If Scotland becomes independent

[Guest]

MSP's couldn't even sort out a building for themeselves without making a complete erse of it. Do we trust them to run an entire Nation?

[The Mighty Thor]

 

So Dave did i tell you all about our North Sea Oil reserves

[Zibi]

MSP's couldn't even sort out a building for themeselves without making a complete erse of it. Do we trust them to run an entire Nation?

Take it you trust the Tories to run Scotland then, they really are doing a great job at the moment with their desire to cut everything.

[Bigsmak]

Based upon the rather simplistic assumption that seeing as the oil is predominantly in what would become Scottish territorial waters then the taxes would be ours, regardless of where the head office was based. However, we would lose access to the UKs sizable gas reserves that are in 'English' territorial waters. (Northern North Sea is mostly oil, Southern North Sea is mostly gas, the bit in the middle near Teeside is a mixture). I imagine deals would be required to supplement the gas that comes in to St Fergus if that wasn't enough for us (can't remember the production vs consumption figures off the top of my head).

 

graeme

 

 

Good point made about taxation at the point where the oil/gas comes ashore.

 

But 1 more point I will raise is that if Taxes are raised then the Big Guns (Shell etc) will just slow or cut down the exploration side of the business while still keeping ahead with the actual production side. Why increase your tax liability when you can drill in Africa with less HSE restraints and taxation issues (although local gov'ts can be a pain in the ass.. and the new egypt / Lybia will prove to be interesting times ahead. _)

 

As I said, this finite resource will 'dry' up eventually (maybe 40 years - maybe 80.. who knows) and then what.. We don't want an independent country for 'as long as the oil lasts' ...

 

...........

 

In order for me to vote yes (and this will take a lot of persuading)

1. Detailed information regarding revenue raising methods of an independent nation. - With regards to personal and corporation taxes

2. A discussion (and conclusion) about the legal position of assets such as Oil and borders. Cross border working for example

3. Defence

4. NHS spending - will it be a UK NHS or will we have a scottish one?

5. Schooling -

6. Our place in Europe - where will we stand.. and leading into

7. Currency - will we still be linked with Stirling.. Surely this would be a bad idea, we would need our own currency and monitory controls that come with it... (look at Republic or Ireland in the Euro - we would be a small fish in the Stirling ??? pot)

8. Policing -

9. Postal Service - The monarchy - The BBC - these are part of the UK ... would we still be involved?

 

 

I'll stop now.

 

EDIT - also I'd like to know the position regarding the separation/integration of Church and State - from my own Atheist stance.

 

and

 

Immigration

[Arnold Rothstein]

Take it you trust the Tories to run Scotland then, they really are doing a great job at the moment with their desire to cut everything.

 

 

Imagine if they'd meddled with the smooth construction of the Millennium Dome and Wembley.

 

So what we're saying is that they're pretty much as shite as each other? Great.

[Walter Kidd]

as i said on the other thread, we will have to assume 10% of the UK debt, but we would also stand to gain 10% of the resources as well (can't find the damn link now though)

 

taking oil out of the equation, are you aware that whisky alone brings in approx ?3 million per year in taxes which heads straight to westminster?

 

thats just one thing that they won't be getting.

 

i would suggest that westminster are terrified of the break up of the union as they know they would ultimately be the losers while we, as a country flourish. if they think they subsidise us so heavily (total myth) why are they so desperate to keep the union?

did you know that scotland contributes 11.5% of UK GDP, with 8.5% of the population and WITHOUT taking North Sea oil revenue into account. more than enough of an economic base to go it alone dontcha think?

it is only right and fair that the key decisions affecting a country should be made in that country by the democratically elected representatives of the people of that country. and on top of that, westminster has been proven corrupt. why not allow ourselves the chance to make a good go of it?

i for one reckon we'd do a bloody good job!

 

 

?3million per year from Whisky would pay Govan's incapacity and dole money for a month.

 

Anyone who hankers after independence is a complete and utter buffoon.

[Guest]

Take it you trust the Tories to run Scotland then, they really are doing a great job at the moment with their desire to cut everything.

 

 

Alex Salmond is a very clever and capable politician, but what about the rest of them?

