The Student Room Group
Original post by MatureStudent36
Do we have different needs? Its news to me.

I'm amazed with how an additional £1.3k government spend that's the UK average we can still complain about things like this. Maybe we're starting to see the real impact of the council tax freeze that the SNP imposed. It has benefited middle class families and screwed over the poor. Not a new concept really, most socialist policies always screw over the poor to benefit the rich.

I'm still amazed how you can still claim that Westminster is stealing out money. More is spent in Scotland than is generated . In fact its the opposite way around. Money flows out of the SE England to elsewhere in the UK, and that's with some of the lowest government spend per capita.

Yet no mention of the more heavily subsidised welsh and Northern Irish?

If you are going to try and debate a point, could you please at least try and ground it in reality



Can I just say though, we can endlessly talk about all the statistics etc. But it doesn't really change the fact that Scotland is governed by a party they didn't vote for and have been for so many years. Its time to give the Scots democratic power. Yes, I'll admit that there is a few financial uncertainties(regardless of how much it pains me to say it), but wouldn't you want to be alive in a life time where you see Scotland become independent, this is truly a once in a life time opportunity.Scotland has an incredible cultural identity, its own cultural identity which is continually undermined. If the vote goes either way, we have don't have a clue what will happen, even in the UK. And can I just point out that the Conservatives plan to have an EU referendum, and UKIP seem to be gaining more supporters- two very catastrophic situations
Original post by shinyroof43
Can I just say though, we can endlessly talk about all the statistics etc. But it doesn't really change the fact that Scotland is governed by a party they didn't vote for and have been for so many years. Its time to give the Scots democratic power. Yes, I'll admit that there is a few financial uncertainties(regardless of how much it pains me to say it), but wouldn't you want to be alive in a life time where you see Scotland become independent, this is truly a once in a life time opportunity.Scotland has an incredible cultural identity, its own cultural identity which is continually undermined. If the vote goes either way, we have don't have a clue what will happen, even in the UK. And can I just point out that the Conservatives plan to have an EU referendum, and UKIP seem to be gaining more supporters- two very catastrophic situations


OK so when you are proven wrong suddenly statistics don't matter. What a joke.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by shinyroof43
Can I just say though, we can endlessly talk about all the statistics etc. But it doesn't really change the fact that Scotland is governed by a party they didn't vote for and have been for so many years. Its time to give the Scots democratic power. Yes, I'll admit that there is a few financial uncertainties(regardless of how much it pains me to say it), but wouldn't you want to be alive in a life time where you see Scotland become independent, this is truly a once in a life time opportunity.Scotland has an incredible cultural identity, its own cultural identity which is continually undermined. If the vote goes either way, we have don't have a clue what will happen, even in the UK. And can I just point out that the Conservatives plan to have an EU referendum, and UKIP seem to be gaining more supporters- two very catastrophic situations


I fully agree. The SNP returned 6 out of 59 MPs and received less than 50% of the vote at the Holyrood elections on only a 50% turnout.

It's shocking that they're allowed to claim to speak on behalf of Scotland.


I'll let you into a secret. Stop peddling that kind emotive speak. You're talking from a position of weakness.
Original post by Midlander
OK so when you are proven wrong suddenly statistics don't matter. What a joke.


Posted from TSR Mobile


They're also normally the first people to complain when they realise that politicians haven't costed grandiose plans properly.
Reply 9904
Original post by MatureStudent36
The finance sector is responsible for 10 % of the Scottish economy.

It was Alex Salmond that decided on a yes or no vote.

I'm sure you'll vote yes. There's plenty of economic illeterates out there who don't realise where the money comes from to finance things like the welfare state, education, benefits etc.

It may have missed you by, but the majority of us aren't that stupid to fall for the pish that the YeSNP is peddling.


I'm not an economist, but economists have recommended a currency union as the best deal for Scotland. I cannot remember the full details, but a country can only control 2 of the 3 monetary levers; exchange rate, interest rates and another. Seeing as
Scotland would want to be on a par with the UK, and indeed with Europe, not having control over one of the levers would be the same with our own currency and thus is no more independent than a currency union.


