• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

17 Good

About Stash

  • Rank
  • Birthday 05/16/1978
  1. The Dirty Independence Question

    Hypothetical for you. Which is better, a UK Tory government in London, or a Scottish Tory government in Edinburgh?
  2. The Dirty Independence Question

    Just how the line in bold above tallies with the numbers presented and the grievance politics loved by the SNP, I will never understand!  
  3. The Dirty Independence Question

    As you well know and LJS has conceeded, this 34 year outstripping UK taxes is an absolute joke of a figure and deserves nothing but derision. It's an absolute wings-esque type argument and fails to even consider part of the overall picture.  I've no intention of doing this for 34 years, but the figures attached show population & taxation figures for the last year I could locate official matching reports, 2013. It clearly shows several other UK regions outstripping Scotland's tax income and also shows relative populations, even with oil revenues included for Scotland.  Rather than helping your grievance laden argument, it actually shows how the UK working together is stronger than the individual components of the UK. Also don't forget that what is not shown is that thanks to Barnett, Scotland is getting back £1.2 for every £1 collected. Sounds like a good deal to me.      
  4. The Dirty Independence Question

    Pull the other one...
  5. The Dirty Independence Question

    The reason I call Wings on that, as you well know, is that it is factual horse-manure. It's written in such a way as to make non-thinkers assume that Scotland is in fact propping up the whole UK and is therefore terribly hard done by by those nasty westminster types.    Scotland, as a region of the UK has had better/higher tax receipts than some other regions of the UK. But it by no means outperforms the UK, just the average of all the other regions. However, and here comes the small print,  the analysis of those years mentioned (and you luckily choose oil years in your comparison, i wonder why?) shows that it is only the wider South East (Greater London, the South East and the Eastern Region) that made a positive net contribution to the UK public finances in most of those years, with the Northern regions, the Midlands and the South West joining Northern Ireland, Wales and Scotland as a net drain on the Exchequer.  There has been a persistent pattern, throughout the years in your selective sample, of the Southern regions providing fiscal support to the rest of the UK, which is not surprising given the relative strengths of the different regional economies and the broadly redistributive nature of government policies towards taxation and spending.  However, that doesn't really fit in with your hard done by narrative does it?   Aother question that you can duck, just like the last. Why, when you want to disparage the relationship of Scotland and the rUK do you only focus on England, but when you want to show Scotland in a favourable light do you include only comparisons with UK-wide averages?   Lastly, no I would not remove Holyrood.
  6. The Dirty Independence Question

    How do we know that, have we been dipping into Wings again?  That particular calculation only works when oil revenues are included, and we all know how toxic that argument is for snippers at the moment. However ignoring that, as a region Scotland doesn't outperform all of the rest of the regions of the UK in tax revenues, but that wouldn't suit your one sided argument would it?
  7. The Dirty Independence Question

    Apart from everything else wrong with that, where on earth does this person thing the more will come from. There is no magic money tree!
  8. The Dirty Independence Question

    If we are to believe the reports in the press, he has asked for per capita indexation on income tax to remain in the block grant for income tax as well as the remainder of the block grant not affected by the devolution of income tax. So essentially, he wants control of income tax rates & collection, but still wants a link to rUK population to be kept, meaning that if the rest of the UK grows, and becomes more expensive to run, Scotland gets a piece of that action too - essentially the Barnett formula in a different name. However the reverse is not true, so rUK will never get a piece of any extra income tax revenues generated in Scotland. Is that a fair analysis from your perspective.  So my question would be, why are we bothering? Wouldn't it be better for the UK, the country that Scotland voted to remain a part of, to have 1 tax system, 1 tax collection agency and 1 central government redistributing that funding. What is the point of hiving off part of it for the benefit of only a small part of the country and then ring-fencing all funding to that small part of the country to the detriment of the rest of the country.  Without talking about independence etc, is there a logical reason to do any of that?
  9. The Dirty Independence Question

    Another important thing to remember for the SNP is that if they scupper the devolution of further powers, and get the vast majority of their non-thinking supporters to scream & shout about how it's all Westmonster's fault, they can then fight the election in May on their favourite subject, the constitution, instead of discussing how they'll actually use the powers.  Of course, there will be nothing to stop them accepting (not very graciously) the new powers in June or soon after without ever really having to make any manifesto promises on how they'd be used.  I'd say that would be seen as a win-win for Sturgeon and co. 
  10. The Dirty Independence Question

    It'd be nice to think that they'd wise up to the lies, but I think you underestimate just how difficult it will be to change some people's minds. No matter what evidence is available, some people, including those on this thread, will just not look at it. It's just too easy to pretend that everything will change in 5, 10 or 20 years and that everything will turn out right on the night.  I think "Caveman Swinney" knows it too;  - Demanding an increase in Barnett allows him to say he is looking after Scotland's interest. - Being denied a Barnett increase lets him say that EVEL Westmonster is mistreating Scotland again.  - Refusing to sign off the Scotland Bill and with it further devolution lets him say that those nasty Tories (both red & blue) broke their "vow", just like he said they would After all, breaking up the Union is the only goal as far as the SNP are concerned, any bad policy can be justified in it's name. Anyway, it'll be very easy to spin it for the hard of understanding. The extra money will only be needed because of Tory cuts and it's Scotland's money anyway because of the oil, renewables, extra income tax, London train-sets, lets just call it Scottish exceptionalness.     
  11. The Dirty Independence Question

    So practically unchanged from every other survation poll for around a year then? What is it you and Tweedledum always say when you refuse to discuss the actual requirements of seceding? There is no referendum question being asked right now, so how could you possibly talk about finances, institutions, debts etc Why hold any stock in opinion polls when you refuse to even try and back your own opinion up?   Looks like another year of bluff, bluster and not much substance from the secessionists ahead
  12. The Dirty Independence Question

    “Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.” ― George Carlin   “Sometimes a man wants to be stupid if it lets him do a thing his cleverness forbids.” ― John Steinbeck
  13. The Dirty Independence Question

    Crisis? There is no crisis. We have just actually extracted more oil than ever before in the North Sea. We have the most skilled workforce in the North Sea and it is booming... will be a bonus. If oil is taken out of the equation, then Scotland's economic output per head is almost identical to the that of the UK. The benefit we get from oil and gas will be a huge bonus.
  14. The Dirty Independence Question

    I read about the investigation into Philip Boswell by the parliamentary commissioner for standards. It was on the BBC News homepage so passes LJS' test on whether it's real/important/credible news or not. I'm confused about what he's being investigated over though. I thought we were told by the SNP last month that he had declared all interests in line with the rules? No I know he's guilty of talking out of both sides of his face, but that's par for the course with politicians, even true scottis ones. So what's the story. Is there something more to it than we were told or have those nasty tories managed to do concoct another SNP Bad story and roped the standards commissioner into it?
  15. General News Discussion

    Strangely that's not entirely true. It would raise eyebrows if it was known. It's just that it would never be known unless it was DSK