 

 

 

Sad to say but I'd much rather trust an Eton educated toff who feels he's fulfilling his destiny than some no mark MSP

[After The Watershed]

I didn't really want to get into the 'should RBS have been bailed out?' argument more the 'could we have done it as an independent Scotland?'. But as an aside if we had been independent at the time and only safeguarded the savings instead of bailing them out, what about the thousands of people suddenly out of work?

 

 

In my opinion it could have been bailed out if independent.

 

As for the thousands out of work the UK goverment did nothing for the coal, steel ship building and car industries when they helped to send them under. It is more likely that other banks would have taken on the customers of RBS and probably created jobs in doing so. I think the impact of debt being wiped for those home owners and credit card holders could have helped the retail industry for one which could have grown.

 

In truth to both questions we have made, we will never know. I'm glad you replied as this was a point I was trying to make. We can't keep looking to the past and think of what if's. We need to look to the future and focus on what can be done to grow our economy, prevent this from happening again and provide the best quality of life for the people of this country. (Yes I'm referring to Scotland).

[clanmac]

All we need is a couple of years of DEBATE,this is not something anyone can vote on in short notice.The questions have to be asked and answered without political spin(which will never happen,but we live in hope).All the scare mongering from both side has to be addressed,as it is happening already.If the polititions are'nt mature enough to answer the people then we need a comittee with partial views to be formed to answer the most basic of questions.Pound/Euro,Nhs/private healthcare,Taxes,Armedforces,share of uk debt.Can we survive on our own,theres a million questions to be asked and answered.

 

Anyone who has made there decision based on political or national allegiances imho needs to give them self a slap and open there eyes.Like it or not this is our time to be part of history,whatever way you vote.

[Nicholas Brody]

In order for me to vote yes (and this will take a lot of persuading)

1. Detailed information regarding revenue raising methods of an independent nation. - With regards to personal and corporation taxes

2. A discussion (and conclusion) about the legal position of assets such as Oil and borders. Cross border working for example

3. Defence

4. NHS spending - will it be a UK NHS or will we have a scottish one?

5. Schooling -

6. Our place in Europe - where will we stand.. and leading into

7. Currency - will we still be linked with Stirling.. Surely this would be a bad idea, we would need our own currency and monitory controls that come with it... (look at Republic or Ireland in the Euro - we would be a small fish in the Stirling ??? pot)

8. Policing -

9. Postal Service - The monarchy - The BBC - these are part of the UK ... would we still be involved?

 

 

I'll stop now.

 

EDIT - also I'd like to know the position regarding the separation/integration of Church and State - from my own Atheist stance.

 

and

 

Immigration

 

This

[Arnold Rothstein]

In my opinion it could have been bailed out if independent.

 

As for the thousands out of work the UK goverment did nothing for the coal, steel ship building and car industries when they helped to send them under. It is more likely that other banks would have taken on the customers of RBS and probably created jobs in doing so. I think the impact of debt being wiped for those home owners and credit card holders could have helped the retail industry for one which could have grown.

In truth to both questions we have made, we will never know. I'm glad you replied as this was a point I was trying to make. We can't keep looking to the past and think of what if's. We need to look to the future and focus on what can be done to grow our economy, prevent this from happening again and provide the best quality of life for the people of this country. (Yes I'm referring to Scotland).

 

You think that if RBS had gone under people would just have not had to pay off mortgages or credit cards????

[Rick Grimes]

Sad to say but I'd much rather trust an Eton educated toff who feels he's fulfilling his destiny than some no mark MSP

 

 

 

why?

[Big D]

Based upon the rather simplistic assumption that seeing as the oil is predominantly in what would become Scottish territorial waters then the taxes would be ours, regardless of where the head office was based. However, we would lose access to the UKs sizable gas reserves that are in 'English' territorial waters. (Northern North Sea is mostly oil, Southern North Sea is mostly gas, the bit in the middle near Teeside is a mixture). I imagine deals would be required to supplement the gas that comes in to St Fergus if that wasn't enough for us (can't remember the production vs consumption figures off the top of my head).

 

graeme

Might be worth googling a look at how the world's 126th country to become independent since WW2 handled the negotiations over oil revenues and taxation with its new neighbour and former owner. South Sudan has much of the oil but not the ports or infrastructure to exploit the market. The countries which had been intermittently at war for 30 years managed to separate fairly amicably. Britons aren't as great as Sudanese if you give any creedence to many of the posts on this thread.

