe no bounds. What all your followers (and all those you have insulted in the past) desire is a mere sign, a simple sign as to your magnificent wisdom.
My ways are your ways oh great malcolmg - these are infallible ways for in this you have vouched.
edit - you could also say that you were rather rude, and you apologise
Omnium , your first one was correct , your edit not so much but given you may not be au fait with my ways , I apologise unreservedly if you were upset by my sense of humour. I will however be unlikely to change in the future, you may well be on receiving end of Turnip of the Day Awards at some point.., then you will know you have made it
Pull yourself together man!
I wasn't upset even slightly by your sense of humour, but rather the failure of it. If the price of you're taking a second look at your posts and being a little less belligerent is being made Turnip of the Day then I would warmly embrace it.
Happily I can offer a better reward - you can consider yourself as PB Man-of-the-day if you just step back a moment, consider that you may have been a touch out-of-order, and give yourself a bit of a telling-off.
I am never out of order, you obviously have no sense of humour. Get those pigtails sorted properly.
We cannot have it both ways. There's no doubt that Brexit is daft on purely economic grounds - there's a price to be paid. That price will continue for several years.
Having made that decision, we can't now just turn on the Scots and tell them that they're committing economic suicide - that's just rerunning the old too puir, too wee, too daft crap that people have peddled for years.
Scotland should have a second Sindy referendum. I do think it would be wise to wait until we understand the UK's exit strategy. If it's going to be pure WTO, for example, I'd expect the Nationalists to win handily.
Is there any polling on whether the Scots think joining the Euro and Schengen is a price worth paying to get independence?
And giving back fisheries and farming rights having only just regained them.
Westminster will never give us any say in fisheries
Under devolved government, I'd see little point in Westminster trying to keep it a UK issue. It would be a big own goal. Either they will give it to Nicola, or she'll have a little tussle over it and get it that way.
Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.
Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.
We cannot have it both ways. There's no doubt that Brexit is daft on purely economic grounds - there's a price to be paid. That price will continue for several years.
Having made that decision, we can't now just turn on the Scots and tell them that they're committing economic suicide - that's just rerunning the old too puir, too wee, too daft crap that people have peddled for years.
Scotland should have a second Sindy referendum. I do think it would be wise to wait until we understand the UK's exit strategy. If it's going to be pure WTO, for example, I'd expect the Nationalists to win handily.
Is there any polling on whether the Scots think joining the Euro and Schengen is a price worth paying to get independence?
And giving back fisheries and farming rights having only just regained them.
Westminster will never give us any say in fisheries
Under devolved government, I'd see little point in Westminster trying to keep it a UK issue. It would be a big own goal. Either they will give it to Nicola, or she'll have a little tussle over it and get it that way.
Which is why I was Remain in both, although the Scottish vote I didn't really debate with anyone as I was not a voter.
True, they will have one definitely. But the SNP case on finances is awful, vague and downright mendacious......and at the same time as they criticise Boris et al.
There is nothing wrong with the finances of an Independent Scotland unless you deliberately include the UK membership fees of £200m a week that Scotland gets applied to its budget.
That's why Kevin Hague's chokkablog never ever looks at spending.
Please be kidding.
GERS is a reflection of the current fiscal framework of the United Kingdom. It therefore includes significant elements which are open to negotiation in the disentanglement of the UK's finances and significant spending lines which simply would not exist in an Independent Scotland.
Chokkablog deliberately ignores these.
There are other issues with GERS (for example the figures are not generated by the Scottish Government, everything comes from the Treasury) and GERS only uses quite basic population share adjustments which do not provide a proper reflection of things such as head office effects.
The full accurate picture is very difficult and expensive to calculate, it might be reasonable to estimate that revenues would be marginally higher for Independent Scotland while costs significantly lower.
Indigo. Are you still optimistic for the UK's economic prospects in the short, medium and long term? Also what arrangement are you hoping the UK achieve with Europe post Brexit?
Until recently I had great faith in the British people to weather a short term downturn and make the best of the new world, making deals with countries outside the EU for a neutral medium term and improved long term. However given the amount of crying, naysaying and attempts to cling on to nurse I am now not quite so sure, the stiff upper lip and bulldog spirit appear to be long gone.
If I had any confidence that the people would be offered another look at the issue in a decade I could live with the EEA/EFTA approach for now and let people see how they feel about the immigration issue later on. My main concern is that politicians having been given a massive scare are not going to feel inclined to ask the people what they think in future, and so the question is not going to get asked.
I fear there will be increasing civil unrest in the medium term if we stay with Freedom of Movement because frankly politicians are not going to make the changes required to make it work, vis contributory benefits systems, and proper provision on health and schooling. The former because the left and wishywashy Tories will scream blue murder at the merest suggestion, and the later because the British public will never accept the tax rises required to fund it.
The thing is, there has been no planning for post a Leave vote by anyone.
There is no consensus about what Leave means.
There was no realisation that a long period of limbo would have economic consequences.
Before the vote, I repeatedly stated that the choice should be between two concrete proposals. I stated that - failing that - there should be a supplementary question on the ballot paper about the UK's future relationship with the EU.
