1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Scottish Independance Referendum 2

Discussion in 'Speaker's Corner' started by Kyo, Mar 13, 2017.

  1. eddiemcgarrigle

    Mobster

    Joined: Nov 13, 2006

    Posts: 3,718

    Location: Inverkip

    The long held myth that the SNP ushered in Thatcher is exactly that, a myth. Even a simple google search will tell you it was rebel Labour backbenchers who toppled Labour. As for Brexit, it's widely reported that the SNP preference is for Scotland to remain in the EU. A deal that sees Northern Ireland and Gibraltar continue to trade in the customs union because they voted remain seems fair but Scotland has been told that we are to put up and shut up. No special deal for Scotland even though every area in Scotland voted to remain.

    As for not trusting the media. Do you remember the furore over Michelle Thomson? It ran for weeks, on tv and in the press. Did we hear a thing when it was proven she had done nothing wrong? Barely a peep, it was almost trial by media. Now we hear that Theresa May is in Scotland to push her brand of Brexit and has welcomed the press to attend a meeting, well most of the press. The only pro-indy newspaper that we have has been refused access. Shades of Trumpism there.
     
  2. Pudney

    Soldato

    Joined: Sep 6, 2005

    Posts: 5,428

    Location: Essex

    You seem to ignore the quite significant difference in the geographic position of N. Ireland and Gibraltar to Scotland. Which is more relevant to the possibility to any "special" deal than voting position in the referendum.

    Perhaps people would listen to you more if your opinions weren't so blatantly biased.
     
  3. eddiemcgarrigle

    Mobster

    Joined: Nov 13, 2006

    Posts: 3,718

    Location: Inverkip

    Geographic position!!!! Would the backstop be any different to England if it where on the border with Scotland rather than in the Irish Sea?
     
  4. JeditOjanen

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 7, 2011

    Posts: 4,566

    Really? One simple google search later:

    I suspect that the SNP's 11 MPs voting as a bloc with the Tories had a far larger effect on the outcome than the zero "rebel Labour backbenchers" who did likewise. The only Labour MPs who didn't vote against the motion were the tellers and Sir Alfred Broughton, who had offered to get off his ******* deathbed to support the government but was told by Callaghan to stay home.
     
  5. JeditOjanen

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 7, 2011

    Posts: 4,566

    As for this drivel: if you're talking about an independent Scotland then there wouldn't be a backstop. The backstop is a unique requirement created by the disunity of Ireland.
     
  6. mburn_83

    Gangster

    Joined: Jun 1, 2004

    Posts: 439

    Location: Chryston, Glasgow

    Hardly, if labour had delivered on devolution then perhaps the snp would not have voted against them?

    But regardless all they did was cause a general election, which labour lost. That this is still an attack after all this time is strange.
     
  7. eddiemcgarrigle

    Mobster

    Joined: Nov 13, 2006

    Posts: 3,718

    Location: Inverkip

    Labour backbenchers would not allow concessions to the SNP as they had done for Plaid Clymu, Labour put the amendment into the Devolution Bill that effectively won it, had a similar act been in place for Brexit, that wouldn't have happened either.
     
  8. JeditOjanen

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 7, 2011

    Posts: 4,566

    The Scottish devolution referendum did not meet the required level of support. This is not a bad thing, either; as Eddie has said, the EU referendum should have had a similar requirement.
     
  9. eddiemcgarrigle

    Mobster

    Joined: Nov 13, 2006

    Posts: 3,718

    Location: Inverkip

    The Devolution Bill was hamstrung by a Scottish Labour MP, nothing quite like those who prefer ermine to their own country.

    A little slip on a recent BBC Newsnight interview saw them blurt out that a no deal Brexit would result in a 9% hit on the economy "that's like Scotland leaving the UK, a £200 billion hit". So there you have it, Scotland contributes £200 billion and gets £32 billion back.
     
  10. RDM

    Capodecina

    Joined: Feb 1, 2007

    Posts: 20,211

    I dont think you quite understand economics. £200b might be Scotland’s contributions to the economy (I have no idea if it is) but you dont tax your entire economy, If you did, you wouldn’t have much of an economy for much longer.
     
  11. eddiemcgarrigle

    Mobster

    Joined: Nov 13, 2006

    Posts: 3,718

    Location: Inverkip

    Still, in economic terms you also don't leave behind £168 billion when you could use it to ensure yours citizens don't need to go to foodbanks or suffer 5 week delays in getting their benefits.
     
  12. 200sols

    Mobster

    Joined: Jan 14, 2018

    Posts: 2,529

    Location: Hampshire

    A crash course in economics is needed. England is not taking £200bn from you and only giving you £32bn back, but I guess the propaganda you read probably tells you otherwise.
     
  13. eddiemcgarrigle

    Mobster

    Joined: Nov 13, 2006

    Posts: 3,718

    Location: Inverkip

    Keep reading your Daily Mail matey. This was on the BBC Newsnight programme and was not corrected by the other guests or even the interviewer. Scotland's Block Grant is £32 billion, so who gets the remaining £168 billion that apparently effects GDP. Let me give you a clue, it isn't Scotland.
     
  14. 200sols

    Mobster

    Joined: Jan 14, 2018

    Posts: 2,529

    Location: Hampshire

    Since you still dont get it, GDP is a measure of output, it is not a sum of total money you have available to spend, that money comes from taxes.
     
  15. eddiemcgarrigle

    Mobster

    Joined: Nov 13, 2006

    Posts: 3,718

    Location: Inverkip

    You don't get it, it was said that losing that amount of money from the economy would badly effect GDP and see it slip by at least 9%. £200 billion was stated as the net worth of Scotland to the exchequer. If Scotland's net worth is £200b then perhaps you can understand the ire at Scotland only getting £32b in the block grant?
     
  16. RDM

    Capodecina

    Joined: Feb 1, 2007

    Posts: 20,211

    Only if you don't understand economics. £200b isn't going to the exchequer, £200b is what is considered to be the GDP of Scotland, this is not paid to anyone. You would need to look at the tax take in Scotland compared to the money spend in Scotland (which isn't all covered by the block grant) to see if Scotland is actually losing out.
     
  17. 200sols

    Mobster

    Joined: Jan 14, 2018

    Posts: 2,529

    Location: Hampshire

    Net worth to GDP, so if Scotland left the UK economy would be £200bn smaller, it does not mean if Scotland left they would have £200bn to spend on public services..
     
  18. RDM

    Capodecina

    Joined: Feb 1, 2007

    Posts: 20,211

  19. JeditOjanen

    Mobster

    Joined: Feb 7, 2011

    Posts: 4,566

    Think of it like having £2000 in a locked investment account. You can't touch that £2000, but every year you get £320 in interest. That's how GDP works; the GDP is your principal, taxes are the interest.
     
  20. Stretch

    Capodecina

    Joined: Feb 14, 2004

    Posts: 11,547

    Location: Cambridge