[fordy]

Loving the mammoth step you have taken from independence to Socialist Republic!

 

Still, we can all dream......

 

Not a supporter of independence, but, ''Socialist Republic ?' I like the sound of that.

[kingantti1874]

I've stayed clear of this thread because of the last thread o this nature in which it seemed like I was lone voice... I will not be voting for independence in any way shape or form unless someone can prove that financially we will be significantly better off... If someone can prove that we will garner x from oil revenues over x years which will ultimately benefit me in a substantial way then fair enough I may think about it - but I have seen no substantiated evidence that this is the case so far, but the onus of proof is for those who seek change.. If we do become independent, and we ###### it up meaning I and my family are worse off.. I'll be heading south and taking my tax contributions with me... Those who **** it up can deal with consequences on their own...

[Jambo corker]

This whole Devolution max subject which Mr Salmon seems to have popped up with very cleverly has for me made me lose a lot of respect for him and his independence campaign.

 

The main policy for SNP I thought was to become an independent country - however listening to Nicola Sturgin just now has made me think they are not so confident of winning said referendum. She gave it some speil about SNP being democrates and this question should be included if Scottish people want this but I don't this.

 

It is IMO that SNP are not confident at all about winning this referendum and I think this is another cop out.

 

Edit to add this has made my mind up. If a government can't be confident about winning its main policy then I can't be confident about them running our country alone.

[Bigsmak]

This whole Devolution max subject which Mr Salmon seems to have popped up with very cleverly has for me made me lose a lot of respect for him and his independence campaign.

 

The main policy for SNP I thought was to become an independent country - however listening to Nicola Sturgin just now has made me think they are not so confident of winning said referendum. She gave it some speil about SNP being democrates and this question should be included if Scottish people want this but I don't this.

 

It is IMO that SNP are not confident at all about winning this referendum and I think this is another cop out.

 

Edit to add this has made my mind up. If a government can't be confident about winning its main policy then I can't be confident about them running our country alone.

 

 

So .. you think that the SNP know that independence is not a good idea and only included it in their election manifesto as a vote winner for the large proportion of Scottish people who vote based on feelings and beliefs rather than actual facts and realism.......????????

[Jambo, Goodbye]

Made me laugh. Has anyone else noticed that all the unionist supporters come out with negative scare mongering messages with no basis of fact? Using the tax rate in norway without also showing other facts like pay rates, standard of living etc. I started to wonder if I was reading the daily record.

 

Scared, anxious, worried, negative, doom-merchants, plague proclaimers - It's the Unionist way...

[Jambo, Goodbye]

This whole Devolution max subject which Mr Salmon seems to have popped up with very cleverly has for me made me lose a lot of respect for him and his independence campaign.

 

The main policy for SNP I thought was to become an independent country - however listening to Nicola Sturgin just now has made me think they are not so confident of winning said referendum. She gave it some speil about SNP being democrates and this question should be included if Scottish people want this but I don't this.

 

It is IMO that SNP are not confident at all about winning this referendum and I think this is another cop out.

 

Edit to add this has made my mind up. If a government can't be confident about winning its main policy then I can't be confident about them running our country alone.

 

I don't get how people can make their minds up when we have 2 and a half years of debate and discussion to go before we go to the polls

 

And an independent Scotland would trigger a new general election, so why worry about the SNP afterwards when they might not be in power by 2015 anyway?

[Jambo corker]

So .. you think that the SNP know that independence is not a good idea and only included it in their election manifesto as a vote winner for the large proportion of Scottish people who vote based on feelings and beliefs rather than actual facts and realism.......????????

I think SNP believe independence is the best thing for Scotland but are not confident of winning it. That's the only reason they have included devo max? Why else would they want it?.

 

And dont say its because they want the people of Scotland to choose and it is democratic it's as thy have been campaigning for full independence for years.

[jambos are go!]

This whole Devolution max subject which Mr Salmon seems to have popped up with very cleverly has for me made me lose a lot of respect for him and his independence campaign.

 

The main policy for SNP I thought was to become an independent country - however listening to Nicola Sturgin just now has made me think they are not so confident of winning said referendum. She gave it some speil about SNP being democrates and this question should be included if Scottish people want this but I don't this.

 

It is IMO that SNP are not confident at all about winning this referendum and I think this is another cop out.