Without this, anyone claiming to know the will of the British people is lying. No-one knows. And the longer we sit there, with future trade relationships unknown the longer businesses will sit on their hands.
Leaving the EU could be achieved with limited near-term economic consequences. Instead we seem to be going for maximum economic damage.
The think that has angered me most about Cameron is that he has genuinely done no contingency planning. It's utterly extraordinary and a complete dereliction of duty.
I had also said that a few days ago and was widely shouted down as being unrealistic and naive. But it does forewarn companies considering hiring Osborne or Cameron for any similar role.
I consider myself a Labour LEAVER: I voted Lab at GE2015, and I voted LEAVE at EUref
Sunil. I am disappointed, that makes you very common. With the exception of SO, millions are Labour Leavers, walking away from the steaming excrement that the party has become. I always thought of you as a principled individual. Smiley face of I knew how to do it.
On a serious note I think it would be a giant step forward if party support became detached from the emotional support some parties claim and the family loyalty, which is entirely inappropriate for free thinking adults.
Support should depend on your view of the policies and people, not illogical ties.
Which is why I was Remain in both, although the Scottish vote I didn't really debate with anyone as I was not a voter.
True, they will have one definitely. But the SNP case on finances is awful, vague and downright mendacious......and at the same time as they criticise Boris et al.
There is nothing wrong with the finances of an Independent Scotland unless you deliberately include the UK membership fees of £200m a week that Scotland gets applied to its budget.
That's why Kevin Hague's chokkablog never ever looks at spending.
Please be kidding.
GERS is a reflection of the current fiscal framework of the United Kingdom. It therefore includes significant elements which are open to negotiation in the disentanglement of the UK's finances and significant spending lines which simply would not exist in an Independent Scotland.
Chokkablog deliberately ignores these.
There are other issues with GERS (for example the figures are not generated by the Scottish Government, everything comes from the Treasury) and GERS only uses quite basic population share adjustments which do not provide a proper reflection of things such as head office effects.
The full accurate picture is very difficult and expensive to calculate, it might be reasonable to estimate that revenues would be marginally higher for Independent Scotland while costs significantly lower.
Lowlander , you are fighting a lost cause, they actually believe the crap they spout.
We cannot have it both ways. There's no doubt that Brexit is daft on purely economic grounds - there's a price to be paid. That price will continue for several years.
Having made that decision, we can't now just turn on the Scots and tell them that they're committing economic suicide - that's just rerunning the old too puir, too wee, too daft crap that people have peddled for years.
Scotland should have a second Sindy referendum. I do think it would be wise to wait until we understand the UK's exit strategy. If it's going to be pure WTO, for example, I'd expect the Nationalists to win handily.
Is there any polling on whether the Scots think joining the Euro and Schengen is a price worth paying to get independence?
They don't have to join Schengen and they wouldn't meet the Euro convergence criteria.
Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.
Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.
They are still in bother and £100 Billion of Tat not going out would cause quite a few issues methinks. Given most of it will be from Germany and France.
Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.
Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.
Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.
Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.
They are still in bother and £100 Billion of Tat not going out would cause quite a few issues methinks. Given most of it will be from Germany and France.
Remind me, what does Scotland export that is not black and sticky?
Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.
Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.
They are still in bother and £100 Billion of Tat not going out would cause quite a few issues methinks. Given most of it will be from Germany and France.
Remind me, what does Scotland export that is not black and sticky?
Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.
Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.
They are still in bother and £100 Billion of Tat not going out would cause quite a few issues methinks. Given most of it will be from Germany and France.
Remind me, what does Scotland export that is not black and sticky?
Scotch whisky accounts for around a quarter of all British food exports.
I had also said that a few days ago and was widely shouted down as being unrealistic and naive. But it does forewarn companies considering hiring Osborne or Cameron for any similar role.
Apparently governments aren't meant to plan for things that they don't like and never wanted to happen. Who knew?
Which is why I was Remain in both, although the Scottish vote I didn't really debate with anyone as I was not a voter.
True, they will have one definitely. But the SNP case on finances is awful, vague and downright mendacious......and at the same time as they criticise Boris et al.
There is nothing wrong with the finances of an Independent Scotland unless you deliberately include the UK membership fees of £200m a week that Scotland gets applied to its budget.
That's why Kevin Hague's chokkablog never ever looks at spending.
Please be kidding.
GERS is a reflection of the current fiscal framework of the United Kingdom. It therefore includes significant elements which are open to negotiation in the disentanglement of the UK's finances and significant spending lines which simply would not exist in an Independent Scotland.
Chokkablog deliberately ignores these.
There are other issues with GERS (for example the figures are not generated by the Scottish Government, everything comes from the Treasury) and GERS only uses quite basic population share adjustments which do not provide a proper reflection of things such as head office effects.
The full accurate picture is very difficult and expensive to calculate, it might be reasonable to estimate that revenues would be marginally higher for Independent Scotland while costs significantly lower.
No he doesn't, he makes it very clear with each analysis what the issues are with separating the figures and also makes it clear that the figures would not be a full and clear representation of an independent Scotland's finances. He treats them as what they are, the closest indicator that we all have to understand the state of the governments finances in Scotland. You clearly have not read his figures and have instead read the semi-literate ramblings of Wings instead.
