It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What is Westminsters Plan B

page: 5
5
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 04:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

So basically, your predicating Scotland being able to afford all that was promised on the proviso that Oil might, at some point in the future, balloon in price whilst ignoring all the efforts to actually reduce consumption or find alternate sources of energy?

For example, there is likely to be a gas boom in England soon - fracking, like it or not, it's here to stay - which will only depress prices further, which may even make many fields in "Scottish waters" uneconomic.

Taking the figures from the Scottish Government, even at those 2008 prices, Scotland did not raise enough money to cover it's expenses. At the moment, there is a shortfall of around £15 Billion. How exactly is Scotland going to raise that money if independent? From the bond markets? How will that work when you don't have control of your own currency?




posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 04:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: Soloprotocol

So basically, your predicating Scotland being able to afford all that was promised on the proviso that Oil might, at some point in the future, balloon in price whilst ignoring all the efforts to actually reduce consumption or find alternate sources of energy?

For example, there is likely to be a gas boom in England soon - fracking, like it or not, it's here to stay - which will only depress prices further, which may even make many fields in "Scottish waters" uneconomic.

Taking the figures from the Scottish Government, even at those 2008 prices, Scotland did not raise enough money to cover it's expenses. At the moment, there is a shortfall of around £15 Billion. How exactly is Scotland going to raise that money if independent? From the bond markets? How will that work when you don't have control of your own currency?


Dear god....how can anyone reply in a serious fashion to this nonsense?

And you are on an alternative media website.

BBC is ------------------> that way!



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 04:09 AM
link   
a reply to: jrmcleod

Ironic, as that applies quite nicely to the "Yes" camp and their wishlist of promises for post referendum.

Why on earth is rUK desperate? I don't know a single person in England - including the Scots I know - who is "desperate" to keep you.. What irks us though is all the badmouthing and blaming "Westminster", which we all know is code for those "bastard English".



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 04:12 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason

Nah. I'm just really, really over little teeny, tiny countries that used to have a lot of power still trying to cling desperately to faded glory.

I may have come off very anti-England. I'm not, I just said all that to piss the English amongst us off, because they need to realise that catastrophic hangover that their country has made of the world is unacceptable and any semblance of it has to go away.

We're all in the process of cleaning house, is all.



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 04:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: jrmcleod

Ironic, as that applies quite nicely to the "Yes" camp and their wishlist of promises for post referendum.

Why on earth is rUK desperate? I don't know a single person in England - including the Scots I know - who is "desperate" to keep you.. What irks us though is all the badmouthing and blaming "Westminster", which we all know is code for those "bastard English".


So PLEASE explain why Westminster wants to hold onto Scotland...and don't for 1 minute tell me its because we are "family" or they "really like the Scots".

There is only 1 reason why the want to hold onto Scotland and that is because without Scotlands revenue, the rUK would be hit FAR harder than Scotland would be without the rUK revenue.

How can you not see this?

The desperation tactics by those in power is despicable, including corporations and politicians.



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 04:14 AM
link   
a reply to: jrmcleod

So, you can't actually refute what I am saying, so you resort to the classic Salmond Manoeuvre and just shout "nonsense!" before running off?

Whenever I get involved in these threads, I take the figures from the Scottish Government, where possible, so as to avoid these baseless accusations. If you like, I can go and get them again for you, although it won't be the first time.

Basically, the international markets are jittery because of the currency issue. We're not about to do a Union with you, so you'll either have to create your own - meaning you walk from the UK debt and immediately get a "junk" rating from the credit agencies - or use the pound anyway but have no control over interest rates etc.

How exactly is Scotland going to raise funds without either tax hikes or bond issues? There is a blackhole in the Scottish Government budget and it is getting wider, explain.



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 04:17 AM
link   
a reply to: jrmcleod

Loss of face, primarily.

The simple fact of the matter is, the block grant going North from the Treasury is greater than the revenue generated in Scotland and sent south, including Oil revenue. So exactly how is the rUK (which keeps 90% of the population and around 92% of the GDP) going to be "hit hardest"?

I do wonder sometimes about the fanciful mathematics you guys use.



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 04:19 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason

You state that there will be no currency union. And that is based on what? What the MP's say before the poll takes place? or what Tom Carney says (even though he has a contingency plan).

Or is it based on the fact that they somehow feel the BoE and the Pound doesn't belong to Scotland also?

There will be a currency union based on the fact that both parties have too much to lose without one and that the Pound does not belong to any single nation in the UK. The BoE does not belong to any single nation in the UK either.

We have as much entitlement as you lot. And trust me, if its a yes vote, there will most definably be a union.



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 04:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: stumason
a reply to: jrmcleod

Loss of face, primarily.

The simple fact of the matter is, the block grant going North from the Treasury is greater than the revenue generated in Scotland and sent south, including Oil revenue. So exactly how is the rUK (which keeps 90% of the population and around 92% of the GDP) going to be "hit hardest"?

I do wonder sometimes about the fanciful mathematics you guys use.


That is just bulls*t and you know it is. Scotland receives £1,200 higher public spending than the rest of the UK but it generates £1,700 more per capita than the rest of the UK. Scotland's grant (which is ours anyway) has reduced by 7% in the last few years whilst our GDP has remained steady or increased.

Westminster is NOT Scotlands parent, we can do all of it on our own and we should not need permission.

Scotland does not get subsidised, it subsidises. FACT



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 04:28 AM
link   
a reply to: jrmcleod

Now I know you're just talking typical Nat bollocks. I would have thought the clue was in the name, no? Bank of England? Created in the 17th Century (before the Union) to finance the English Government. Granted, it was nationalised in 1946, so now belongs to the UK Government, but that doesn't give Scotland any right to it.