It should be noted that Scotland too has a strong and diverse economy; recent reports - such as the GERS report - suggested that our finances are stronger than the UK's. Standard and Poor said that we would get a AAA credit rating. Greece didn't collect taxes, and Ireland had an IT based economy that collapsed when the housing market collapsed. Scotland's dynamic is different to both countries. It's worth remembering that the UK has slashed defence jobs in Scotland and that an independent Scotland would be able to offer our shipyards to the world. It doesn't have to be warships for the UK. A Scottish Navy, cruise liners, other vessels, there's huge scope.
Original post by Midlander
OK so when you are proven wrong suddenly statistics don't matter. What a joke.


Posted from TSR Mobile


OF COURSE they matter, why else would I be giving them. I was just making a different point other than statistics.

And also, numbers can be spun in lots of different ways, so don't say that you've proven me wrong - because you haven't
:smile:
(edited 9 years ago)
Reply 9906
Original post by MatureStudent36
The finance sector is responsible for 10 % of the Scottish economy.

It was Alex Salmond that decided on a yes or no vote.

I'm sure you'll vote yes. There's plenty of economic illeterates out there who don't realise where the money comes from to finance things like the welfare state, education, benefits etc.

It may have missed you by, but the majority of us aren't that stupid to fall for the pish that the YeSNP is peddling.


Can you site your source that Alex salmond didnt want devo max?
Original post by MatureStudent36
I fully agree. The SNP returned 6 out of 59 MPs and received less than 50% of the vote at the Holyrood elections on only a 50% turnout.

It's shocking that they're allowed to claim to speak on behalf of Scotland.


I'll let you into a secret. Stop peddling that kind emotive speak. You're talking from a position of weakness.


:P, I don't think its a position of weakness to be perfectly honest. I think its just being prideful of Scotland, and being aware of its potential
Original post by E-wan
I'm not an economist, but economists have recommended a currency union as the best deal for Scotland. I cannot remember the full details, but a country can only control 2 of the 3 monetary levers; exchange rate, interest rates and another. Seeing as
Scotland would want to be on a par with the UK, and indeed with Europe, not having control over one of the levers would be the same with our own currency and thus is no more independent than a currency union.


It should be noted that Scotland too has a strong and diverse economy; recent reports - such as the GERS report - suggested that our finances are stronger than the UK's. Standard and Poor said that we would get a AAA credit rating. Greece didn't collect taxes, and Ireland had an IT based economy that collapsed when the housing market collapsed. Scotland's dynamic is different to both countries. It's worth remembering that the UK has slashed defence jobs in Scotland and that an independent Scotland would be able to offer our shipyards to the world. It doesn't have to be warships for the UK. A Scottish Navy, cruise liners, other vessels, there's huge scope.

One economist has recommended a currency union would be best for Scotland. Others have said that it wouldn't . Unfortunately, the dominant partner in any form of any currency union has said that they don't want one, economically or politically.

GERS figures should be taken with a punch if salt as recommended by Holyroods former chief economist.

http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/independence-economist-attacks-evidence-in-debate-1-2857358

We do have a diverse economy, but that is likely to be damaged in the event of a yes vote.

http://b.3cdn.net/better/c1d14076ee08022eec_u9m6vd74f.pdf
Original post by shinyroof43
:P, I don't think its a position of weakness to be perfectly honest. I think its just being prideful of Scotland, and being aware of its potential


You're arguing from a position of weakness as you hold a minority viewpoint.

I think you'll find the majority of Scots (who will be voting no) have a lot of pride in Scotland.
Original post by MatureStudent36
You're arguing from a position of weakness as you hold a minority viewpoint.

I think you'll find the majority of Scots (who will be voting no) have a lot of pride in Scotland.


Oh, that's what you meant

I would hardly say its a minority view point, with the polls tightening
Original post by E-wan
Can you site your source that Alex salmond didnt want devo max?


http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/oct/15/scottish-independence-devo-max-referendum

Devo max is a tricky one . That impacts the whole of the UK so it should be a UK wide decision.

Like it or not , Salmond can't stamp his feet and demand things. He can only go for an in out referendum.
Reply 9912
Original post by MatureStudent36
One economist has recommended a currency union would be best for Scotland. Others have said that it wouldn't . Unfortunately, the dominant partner in any form of any currency union has said that they don't want one, economically or politically.