There is margin or error in the figures, and the reverse could also be very true with large short term costs as Scotland begins to run its own finances such as setting up its own tax office.
Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.
Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.
They are still in bother and £100 Billion of Tat not going out would cause quite a few issues methinks. Given most of it will be from Germany and France.
Remind me, what does Scotland export that is not black and sticky?
Which is why I was Remain in both, although the Scottish vote I didn't really debate with anyone as I was not a voter.
True, they will have one definitely. But the SNP case on finances is awful, vague and downright mendacious......and at the same time as they criticise Boris et al.
There is nothing wrong with the finances of an Independent Scotland unless you deliberately include the UK membership fees of £200m a week that Scotland gets applied to its budget.
That's why Kevin Hague's chokkablog never ever looks at spending.
Please be kidding.
GERS is a reflection of the current fiscal framework of the United Kingdom. It therefore includes significant elements which are open to negotiation in the disentanglement of the UK's finances and significant spending lines which simply would not exist in an Independent Scotland.
Chokkablog deliberately ignores these.
There are other issues with GERS (for example the figures are not generated by the Scottish Government, everything comes from the Treasury) and GERS only uses quite basic population share adjustments which do not provide a proper reflection of things such as head office effects.
The full accurate picture is very difficult and expensive to calculate, it might be reasonable to estimate that revenues would be marginally higher for Independent Scotland while costs significantly lower.
Lowlander , you are fighting a lost cause, they actually believe the crap they spout.
I consider myself a Labour LEAVER: I voted Lab at GE2015, and I voted LEAVE at EUref
Sunil. I am disappointed, that makes you very common. With the exception of SO, millions are Labour Leavers, walking away from the steaming excrement that the party has become. I always thought of you as a principled individual. Smiley face of I knew how to do it.
On a serious note I think it would be a giant step forward if party support became detached from the emotional support some parties claim and the family loyalty, which is entirely inappropriate for free thinking adults.
Support should depend on your view of the policies and people, not illogical ties.
You are a fair weather friend. Politics, like football should be part of your DNA. That is why the loss of Scotland and potentially the WWC represents an existential crisis for Labour. I'm Labour, even if Farage becomes leader.
Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.
Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.
They are still in bother and £100 Billion of Tat not going out would cause quite a few issues methinks. Given most of it will be from Germany and France.
Remind me, what does Scotland export that is not black and sticky?
Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.
Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.
They are still in bother and £100 Billion of Tat not going out would cause quite a few issues methinks. Given most of it will be from Germany and France.
Remind me, what does Scotland export that is not black and sticky?
Scotch whisky accounts for around a quarter of all British food exports.
No idea what the value of oil exports is these days but Scotch whisky exports are worth just under £4 billion a year. That is one very important industry.
Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.
Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.
They are still in bother and £100 Billion of Tat not going out would cause quite a few issues methinks. Given most of it will be from Germany and France.
Remind me, what does Scotland export that is not black and sticky?
Which is why I was Remain in both, although the Scottish vote I didn't really debate with anyone as I was not a voter.
True, they will have one definitely. But the SNP case on finances is awful, vague and downright mendacious......and at the same time as they criticise Boris et al.
There is nothing wrong with the finances of an Independent Scotland unless you deliberately include the UK membership fees of £200m a week that Scotland gets applied to its budget.
That's why Kevin Hague's chokkablog never ever looks at spending.
Please be kidding.
GERS is a reflection of the current fiscal framework of the United Kingdom. It therefore includes significant elements which are open to negotiation in the disentanglement of the UK's finances and significant spending lines which simply would not exist in an Independent Scotland.
Chokkablog deliberately ignores these.
There are other issues with GERS (for example the figures are not generated by the Scottish Government, everything comes from the Treasury) and GERS only uses quite basic population share adjustments which do not provide a proper reflection of things such as head office effects.
The full accurate picture is very difficult and expensive to calculate, it might be reasonable to estimate that revenues would be marginally higher for Independent Scotland while costs significantly lower.
No he doesn't, he makes it very clear with each analysis what the issues are with separating the figures and also makes it clear that the figures would not be a full and clear representation of an independent Scotland's finances. He treats them as what they are, the closest indicator that we all have to understand the state of the governments finances in Scotland. You clearly have not read his figures and have instead read the semi-literate ramblings of Wings instead.
There is margin or error in the figures, and the reverse could also be very true with large short term costs as Scotland begins to run its own finances such as setting up its own tax office.
Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.
Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.
They are still in bother and £100 Billion of Tat not going out would cause quite a few issues methinks. Given most of it will be from Germany and France.
Remind me, what does Scotland export that is not black and sticky?
Scotch whisky accounts for around a quarter of all British food exports.
I wonder what a good shot of whisky would do to those Lab Rats that fared so badly on rice crispies?
Which is why I was Remain in both, although the Scottish vote I didn't really debate with anyone as I was not a voter.
True, they will have one definitely. But the SNP case on finances is awful, vague and downright mendacious......and at the same time as they criticise Boris et al.
There is nothing wrong with the finances of an Independent Scotland unless you deliberately include the UK membership fees of £200m a week that Scotland gets applied to its budget.
