Nicola Sturgeon

[Iluvfriends]

Is a hypocrite.

Boris will be 'picking a fight with the democratic wishes of the Scottish people' and ' the only people that can decide the future of Scotland are the Scottish people'

Forgive me if i'm being stupid but didn't we already have a vote on independence, how did that go. Oh that's right......not how NS wanted so she ignores the democratic wishes of the Scottish people and pushes for Indy 2.

Laughable how she comes out with this stuff.

Have team captain duties to perform but will be back. I love discussing MMT!!

I don't pretend to be an economist so I rely on people who know a lot more about this than I do, like in this financial Times piece from last month

The upshot seems to that while an independent Scotland could be prosperous in the long term, in the short to medium term we'd be in for a very rough ride. Our fiscal position is considerably weaker than predicted even in the Growth commission report (which itself was set up because the picture was bleaker in 2016 than 2014 due to the oil crash). Our tax receipts are lower than expected, and we'd be expected to leave with a deficit of about 10%, considerably more than the 3% considered sustainable. Even dropping our share of defence spending etc leaves a deficit of 8.7%, and tax rises/spending cuts of over £1700 per person in Scotland would be needed to bring that deficit to sustainable levels. The report points to other potential issues too, but the overall message is that we're in quite a weak position and it would be very tough for a considerable length of time.

Some might decide they don't care and want independence regardless, but if we are to have this conversation let's at least make it a frank and honest one.

The point about why does 'England' want to 'keep' Scotland if it's such a financial drain is often raised on these threads. Obviously posters who want independence don't feel this way, but there is 300 years of shared history, language, culture involved here, soldiers in the British army have fought side by side in world wars, English soldiers have fought in Scottish regiments and vice versa. Scots have served in the UK parliament, there is seamless trade between the two countries and we share so much. Others obviously don't value these things and myriad others but some of us do.

@Graffitiqueen

https://gimms.org.uk/job-guarantee/

"A Job Guarantee (JG) that works to keep inflation down as it provides employment to anyone willing and able to work is central to MMT. "

Thanks, I can't see a JG being put into place.

MMT in my opinion is one of those things that in theory looks good but would require incredible discipline from a government that is unrealistic in practice and could go horribly horribly wrong.

@Y0uCann0tBeSer10us

I don't pretend to be an economist so I rely on people who know a lot more about this than I do, like in this financial Times piece from last month

The upshot seems to that while an independent Scotland could be prosperous in the long term, in the short to medium term we'd be in for a very rough ride. Our fiscal position is considerably weaker than predicted even in the Growth commission report (which itself was set up because the picture was bleaker in 2016 than 2014 due to the oil crash). Our tax receipts are lower than expected, and we'd be expected to leave with a deficit of about 10%, considerably more than the 3% considered sustainable. Even dropping our share of defence spending etc leaves a deficit of 8.7%, and tax rises/spending cuts of over £1700 per person in Scotland would be needed to bring that deficit to sustainable levels. The report points to other potential issues too, but the overall message is that we're in quite a weak position and it would be very tough for a considerable length of time.

Some might decide they don't care and want independence regardless, but if we are to have this conversation let's at least make it a frank and honest one.

Comprehensively debunked by Professor Richard Murphy.

www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2021/04/03/__trashed-2/

Richard Murphy comprehensively debunked by pretty much anyone else in the industry!

@reprehensibleme

The point about why does 'England' want to 'keep' Scotland if it's such a financial drain is often raised on these threads. Obviously posters who want independence don't feel this way, but there is 300 years of shared history, language, culture involved here, soldiers in the British army have fought side by side in world wars, English soldiers have fought in Scottish regiments and vice versa. Scots have served in the UK parliament, there is seamless trade between the two countries and we share so much. Others obviously don't value these things and myriad others but some of us do.

We're not wishing to physically move away. We're looking to continue to be neighbours within an equal partnership. It is possible and done the world over.

@Iwouldratherbesailing

Richard Murphy comprehensively debunked by pretty much anyone else in the industry!

"In September 2015, Murphy was appointed Professor of Practice in International Political Economy in the Department of International Politics at City University London,[1] as a part-time appointment involving research and teaching.[11] Previously he had been a visiting fellow at University of Portsmouth Business School, the Centre for Global Political Economy at the University of Sussex, and at the Tax Research Institute at the University of Nottingham.[4]"

People have different opinions on policy, as they should. The world would be a boring place otherwise. He knows his s*it and it's disingenuous to suggest otherwise.

I'm sure an expert can be found to support any point of view, which is why I tend to rely on neutral institutions like the FT or the IFS. The majority view does seem to be that in the short/medium term it will be very difficult for the reasons discussed.

Richard Murphy is The National’s economist as he is the only person that tells them what they want to hear.

I say it again, in order to make a success of Scotland the SNP have to acknowledge where the problems lie then address them.