 

Edit to add this has made my mind up. If a government can't be confident about winning its main policy then I can't be confident about them running our country alone.

 

There is a big problem with devo max which is designed either to be a halfway house or a method to keep the Nationalist cause in existence. If its a straight yes no and independence is firmly rejected what dos that mean for the SNP.. Dissulution.

 

The other problem is who will campaign for Devo Max. The SNP are committed to campaign for Independence and the The Unionists parties for the Union. So if none of the major parties are prepared to support Devo Max whats the point of being and option. That is why big Eck is trying to court the LibDems without success so far.

[Bigsmak]

a method to keep the Nationalist cause in existence. If its a straight yes no and independence is firmly rejected what dos that mean for the SNP.. Dissulution.

 

 

I forgot about that. What does a 1 policy party campaign on when it achieves it goal?

 

The SNP would fall apart at the seams....

[Big D]

There is a big problem with devo max which is designed either to be a halfway house or a method to keep the Nationalist cause in existence. If its a straight yes no and independence is firmly rejected what dos that mean for the SNP.. Dissulution.

 

The other problem is who will campaign for Devo Max. The SNP are committed to campaign for Independence and the The Unionists parties for the Union. So if none of the major parties are prepared to support Devo Max whats the point of being and option. That is why big Eck is trying to court the LibDems without success so far.

Close, but no cigar JAG. Devo Max is not, and never has been SNP policy. Devo max (or whatever) was a democratic response to Westminster's Scotland Bill based on the Calman Report. http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2010-11/scotland.html. It was felt that if the unionist parties were so supportive of this option then it would be undemocratic of the Scots' Government to discount it as a ballot option. However, that option would still have to be proposed and argued for to feature on the ballot. It would seem that the unionist parties support this in Westminster but refuse to support it in Scotland. Plus ca change...

It would appear from todays Evening news that a non party political alternative is forming to support this.

Dissulution (sic) of the SNP will not happen after autumn 2014, though hopefully there will be the emergence of parties in Scotland whose ideaology is underpinned first and foremost by desire to work for the improvement of the circumstances of all those who wish to be Scots.

[Jambo, Goodbye]

I forgot about that. What does a 1 policy party campaign on when it achieves it goal?

 

The SNP would fall apart at the seams....

 

The same one policy party that has frozen council tax, increased police numbers, brought crime to a 25 year low, developed a plan for the future of our energy needs and consumption, I'm not even skimming the surface, they have a manifesto full of policies, and are better at governing than the rest, hence why they won so may voters over who aren't even pro-independent.

 

They'd just re-establish themselves as another party out there trying to win votes to govern.

[Guest]

The same one policy party that has frozen council tax, increased police numbers, brought crime to a 25 year low, developed a plan for the future of our energy needs and consumption, I'm not even skimming the surface, they have a manifesto full of policies, and are better at governing than the rest, hence why they won so may voters over who aren't even pro-independent.

 

They'd just re-establish themselves as another party out there trying to win votes to govern.

 

Fair play to the SNP they've acually done a decent job so far, but a cynical person might assume that they are trying to buy the vote of the electorate and the payback would be after independence when the start telling everyone we need to pay more for a better quality of life

[Beverley]

?3million per year from Whisky would pay Govan's incapacity and dole money for a month.

 

Anyone who hankers after independence is a complete and utter buffoon.

 

mistype, i meant ?3 billion

 

 

but thanks for calling me a buffoon

[Boab Mugabe]

It would mean that the folk that moan about "being ruled by the English" will moan about being ruled by Brussels instead.

 

In a nutshell.

[jambopompey]

Sell me the independence

 

i am the one that both sides want to vote for them, a person that has a mind and can use it, i can see the basic pro's and con's for the split up

 

so pro independence: what is going to happen to the Armed forces, NHS, Tax rates, coast guard, DVLA, transport, other government departments that would need to be split up.

 

Where does the money come to pay for all this, is it a short term hit for medium to long term gain.

 

I work for a company based in england, do i get taxed by/in Scotland or England.

 

A lot of questions that will be added but the SNP at this moment have not willingly answered.