That's why Kevin Hague's chokkablog never ever looks at spending.
Please be kidding.
GERS is a reflection of the current fiscal framework of the United Kingdom. It therefore includes significant elements which are open to negotiation in the disentanglement of the UK's finances and significant spending lines which simply would not exist in an Independent Scotland.
Chokkablog deliberately ignores these.
There are other issues with GERS (for example the figures are not generated by the Scottish Government, everything comes from the Treasury) and GERS only uses quite basic population share adjustments which do not provide a proper reflection of things such as head office effects.
The full accurate picture is very difficult and expensive to calculate, it might be reasonable to estimate that revenues would be marginally higher for Independent Scotland while costs significantly lower.
No he doesn't, he makes it very clear with each analysis what the issues are with separating the figures and also makes it clear that the figures would not be a full and clear representation of an independent Scotland's finances. He treats them as what they are, the closest indicator that we all have to understand the state of the governments finances in Scotland. You clearly have not read his figures and have instead read the semi-literate ramblings of Wings instead.
There is margin or error in the figures, and the reverse could also be very true with large short term costs as Scotland begins to run its own finances such as setting up its own tax office.
Which is why I was Remain in both, although the Scottish vote I didn't really debate with anyone as I was not a voter.
True, they will have one definitely. But the SNP case on finances is awful, vague and downright mendacious......and at the same time as they criticise Boris et al.
There is nothing wrong with the finances of an Independent Scotland unless you deliberately include the UK membership fees of £200m a week that Scotland gets applied to its budget.
That's why Kevin Hague's chokkablog never ever looks at spending.
Please be kidding.
GERS is a reflection of the current fiscal framework of the United Kingdom. It therefore includes significant elements which are open to negotiation in the disentanglement of the UK's finances and significant spending lines which simply would not exist in an Independent Scotland.
Chokkablog deliberately ignores these.
There are other issues with GERS (for example the figures are not generated by the Scottish Government, everything comes from the Treasury) and GERS only uses quite basic population share adjustments which do not provide a proper reflection of things such as head office effects.
The full accurate picture is very difficult and expensive to calculate, it might be reasonable to estimate that revenues would be marginally higher for Independent Scotland while costs significantly lower.
Lowlander , you are fighting a lost cause, they actually believe the crap they spout.
I think you two need to get a room #bantz
You are bowing out then Harold, bloodied and battered to a pulp, having tried to use Kevin Hague's pure mince as facts. We salute your courage.
So, Scotland's economy is dependent on the export of various long chain hydrocarbons. Some that are black and sticky, and some that are a pale golden color.
Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.
Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.
They are still in bother and £100 Billion of Tat not going out would cause quite a few issues methinks. Given most of it will be from Germany and France.
Remind me, what does Scotland export that is not black and sticky?
So, Scotland's economy is dependent on the export of various long chain hydrocarbons. Some that are black and sticky, and some that are a pale golden color.
Also electricity, we have an embarrassing surplus of the stuff.
Which is why I was Remain in both, although the Scottish vote I didn't really debate with anyone as I was not a voter.
True, they will have one definitely. But the SNP case on finances is awful, vague and downright mendacious......and at the same time as they criticise Boris et al.
There is nothing wrong with the finances of an Independent Scotland unless you deliberately include the UK membership fees of £200m a week that Scotland gets applied to its budget.
That's why Kevin Hague's chokkablog never ever looks at spending.
Please be kidding.
GERS is a reflection of the current fiscal framework of the United Kingdom. It therefore includes significant elements which are open to negotiation in the disentanglement of the UK's finances and significant spending lines which simply would not exist in an Independent Scotland.
Chokkablog deliberately ignores these.
There are other issues with GERS (for example the figures are not generated by the Scottish Government, everything comes from the Treasury) and GERS only uses quite basic population share adjustments which do not provide a proper reflection of things such as head office effects.
The full accurate picture is very difficult and expensive to calculate, it might be reasonable to estimate that revenues would be marginally higher for Independent Scotland while costs significantly lower.
Lowlander , you are fighting a lost cause, they actually believe the crap they spout.
I think you two need to get a room #bantz
You are bowing out then Harold, bloodied and battered to a pulp, having tried to use Kevin Hague's pure mince as facts. We salute your courage.
"We"? Blimey, we have royalty in the thread.
Bless your little cotton socks but troll posting from 2006 is rather old hat wot wot.
Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.
Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.
They are still in bother and £100 Billion of Tat not going out would cause quite a few issues methinks. Given most of it will be from Germany and France.
Remind me, what does Scotland export that is not black and sticky?
Scotch whisky accounts for around a quarter of all British food exports.
Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.
Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.
They are still in bother and £100 Billion of Tat not going out would cause quite a few issues methinks. Given most of it will be from Germany and France.
Remind me, what does Scotland export that is not black and sticky?
Scotch whisky accounts for around a quarter of all British food exports.
No idea what the value of oil exports is these days but Scotch whisky exports are worth just under £4 billion a year. That is one very important industry.
And growing all the time. Production isn't labour intensive enough to support huge amounts of jobs though. There are plenty of ancillary jobs however.