Why should the rUK underwrite an independent nation? Sure, you can still use the pound if you want, but don't expect a currency Union and there will be no appetite for it from the electorate after all the vitriol, especially as the Scots have threatened to not honour their share of the debt if no Union is forthcoming!

The only people I hear saying "of course there will be a currency Union" are the Nat's who refuse to believe what everyone else is saying.

It also begs the question why you want to be "independent" but want to keep the Queen, keep the pound, join the EU (which will only erode your new independence like never before), keep an open border etc.



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 04:35 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason
Yes but only because the treasury borrows money in Scotland behalf. The entire of the UK runs at a deficit.
The potential problem for the UK is Scotland leaves isn't government spending but balance of trade and the affect on the pound. Of course a drop in the value of the pound isn't necessarily a bad thing if controlled but a sudden nose dive would not look good for Osborne.



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 04:38 AM
link   
a reply to: jrmcleod

Keep telling yourself that, but the Scottish Governments own figures paint a different picture.

In simple terms, for FY 12/13:

Scottish Government expenditure: £65.2 Billion
Scottish Government revenue - including geographical share of Oil revenue: £53.147 Billion (much lower if done a a per capita share)

The above figures include the block grant by the way.

That is a budget shortfall of over £12 Billion for the last financial year. How exactly, then, does Scotland subsidises everyone else when it clearly spends more than it generates? But no, you keep telling yourself that.

The only way you;re going to make the numbers balance is either tax hikes or spending cuts, because you sure as hell will find it hard work borrowing money on the international markets.



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 04:39 AM
link   
a reply to: [post=18404847]stumason[/post
Can you explain how Westminster is code for "Bastard English" pretty sure it is code for UK Government and establishment. "bastard" or otherwise.



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 04:45 AM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

I was going to point out in my above post, we all spend more than we generate!

But to your point, in an iScotland how are they going to raise the funds themselves?

As for the balance of trade, excluding oil and gas, Scottish trade is around £24 Billion per annum, much of this to the rUK and EU. Comparatively speaking, this is equivalent to the change down the back of the sofa when looking at rUK. The only hit will be the Gas/Oil, but in all honesty this has been declining for some years now anyway.

If the Spanish PM follows through and blocks Scottish access to the EU - as well might the rUK if Scotland tries to walk from it's obligations - then who exactly will Scotland be trading with?



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 04:49 AM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

That is the way it is perceived and certainly the way it has been sold on the interwebs by the Cybernat brigades. Note how the tune changed from it all being "England's fault" a few years ago to now being "Westminster's" - they only adopted the Westminster angle to make it sound like they weren't the same old bigots they always were, but we know when they start harping on about "Westminster", they really mean England.



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 05:32 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason



I wasn't saying you had to be Scottish to have an opinion, but the fact you're not is even worse as all you've done in this thread is be quite arrogant and rude towards the rUK.


Which was why stu no-one had bothered to reply to any of his posts.

His opinion, which I agree he's fully entitled to, isn't worth jack and is clearly based on ignorance of the facts and outright bigotry.


edit on 12/9/14 by Freeborn because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 06:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Freeborn

I suppose! But you know me....

On the subject of the Scottish budget, spending etc, a thought occurred to me outside while having a smoke...

Taking the figures as they are, including a geographical share of Oil wealth, Scotland currently runs a budget deficit of 8% GDP - with a GDP of around £144 Billion - this is worse than Portugal, or Greece and about the same as Afghanistan! In comparison, the UK as a whole runs a deficit of around 4%.

Obviously, should the vote go for the Yes, the Scottish Government will have further expenditure to consider, such as defence, foreign relations etc.

So, this begs the question - how do the Yes crowd suppose they will overcome this massive budgetary problem?
edit on 12/9/14 by stumason because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 06:13 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason

I posted this in another thread but I suggest you look at this.

Scottish Wealth



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 06:17 AM
link   
a reply to: mclarenmp4

A very selective slice of history there - it's funny, many like to harp on about us stealing "your oil" as if history began in the 1970's and make the point with graphs and how, if you had been independent since the discovery of Oil, you'd all have gold plated streets. It also neglects to illustrate how UK Investment made that Oil recoverable.

What about the previous 260+ years? How much did it cost England to cover Scotland's losses after the Darien Scheme? How much revenue did we lose out on by allowing you unrestricted access to our Markets - Glasgow especially did exceptionally well out of the Empire. In fact, in the months leading up to the Union, Scottish merchants made a killing by exploiting a tax loophole that allowed them to buy up goods such as spices, salt and fish, then sell it back after the Union at a hefty profit.

It's always painted as a one way street, usually by bringing up Oil, but they always forget about the hundreds of years of history before and how very well Scotland did out of the Union, usually at a cost to England. I'm sure if we went back and did the maths, any money you guys would have got from keeping all the Oil since the 70's is heftily outweighed by the money that went in the other direction since the early 18th century.
edit on 12/9/14 by stumason because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 12 2014 @ 06:35 AM
link   
a reply to: stumason

Nice deflection, you've been going on for the last few pages about how can we afford to go it alone and then I show you how and now it's, but what about the last 260 years.

Successive governments have squandered our resources on bailing out the already wealthy, on weapons of war and now we have a chance to change our country for the better. We know it's not going to be easy but hopefully we can rise to the challenge if we do gain independence. It might be the best thing for the UK as a whole if we do get it right.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join