 

If after the answers are given and even if some are not a good thing but on the whole then a vote for yes may come from folk like myself, but if its all hot air then is it not best to keep it with the one's that have always spouted the hot air

[Jambo, Goodbye]

Sell me the independence

 

i am the one that both sides want to vote for them, a person that has a mind and can use it, i can see the basic pro's and con's for the split up

 

so pro independence: what is going to happen to the Armed forces, NHS, Tax rates, coast guard, DVLA, transport, other government departments that would need to be split up.

 

Where does the money come to pay for all this, is it a short term hit for medium to long term gain.

 

I work for a company based in england, do i get taxed by/in Scotland or England.

 

A lot of questions that will be added but the SNP at this moment have not willingly answered.

 

If after the answers are given and even if some are not a good thing but on the whole then a vote for yes may come from folk like myself, but if its all hot air then is it not best to keep it with the one's that have always spouted the hot air

 

The NHS is already split and devolved to Scotland for starters.

 

The SNP are publishing their consultation papers in the coming weeks, it should contain answers to the big questions. I'm sure you weren't aware of this but over the next couple of years we should all be in a position to decide without the usual scaremongering and false spin people like to spout

[Marvin]

Lived down south for 10 years now and I tell you - you have no idea how good you have it in Scotland at the moment.

 

Independence will mean breaking up the Union. Scotland will then have to use the Euro as their currency, that is if your application to join the European Union is accepted.

 

You can say goodbye to free NHS with a working population of 2.5 millionish and having more heads per household on out of work benefits than the rest of the UK, who is going to pay for it?

 

You can say goodbye to your more favourable education costs too.

 

I dont think Salmon (sic) has thought it through.

 

Then there is the question of the wording of your referendum.

 

Imo it should 1 question with a choice of Yes or No.

 

But Salmon knows he wil lose if this was the case.

 

On the whole referendums can be a bit hit and miss considering who is in power and as previously said the wording of the question.

[syndicalist]

I love the way the Nationalists dismiss questions about the billions of pound gap between what Scotland receives from the treasury, as opposed to what it contributes, as scaremongering. Just brush it under the carpet and worry about it later. Of course the key reason for voting no is to avoid the compulsory listening to the proclaimers at all sporting and civic events post independence.

[The Mighty Thor]

I love the way the Nationalists dismiss questions about the billions of pound gap between what Scotland receives from the treasury, as opposed to what it contributes, as scaremongering. Just brush it under the carpet and worry about it later. Of course the key reason for voting no is to avoid the compulsory listening to the proclaimers at all sporting and civic events post independence.

 

How many billions is that 'gap'?

[IMA MAROON]

We have done well from our partnership with England, it has been great, together we built an empire. United we stand

[TheOak88]

Seems like going for independence is taking a big, big risk....which is ok in some circumstances if there is a big, big reward to be gained. But can one of the pro-independence mob state what this big, big reward we are going to possibly get is??

 

( And please don't say no more David Cameron!!)

[portobellojambo1]

I think SNP believe independence is the best thing for Scotland but are not confident of winning it. That's the only reason they have included devo max? Why else would they want it?.

 

And dont say its because they want the people of Scotland to choose and it is democratic it's as thy have been campaigning for full independence for years.

 

You are almost right in that. If a referendum is held and the question on the voting card is do you want Independence, and the voting options are Yes or No, No would win by an absolute landslide. It is not a case of not confident they would win, it is that they know, 100%, they would lose.

 

If the SNP thought the Scottish people would vote for Independence the format of the ballot paper wouldn't bother them in the slightest, nor would the date the referendum is held. If life for Scottish people is really so horrendous as part of the UK, and would really become so joyous after Independence why would the one party interested in obtaining Independence be so intent on deferring that referendum for 3 years rather than have it now. Surely it would make more sense to get out sooner rather than later if it is so terrible at the moment. Trouble is you, like the SNP, would struggle to find any statistic that shows more than 25-28% of people would vote in favour of Independence.

 

They haven't got a clue what state this country would be in if Independence was achieved but have tried to create an image of what they think it would be like, in the hope people would fall for the charm of it. The nearer the date gets the more questions people will ask, and the more questions they ask the less likely they are to be convinced, because the answers won't be forthcoming.

[moogsy]

You are almost right in that. If a referendum is held and the question on the voting card is do you want Independence, and the voting options are Yes or No, No would win by an absolute landslide. It is not a case of not confident they would win, it is that they know, 100%, they would lose.