GERS figures should be taken with a punch if salt as recommended by Holyroods former chief economist.

http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/independence-economist-attacks-evidence-in-debate-1-2857358

We do have a diverse economy, but that is likely to be damaged in the event of a yes vote.

http://b.3cdn.net/better/c1d14076ee08022eec_u9m6vd74f.pdf

Its the same case with devolution, many people were feart that our large organisations would go bust if devolution were to occur. But that fear didn't materialise. Im am not fully for some of the SNP's policy's but we are not voting for a party but we are voting for much needed change. If you want to belittle the referendum to one man, should I vote no because Gordon Brown supports a no vote - a man that oversaw the financial crash? Of course not. It is ridiculous to whittle this debate down to one man's business credentials.
Reply 9913
Original post by MatureStudent36
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/oct/15/scottish-independence-devo-max-referendum

Devo max is a tricky one . That impacts the whole of the UK so it should be a UK wide decision.

Like it or not , Salmond can't stamp his feet and demand things. He can only go for an in out referendum.


That makes for a very interesting argument. Good find.
Original post by shinyroof43
Oh, that's what you meant

I would hardly say its a minority view point, with the polls tightening


The polls shifted marginally but have stayed remarkably stable since.
Original post by shinyroof43
OF COURSE they matter, why else would I be giving them. I was just making a different point other than statistics.

And also, numbers can be spun in lots of different ways, so don't say that you've proven me wrong - because you haven't
:smile:


Generally the 'revenue contributed' versus 'revenue received' figures can only be interpreted in one way.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by E-wan
That makes for a very interesting argument. Good find.


The devo max option from the SNPs perspective is to remain financed by others whilst simultaneously competing financially against them.

I.e Salmonds after Edinburgh competing with London in financial services, keeping the money when things are going well, but expecting the UK taxpayer to bail us out when it goes wrong.

There's still substantial finial levers that Holyrood has, but has chosen not to use even though they were devolved years ago.
Original post by Midlander
The Queen is the epitomy of social inequality-she has no place in a meritocratic society.


Posted from TSR Mobile


That'd hold if she actually held any power or unfair position over you, but since you're already free to either make your fortune or become PM, MP or a high court judge (where actual power in the UK is) your point is mostly hollow ideological rhetoric.

I can live with a dynastic figurehead since it inconveniences me none and brings the UK more benefit then another leadership position for a career politician ever would. No-one would pay to visit the British Presidential Palace after all.

But off-topic, I apologize.
If Scotland did go independent remaining part of the commonwealth is probably one of the few SNP points it could pull off, though with the damage to the UK that Scotland's split would cause there is no guarantee the monarchy would survive the upheaval down south anyway.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by E-wan
But that only accounts for 1.4bn of our economy.

How do you suggest that other countries maintain a financial sector without using sterling?

The way I see it is faslane will be used as a bargaining chip for us to use the pound.

My stance on independence (I'm a scottish citizen) I would have preferred an devo max option on the ballot paper but unfortunately David Cameron being cocky decided on a yes or no vote only making me sway to voting yes in september.


Except the UK won't budge on the issue (it's actually quite ludicrous for a sovereign nation to 'demand' it gets currency union and any other country would be utterly retarded to cave in to such petty tantrums) and Faslane isn't nearly as important as the SNP might think it is, the subs will go south.

Also it conflicts with SNP's anti-nuclear policy. UK only wants Faslane for it's nuclear deterrent. SNP (and independent Scotland) won't allow it. Then again it's what Salmond is most committed to, the economy or nuclear disarmament.
Original post by Studentus-anonymous
That'd hold if she actually held any power or unfair position over you, but since you're already free to either make your fortune or become PM, MP or a high court judge (where actual power in the UK is) your point is mostly hollow ideological rhetoric.

I can live with a dynastic figurehead since it inconveniences me none and brings the UK more benefit then another leadership position for a career politician ever would. No-one would pay to visit the British Presidential Palace after all.

But off-topic, I apologize.
If Scotland did go independent remaining part of the commonwealth is probably one of the few SNP points it could pull off, though with the damage to the UK that Scotland's split would cause there is no guarantee the monarchy would survive the upheaval down south anyway.


She receives vast wealth, privilege and status for being a Windsor. You have no problem with that but I do. The tourism argument is bogus and you can't go inside the palace anyway so there really is no rationale. It is a disgrace that a monarchy still exists in this day and age.


Posted from TSR Mobile

Latest