No he doesn't, he makes it very clear with each analysis what the issues are with separating the figures and also makes it clear that the figures would not be a full and clear representation of an independent Scotland's finances. He treats them as what they are, the closest indicator that we all have to understand the state of the governments finances in Scotland. You clearly have not read his figures and have instead read the semi-literate ramblings of Wings instead.
There is margin or error in the figures, and the reverse could also be very true with large short term costs as Scotland begins to run its own finances such as setting up its own tax office.
Utter piffle. He never analyses costs (because they don't benefit his argument) and his figures are a nonsense because it is impossible to give a reasonable accurate figure for Scottish revenue post Independence based on the current fiscal framework (not least because we don't know what the negotiated settlement would be). All he does is give an indicative number for the current fiscal framework and gives no justification as to why it would exist post independence.
There is absolutely no account given for the complexity and no attempt to analyse the complexity of the true revenue figures on chokkablog. This is not surprising because the reality is that it would be extremely difficult and expensive to do so and lots of the adjustments made for the current fiscal framework would be different under Independence.
Which is why I was Remain in both, although the Scottish vote I didn't really debate with anyone as I was not a voter.
True, they will have one definitely. But the SNP case on finances is awful, vague and downright mendacious......and at the same time as they criticise Boris et al.
There is nothing wrong with the finances of an Independent Scotland unless you deliberately include the UK membership fees of £200m a week that Scotland gets applied to its budget.
That's why Kevin Hague's chokkablog never ever looks at spending.
Please be kidding.
GERS is a reflection of the current fiscal framework of the United Kingdom. It therefore includes significant elements which are open to negotiation in the disentanglement of the UK's finances and significant spending lines which simply would not exist in an Independent Scotland.
Chokkablog deliberately ignores these.
There are other issues with GERS (for example the figures are not generated by the Scottish Government, everything comes from the Treasury) and GERS only uses quite basic population share adjustments which do not provide a proper reflection of things such as head office effects.
The full accurate picture is very difficult and expensive to calculate, it might be reasonable to estimate that revenues would be marginally higher for Independent Scotland while costs significantly lower.
No he doesn't, he makes it very clear with each analysis what the issues are with separating the figures and also makes it clear that the figures would not be a full and clear representation of an independent Scotland's finances. He treats them as what they are, the closest indicator that we all have to understand the state of the governments finances in Scotland. You clearly have not read his figures and have instead read the semi-literate ramblings of Wings instead.
There is margin or error in the figures, and the reverse could also be very true with large short term costs as Scotland begins to run its own finances such as setting up its own tax office.
Kevin, you are talking mince
Hush, adults are posting.
Now you are just making a T*T of yourself , I shall retire laughing my socks off
So, Scotland's economy is dependent on the export of various long chain hydrocarbons. Some that are black and sticky, and some that are a pale golden color.
I have to say the odd drab of the pale colour greatly enhances my late evenings from time to time
Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.
Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.
They are still in bother and £100 Billion of Tat not going out would cause quite a few issues methinks. Given most of it will be from Germany and France.
Remind me, what does Scotland export that is not black and sticky?
Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.
Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.
They are still in bother and £100 Billion of Tat not going out would cause quite a few issues methinks. Given most of it will be from Germany and France.
Remind me, what does Scotland export that is not black and sticky?
Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.
Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.
They are still in bother and £100 Billion of Tat not going out would cause quite a few issues methinks. Given most of it will be from Germany and France.
Remind me, what does Scotland export that is not black and sticky?
In the early years of Independence, it would also be a big exporter of transfer payments from exported people. Hopefully that would reduce over time.
Isn't there a very big manufacturer of power generators in Scotland?
Yeah forgot Agrekko, world leader. but only £1.5bn total turnover so exports will be less than £1bn. Life Sciences are supposed to be very valuable to Scotland too but I have no idea on the actual number.
Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.
Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.
They are still in bother and £100 Billion of Tat not going out would cause quite a few issues methinks. Given most of it will be from Germany and France.
Remind me, what does Scotland export that is not black and sticky?
Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.
Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.
They are still in bother and £100 Billion of Tat not going out would cause quite a few issues methinks. Given most of it will be from Germany and France.
Remind me, what does Scotland export that is not black and sticky?
Scotch whisky accounts for around a quarter of all British food exports.
We largely don't export food though.
Scotland does. And much of it is at the premium end which is much less exposed to world market prices (not all but significant parts).
No he doesn't, he makes it very clear with each analysis what the issues are with separating the figures and also makes it clear that the figures would not be a full and clear representation of an independent Scotland's finances. He treats them as what they are, the closest indicator that we all have to understand the state of the governments finances in Scotland. You clearly have not read his figures and have instead read the semi-literate ramblings of Wings instead.
There is margin or error in the figures, and the reverse could also be very true with large short term costs as Scotland begins to run its own finances such as setting up its own tax office.
Utter piffle. He never analyses costs (because they don't benefit his argument) and his figures are a nonsense because it is impossible to give a reasonable accurate figure for Scottish revenue post Independence based on the current fiscal framework (not least because we don't know what the negotiated settlement would be). All he does is give an indicative number for the current fiscal framework and gives no justification as to why it would exist post independence.