 

If the SNP thought the Scottish people would vote for Independence the format of the ballot paper wouldn't bother them in the slightest, nor would the date the referendum is held. If life for Scottish people is really so horrendous as part of the UK, and would really become so joyous after Independence why would the one party interested in obtaining Independence be so intent on deferring that referendum for 3 years rather than have it now. Surely it would make more sense to get out sooner rather than later if it so terrible at the moment. Trouble is you, like the SNP, would struggle to find any statistic that shows more than 25-28% of people would vote in favour of Independence.

 

They haven't got a clue what state this country would be in if Independence was achieved but have tried to create an image of what they think it would be like, in the hope people would fall for the charm of it. The nearer the date gets the more questions people will ask, and the more questions they ask the less likely they are to be convinced, because the answers won't be forthcoming.

 

Great post

[Zibi]

I love the way the Nationalists dismiss questions about the billions of pound gap between what Scotland receives from the treasury, as opposed to what it contributes, as scaremongering. Just brush it under the carpet and worry about it later. Of course the key reason for voting no is to avoid the compulsory listening to the proclaimers at all sporting and civic events post independence.

All the money that is raised in Scotland goes to London ok? The billions of pounds we have given England from oil revenues isn't included in these Westminster equations which claim Scotland is subsidised. If Scotland was subsidised why would the Tories, who put cutting costs at the top of their agenda every time they get into power, want to keep Scotland?

 

The opposite is true, they are determined to keep Scotland as they know all too well that without us they would be an insignificant backwater, up to their eyes in debt.

[Zibi]

You are almost right in that. If a referendum is held and the question on the voting card is do you want Independence, and the voting options are Yes or No, No would win by an absolute landslide. It is not a case of not confident they would win, it is that they know, 100%, they would lose.

 

If the SNP thought the Scottish people would vote for Independence the format of the ballot paper wouldn't bother them in the slightest, nor would the date the referendum is held. If life for Scottish people is really so horrendous as part of the UK, and would really become so joyous after Independence why would the one party interested in obtaining Independence be so intent on deferring that referendum for 3 years rather than have it now. Surely it would make more sense to get out sooner rather than later if it so terrible at the moment. Trouble is you, like the SNP, would struggle to find any statistic that shows more than 25-28% of people would vote in favour of Independence.

 

They haven't got a clue what state this country would be in if Independence was achieved but have tried to create an image of what they think it would be like, in the hope people would fall for the charm of it. The nearer the date gets the more questions people will ask, and the more questions they ask the less likely they are to be convinced, because the answers won't be forthcoming.

The SNP said before the last election the referendum would be held in 2014. Nothing has changed regarding the date. It would be mucking the electorate about by changing the date. If the Unionists parties were so confident of winning they would have held the last referendum in the last term and got the issue over with.

 

Many opinion polls show support at levels much higher han 25-28%, and nevertheless after opinion polls showing Labour as being well ahead of the SNP in the run up to the last Holyrood election, I don't think you can read into them in any great detail.

 

You don't know what state Scotland will be in if the Tories continue to cut the grant that is given to Scotland after every Westminster budget is passed?

[I.J]

This thread does not change my view that voting should be IQ based.

 

[TheOak88]

The SNP said before the last election the referendum would be held in 2014. Nothing has changed regarding the date. It would be mucking the electorate about by changing the date. If the Unionists parties were so confident of winning they would have held the last referendum in the last term and got the issue over with.

 

Many opinion polls show support at levels much higher han 25-28%, and nevertheless after opinion polls showing Labour as being well ahead of the SNP in the run up to the last Holyrood election, I don't think you can read into them in any great detail.

 

You don't know what state Scotland will be in if the Tories continue to cut the grant that is given to Scotland after every Westminster budget is passed?

 

I think the point he was making is WHY did the SNP say before the election we are going to wait till 2014 to have the referendum - why didn't they say if we win lets have it within the first year of our governance?

 

People need to stop quoting the current Tory government as a reason to go for independence. Once we go for independence there won't be any going back - you won't be able to just turn around in 3 years time if Labour get back into Westminster and say "now that Cameron's gone can we join back into the Union, please?". All the Labour supporters up here need to stop being so immature and short sighted.