@Y0uCann0tBeSer10us

I'm sure an expert can be found to support any point of view, which is why I tend to rely on neutral institutions like the FT or the IFS. The majority view does seem to be that in the short/medium term it will be very difficult for the reasons discussed.

The FT isn't politically neutral. It backs the Tories over Labour. Owners are probably Tory donors.

The IFS - well , JRM smirked but made no comment when asked if he'd funded the report you're referring to.

300 years of shared history, language, culture involved here, soldiers in the British army have fought side by side in world wars, English soldiers have fought in Scottish regiments and Scots have served in the UK parliament, we share so much

That's lovely. How come the government does not feel this sense of duty to the homeless and unemployed of England?

Sorry don't understand your point. That is My view of our shared history - nothing to do with the government.

@reprehensibleme

The point about why does 'England' want to 'keep' Scotland if it's such a financial drain is often raised on these threads. Obviously posters who want independence don't feel this way, but there is 300 years of shared history, language, culture involved here, soldiers in the British army have fought side by side in world wars, English soldiers have fought in Scottish regiments and vice versa. Scots have served in the UK parliament, there is seamless trade between the two countries and we share so much. Others obviously don't value these things and myriad others but some of us do.

Unfortunately, I know from family in England that almost a decade of the SNP attacking the English (everyone knows that's what 'Westminster' is code for) that good feeling towards the Scots is getting seriously eroded. I keep trying to point out that most Scots don't think that way, but when the first minister and her party take every opportunity to trash 'disgraceful' and 'disgusting' Westminster politicians and to claim that 'the people of Scotland choose a different (read 'better') path to England' there's only so much you can do. I get the feeling it's almost at the point where many would like to see the back of us which is heart breaking.

How would the FT actually sell any papers if it was anything but totally neutral? It sells advice to people that are looking to invest. That’s what it does. If it wasn’t totally impartial advice that looked at facts and facts alone they would go out of business.

You seem to be trapped in some sort of echo chamber and have seriously lost track of reality. You need help

Yes, they've ramped up the rhetoric since the election, Swinney referring to 'Westminster overlords' and Sturgeon's new favourite word appears to be outrageous.

@reprehensibleme

The point about why does 'England' want to 'keep' Scotland if it's such a financial drain is often raised on these threads. Obviously posters who want independence don't feel this way, but there is 300 years of shared history, language, culture involved here, soldiers in the British army have fought side by side in world wars, English soldiers have fought in Scottish regiments and vice versa. Scots have served in the UK parliament, there is seamless trade between the two countries and we share so much. Others obviously don't value these things and myriad others but some of us do.

Its not "England" that wants to keep Scotland. That makes Scotland sound like a gerbil.

Actually the reasons for WM are strategically outlined here - a good article by someone who does know their stuff, he's been at the coalface of devolution in Whitehall (a difficult brief!);

www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/whitehall-devolved-power-scotland-northern-ireland-wales

Some of this angst is all undermined by the QS today where Johnson announced two bills which will undermine devo, one being the Judicial Review Bill and the other the ending of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act.

Obviously posters who want independence don't feel this way, but there is 300 years of shared history, language, culture involved here

Ooh that's lovely. 300 years of Scots and English wearing kilts and speaking gaelic and scots. Morris dancing to bagpipes. Sharing haggis at high tea.

Yeah, you make a great point, I'm convinced 😉

Westminster isn’t code for anything?! It just refers to the Westminster government

Wrong article - this one;

www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/philip-rycroft-scottish-independence-rest-of-uk

Lexmitior I used the word 'keep' as that is exactly the word independence supporters have used. It is also why I used quotation marks.

Bewty, you're obviously one of the independence supporters I referred to who don't understand or feel anything for a shared history.

@Iwouldratherbesailing

How would the FT actually sell any papers if it was anything but totally neutral? It sells advice to people that are looking to invest. That’s what it does. If it wasn’t totally impartial advice that looked at facts and facts alone they would go out of business.

You seem to be trapped in some sort of echo chamber and have seriously lost track of reality. You need help

Of course it contains facts. Articles are written by people woth far less qualifications than Murphy. Who, despite his huge list of credentials, was instantly dismissed by posters (including yourself? I can't be bothered looking back). That's ok?, but I need help .
It's not too strange- big conglomerates are given huge tax breaks by the UK Government. You pat my back, I'll pat yours. I'm going off on a tangent here but remember what led to the near demise of HBOS. Journalists were involved. Spreading rumours, helping friends who were short selling the stock. I've worked a lot in the City. It's a small world.

I absolutely acknowledge that some journalists giving opinion pieces on other papers are biased. That’s their job. But the FTs job is to not be biased.

It's hilarious that some people think that anyone or anything can just 'not be biased' 🤷🏻‍♀️