There is absolutely no account given for the complexity and no attempt to analyse the complexity of the true revenue figures on chokkablog. This is not surprising because the reality is that it would be extremely difficult and expensive to do so and lots of the adjustments made for the current fiscal framework would be different under Independence.
and at the end; "None of this is to suggest that Scotland couldn’t be an independent country or that raw economics should be the only consideration. But if we’re to be honest about the economic implications, it now seems clear that independence will only happen within our lifetimes if the majority of Scots are willing to vote to become considerably worse off, quite possibly for generations to come."
And yes, he says that it cannot be used to predict and independent Scotland fully because it is an analysis of the past and not the future but it is the closest set of figures we have to understand the Scottish government finances.
He goes through the revenue figures extensively, what figures are he missing for example if you disagree? So far you have been excessively vague.
Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.
Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.
They are still in bother and £100 Billion of Tat not going out would cause quite a few issues methinks. Given most of it will be from Germany and France.
Remind me, what does Scotland export that is not black and sticky?
Scotch whisky accounts for around a quarter of all British food exports.
No idea what the value of oil exports is these days but Scotch whisky exports are worth just under £4 billion a year. That is one very important industry.
And growing all the time. Production isn't labour intensive enough to support huge amounts of jobs though. There are plenty of ancillary jobs however.
Which are, sadly, mainly in London. I would not be surprised if more Income Tax is paid in Brent with regards to the Scots Whisky industry than is paid in the whole of Scotland. Of course all that Income Tax is classed by the Treasury as "London Region".
Which is why I was Remain in both, although the Scottish vote I didn't really debate with anyone as I was not a voter.
True, they will have one definitely. But the SNP case on finances is awful, vague and downright mendacious......and at the same time as they criticise Boris et al.
There is nothing wrong with the finances of an Independent Scotland unless you deliberately include the UK membership fees of £200m a week that Scotland gets applied to its budget.
That's why Kevin Hague's chokkablog never ever looks at spending.
Please be kidding.
GERS is a reflection of the current fiscal framework of the United Kingdom. It therefore includes significant elements which are open to negotiation in the disentanglement of the UK's finances and significant spending lines which simply would not exist in an Independent Scotland.
Chokkablog deliberately ignores these.
There are other issues with GERS (for example the figures are not generated by the Scottish Government, everything comes from the Treasury) and GERS only uses quite basic population share adjustments which do not provide a proper reflection of things such as head office effects.
The full accurate picture is very difficult and expensive to calculate, it might be reasonable to estimate that revenues would be marginally higher for Independent Scotland while costs significantly lower.
No he doesn't, he makes it very clear with each analysis what the issues are with separating the figures and also makes it clear that the figures would not be a full and clear representation of an independent Scotland's finances. He treats them as what they are, the closest indicator that we all have to understand the state of the governments finances in Scotland. You clearly have not read his figures and have instead read the semi-literate ramblings of Wings instead.
There is margin or error in the figures, and the reverse could also be very true with large short term costs as Scotland begins to run its own finances such as setting up its own tax office.
Kevin, you are talking mince
Hush, adults are posting.
Now you are just making a T*T of yourself , I shall retire laughing my socks off
I have to say your arrogant pomposity must be an affectation because so far you've shown nothing to back it up with beside flailing around shouting "banter" and then apparently flouncing after declaring that "we" have decided I had. Still to find out who "we" is. Good luck in your future endeavors.
Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.
Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.
They are still in bother and £100 Billion of Tat not going out would cause quite a few issues methinks. Given most of it will be from Germany and France.
Remind me, what does Scotland export that is not black and sticky?
How would people on here feel about corporation tax in Britain falling below Ireland's? Say if it was revenue neutral in the short term by closing loopholes but raised say an extra few billion in the short term. The chancellor is planning cutting below 15%.
No he doesn't, he makes it very clear with each analysis what the issues are with separating the figures and also makes it clear that the figures would not be a full and clear representation of an independent Scotland's finances. He treats them as what they are, the closest indicator that we all have to understand the state of the governments finances in Scotland. You clearly have not read his figures and have instead read the semi-literate ramblings of Wings instead.
There is margin or error in the figures, and the reverse could also be very true with large short term costs as Scotland begins to run its own finances such as setting up its own tax office.
Utter piffle. He never analyses costs (because they don't benefit his argument) and his figures are a nonsense because it is impossible to give a reasonable accurate figure for Scottish revenue post Independence based on the current fiscal framework (not least because we don't know what the negotiated settlement would be). All he does is give an indicative number for the current fiscal framework and gives no justification as to why it would exist post independence.
There is absolutely no account given for the complexity and no attempt to analyse the complexity of the true revenue figures on chokkablog. This is not surprising because the reality is that it would be extremely difficult and expensive to do so and lots of the adjustments made for the current fiscal framework would be different under Independence.
and at the end; "None of this is to suggest that Scotland couldn’t be an independent country or that raw economics should be the only consideration. But if we’re to be honest about the economic implications, it now seems clear that independence will only happen within our lifetimes if the majority of Scots are willing to vote to become considerably worse off, quite possibly for generations to come."