[syndicalist]

All the money that is raised in Scotland goes to London ok? The billions of pounds we have given England from oil revenues isn't included in these Westminster equations which claim Scotland is subsidised. If Scotland was subsidised why would the Tories, who put cutting costs at the top of their agenda every time they get into power, want to keep Scotland?

 

The opposite is true, they are determined to keep Scotland as they know all too well that without us they would be an insignificant backwater, up to their eyes in debt.

I can't find any evidence of that. The only year since 1979 that Scotland paid more to the treasury than they received was 2008/2009, even if you include NSO revenue as a purely Scottish contribution. In 08/09 the price of the oil produced in the north sea was unusually high and the Scottish banks made a massive contribution to the treasury. For 09/10 the shortfall was 9 Billion even if you allocated all NSO revenue to Scotland.

 

Of course no-one knows how business will react to an independent Scotland and if anyone votes for or against it based on what happens now I think they're being foolish. The question should be can we build a Scotland for future generations out with the Union that is better than the Scotland that exists now.

 

To say the Tories wouldn't want to keep Scotland within the Union unless it was profitable doesn't stand up either. Why would they keep NI or any of the other regions if that was the case. Why doesn't London just go it alone. I think the attitude of the Tories now is one of ambivalence. If the people of Scotland want independence, do it, they can't really lose.

[The Comedian]

We have done well from our partnership with England, it has been great, together we built an empire. United we stand

 

We'll have no problems running our own wee country then.

 

[Big D]

How many billions is that 'gap'?

Poor wee Moore let the cat out the bag recently when discussing taxation and GDP regarding Scotland and the UK. He was attempting Scots bashing by saying our GDP had shrunk and was only 10% of U.K. GDP. He also said in the same interview that we have 8.6% of the U.K. population. So Westminster's Minister for Scottish dependance has admitted we run a GDP surplus. Is it possible he and his U.K. government colleagues have lied about some other figures? Perhaps a google of the last five GERS reports may uncover some more honest (sic) mistakes regarding Scotland's surplus by WestMinisters.

[Guest]

Presumably an independent Scotland will bin the council tax and go with the SNP's local income tax plan.

 

 

So, me, living a modest lifestyle, alone, in a small 1 bed flat would end up paying more than a large family of workshy jakies.

 

 

Thanks, but no thanks

[syndicalist]

Poor wee Moore let the cat out the bag recently when discussing taxation and GDP regarding Scotland and the UK. He was attempting Scots bashing by saying our GDP had shrunk and was only 10% of U.K. GDP. He also said in the same interview that we have 8.6% of the U.K. population. So Westminster's Minister for Scottish dependance has admitted we run a GDP surplus. Is it possible he and his U.K. government colleagues have lied about some other figures? Perhaps a google of the last five GERS reports may uncover some more honest (sic) mistakes regarding Scotland's surplus by WestMinisters.

I would be interested to see figures for public spending as a percentage of GDP, but I can't find them.

[Jam Tarts 1874]

This thread does not change my view that voting should be IQ based.

 

 

Yup, Sir Winston Churchill (not the one who posts on here) once said that the biggest argument against democracy was a 5 minute conversation with the average voter.

 

I think he was right.

[Walter Kidd]

mistype, i meant ?3 billion

 

 

but thanks for calling me a buffoon

 

Wasn't personal.

[Boris]

Presumably an independent Scotland will bin the council tax and go with the SNP's local income tax plan.

 

 

So, me, living a modest lifestyle, alone, in a small 1 bed flat would end up paying more than a large family of workshy jakies.

 

 

Thanks, but no thanks

 

Given your allusion you are probably paying more at the moment too.

[Jam Tarts 1874]

I would be interested to see figures for public spending as a percentage of GDP, but I can't find them.

 

I'm sure the figures are in the public domain somewhere, however due to the huge public expenditure on things like infrastructure projects, civil service etc etc in the south east trying to glean useful information just based on public spend in relation to GDP will be difficult.

 

The Barnett formula takes this spending in the South East into account and gives Scotland an huge boost, if you don't beleive the difference it makes just go for a tour around the north of England where they get buttons from the Government. They are like a third world country compaired to us.

[Guest]

Given your allusion you are probably paying more at the moment too.

 

 

I remember working it out when it was mooted a few years ago. I'd be worse off under local income tax than council tax.

 

A fairer tax would be one per head/per person. Then eveyone is equal