And yes, he says that it cannot be used to predict and independent Scotland fully because it is an analysis of the past and not the future but it is the closest set of figures we have to understand the Scottish government finances.
He goes through the revenue figures extensively, what figures are he missing for example if you disagree? So far you have been excessively vague.
Perhaps you can point me to where he adjusts revenue for tax differentials caused by head office effects (such as Diageo being HQed in London). Just as a starter.
To summarize - as it becomes ever more apparent that Gove/Johnson/Leadsom/Stuart/et al have spent years and more recently months campaigning to leave the EU without a thought in their pretty little heads of what they wanted or how it might work, it's all DCs fault. You couldn't make it up.
Europe seems to be in perpetual economic limbo with the woes of the Eurozone. They have a £100bn surplus at stake in their dealings with the UK. The German car industry is playing with over 20% of it's exports.
Did you know that, even if the Eurozone exports to the UK fell to zero, it would still run a current account surplus.
They are still in bother and £100 Billion of Tat not going out would cause quite a few issues methinks. Given most of it will be from Germany and France.
Remind me, what does Scotland export that is not black and sticky?
Scotch whisky accounts for around a quarter of all British food exports.
No idea what the value of oil exports is these days but Scotch whisky exports are worth just under £4 billion a year. That is one very important industry.
And growing all the time. Production isn't labour intensive enough to support huge amounts of jobs though. There are plenty of ancillary jobs however.
Which are, sadly, mainly in London. I would not be surprised if more Income Tax is paid in Brent with regards to the Scots Whisky industry than is paid in the whole of Scotland. Of course all that Income Tax is classed by the Treasury as "London Region".
Scotch whisky industry.
And I strongly doubt it.
I would be rather sadder about the degree of foreign ownership - in your brain obviously UK is foreign, but we share a tax base. The majority of the industry is owned by the likes of LVMH, Pernod Ricard, Barcardi, Beam Suntory etc., with more going as we write. A sign of success, yes, but still profits not flowing back into Scotland.
I consider myself a Labour LEAVER: I voted Lab at GE2015, and I voted LEAVE at EUref
Sunil. I am disappointed, that makes you very common. With the exception of SO, millions are Labour Leavers, walking away from the steaming excrement that the party has become. I always thought of you as a principled individual. Smiley face of I knew how to do it.
On a serious note I think it would be a giant step forward if party support became detached from the emotional support some parties claim and the family loyalty, which is entirely inappropriate for free thinking adults.
Support should depend on your view of the policies and people, not illogical ties.
You are a fair weather friend. Politics, like football should be part of your DNA. That is why the loss of Scotland and potentially the WWC represents an existential crisis for Labour. I'm Labour, even if Farage becomes leader.
Labour is a word, that is all
It can be something good or something bad.
I am for good, fairness and progress. If it is called Thatcherism, socialism, corbynism or idealism I care not a jot. I couldn't support a party out of family loyalty or emotional ties. The party changes, sometimes for the better sometimes for the worse. Fight for what I believe in, sure. Givr the party I used to support a kicking, sure if I think they deserve it. Move on? Sure, if it achieved my goals.
No he doesn't, he makes it very clear with each analysis what the issues are with separating the figures and also makes it clear that the figures would not be a full and clear representation of an independent Scotland's finances. He treats them as what they are, the closest indicator that we all have to understand the state of the governments finances in Scotland. You clearly have not read his figures and have instead read the semi-literate ramblings of Wings instead.
There is margin or error in the figures, and the reverse could also be very true with large short term costs as Scotland begins to run its own finances such as setting up its own tax office.
Utter piffle. He never analyses costs (because they don't benefit his argument) and his figures are a nonsense because it is impossible to give a reasonable accurate figure for Scottish revenue post Independence based on the current fiscal framework (not least because we don't know what the negotiated settlement would be). All he does is give an indicative number for the current fiscal framework and gives no justification as to why it would exist post independence.
There is absolutely no account given for the complexity and no attempt to analyse the complexity of the true revenue figures on chokkablog. This is not surprising because the reality is that it would be extremely difficult and expensive to do so and lots of the adjustments made for the current fiscal framework would be different under Independence.
and at the end; "None of this is to suggest that Scotland couldn’t be an independent country or that raw economics should be the only consideration. But if we’re to be honest about the economic implications, it now seems clear that independence will only happen within our lifetimes if the majority of Scots are willing to vote to become considerably worse off, quite possibly for generations to come."
And yes, he says that it cannot be used to predict and independent Scotland fully because it is an analysis of the past and not the future but it is the closest set of figures we have to understand the Scottish government finances.
He goes through the revenue figures extensively, what figures are he missing for example if you disagree? So far you have been excessively vague.
To use the GERS figures as a basis for an independent Scotland means you think an independent Scotland is going to keep paying for HS2.
I don't know why Fox doesn't drop out before the first vote and save us all a few days' worth of speculation. He only has nine confirmed supporters according to Guido.
Which is why I was Remain in both, although the Scottish vote I didn't really debate with anyone as I was not a voter.
True, they will have one definitely. But the SNP case on finances is awful, vague and downright mendacious......and at the same time as they criticise Boris et al.
There is nothing wrong with the finances of an Independent Scotland unless you deliberately include the UK membership fees of £200m a week that Scotland gets applied to its budget.
That's why Kevin Hague's chokkablog never ever looks at spending.
Please be kidding.
GERS is a reflection of the current fiscal framework of the United Kingdom. It therefore includes significant elements which are open to negotiation in the disentanglement of the UK's finances and significant spending lines which simply would not exist in an Independent Scotland.
Chokkablog deliberately ignores these.
Kevin, you are talking mince
Hush, adults are posting.
Now you are just making a T*T of yourself , I shall retire laughing my socks off
I have to say your arrogant pomposity must be an affectation because so far you've shown nothing to back it up with beside flailing around shouting "banter" and then apparently flouncing after declaring that "we" have decided I had. Still to find out who "we" is. Good luck in your future endeavors.
Comments
Some unilateral restriction on freedom of movement is allowed.
There is also more freedom to restrict benefits to EU citizens migrating here, and AIUI force them to take out health insurance.
http://campaignforanindependentbritain.org.uk/some-restriction-on-free-movement-of-people-is-possible-within-the-eea-agreement/
To my mind the problem is caused by people who migrate either without jobs or to do low paid low skills jobs. Take housing benefit, tax credits and unemployment benefit away and bring in compulsory health insurance and the problem goes away.
That's why Kevin Hague's chokkablog never ever looks at spending.
Shocking collusion by Osborne. But nothing surprising from the man who could not strategise his way out of a paper bag.
I wasn't upset even slightly by your sense of humour, but rather the failure of it. If the price of you're taking a second look at your posts and being a little less belligerent is being made Turnip of the Day then I would warmly embrace it.
Happily I can offer a better reward - you can consider yourself as PB Man-of-the-day if you just step back a moment, consider that you may have been a touch out-of-order, and give yourself a bit of a telling-off.
The UK has just taken a monumental step back from the brink.
In a hotel in Breda The Netherlands this evening. The other occupants are the under 25 hockey teams from Netherlands and Belarus (who sing happy birthday in English and out of tune). Women's hockey, 40 fit young women. Sean, you would be in ecstacy!
Swimming pool or sauna? Hmm as I was up at five this morning I think boring old bed all on my own.
1) EU
2) EEA
3) Completely Out
With it obviously having to be decided by AV.
PS: No more Mr Niceguy
Chokkablog deliberately ignores these.
There are other issues with GERS (for example the figures are not generated by the Scottish Government, everything comes from the Treasury) and GERS only uses quite basic population share adjustments which do not provide a proper reflection of things such as head office effects.
The full accurate picture is very difficult and expensive to calculate, it might be reasonable to estimate that revenues would be marginally higher for Independent Scotland while costs significantly lower.
On a serious note I think it would be a giant step forward if party support became detached from the emotional support some parties claim and the family loyalty, which is entirely inappropriate for free thinking adults.
Support should depend on your view of the policies and people, not illogical ties.
You clearly have not read his figures and have instead read the semi-literate ramblings of Wings instead.
There is margin or error in the figures, and the reverse could also be very true with large short term costs as Scotland begins to run its own finances such as setting up its own tax office.
In the early years of Independence, it would also be a big exporter of transfer payments from exported people. Hopefully that would reduce over time.
You are a fair weather friend. Politics, like football should be part of your DNA. That is why the loss of Scotland and potentially the WWC represents an existential crisis for Labour.
I'm Labour, even if Farage becomes leader.
Bless your little cotton socks but troll posting from 2006 is rather old hat wot wot.
There is absolutely no account given for the complexity and no attempt to analyse the complexity of the true revenue figures on chokkablog. This is not surprising because the reality is that it would be extremely difficult and expensive to do so and lots of the adjustments made for the current fiscal framework would be different under Independence.
http://chokkablog.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/the-price-of-independence.html
and at the end;
"None of this is to suggest that Scotland couldn’t be an independent country or that raw economics should be the only consideration. But if we’re to be honest about the economic implications, it now seems clear that independence will only happen within our lifetimes if the majority of Scots are willing to vote to become considerably worse off, quite possibly for generations to come."
And yes, he says that it cannot be used to predict and independent Scotland fully because it is an analysis of the past and not the future but it is the closest set of figures we have to understand the Scottish government finances.
He goes through the revenue figures extensively, what figures are he missing for example if you disagree? So far you have been excessively vague.
Good luck in your future endeavors.
NEW THREAD NEW THREAD
And I strongly doubt it.
I would be rather sadder about the degree of foreign ownership - in your brain obviously UK is foreign, but we share a tax base. The majority of the industry is owned by the likes of LVMH, Pernod Ricard, Barcardi, Beam Suntory etc., with more going as we write. A sign of success, yes, but still profits not flowing back into Scotland.
It can be something good or something bad.
I am for good, fairness and progress. If it is called Thatcherism, socialism, corbynism or idealism I care not a jot. I couldn't support a party out of family loyalty or emotional ties. The party changes, sometimes for the better sometimes for the worse. Fight for what I believe in, sure. Givr the party I used to support a kicking, sure if I think they deserve it. Move on? Sure, if it achieved my goals.