Printable Version | Subscribe | Add to Favourites
<<  5    6    7    8  >>
New Topic New Poll New Reply
Author: Subject: Scottish Independence Referendum
jeffw

posted on 28/8/14 at 05:59 AM Reply With Quote
I wrote out a long rebuttal to Davie and Scootz points but, frankly, I can't be arsed.

If you lot want to go, get on with it. You amount to 8% or so of the UK by population so it isn't going to impact the rest of us much. The UK Government has already told the markets it will cover all the debt in the event of a Scottish default so there will be little or no impact to the UK market position.

UK Government says no to currency union as does all the political leaders in the UK, SNP says there will be....roll the dice and we will see.






View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
ceebmoj

posted on 28/8/14 at 02:40 PM Reply With Quote
I'm finding this an interesting discussion. Please can we keep sarcasm out of it, if only so that I can learn something new when the point is explained.
View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
Simon

posted on 28/8/14 at 03:52 PM Reply With Quote
And the reason for the union in the first place was.....?

As I mentioned elsewhere, I hope it doesn't happen but there will be silver linings if it does.

ATB

Simon






View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Sam_68

posted on 28/8/14 at 06:18 PM Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by daviep
Sam you are being disingenuous


I was actually being tongue-in-cheek, but there's a serious point, of course...

Scotland's economy is a small fraction of the size of that of the rest of the UK.

At the moment it's losing a mere £13 billion or so a year, but even if you could turn that around, you're never going to be contributing significantly to the UK economy, over all, and the situation will only get worse as the oil and gas revenues run down.

The current figures for deficit as a percentage of GDP are as near the same as makes no real difference (you've again, understandably, picked the most favourable figures to support your own argument), so to the rest of the UK, it's not going to make a whole hell of a lot of difference whether you stay or you go.

You seem to be missing (or conveniently ignoring) two fundamental problems, though:

1) Where government services and bureaucracies are concerned, there are certain economies of scale. If you find yourself in a system with 1/10th the GDP you're part of now, you won't be able to cut your public sector costs by anything like the same proportion. Given the freedom to go all socialist worker as well, without that nasty, evil, right-wing UK Government to moderate you, you'll almost certainly find that public sector spending will spiral out of all control, but that's a different argument. Even if you just try to maintain the status quo, in the long term, either your services will need to be cut dramatically, or your taxes will need to go up dramatically to pay for the reduced efficiency.

2) It's been said earlier on this thread that it's in neither of our interests to stop playing together, independence or not, because Scotland and the UK are each other's biggest trading partners. Except that's not quite true, is it? England is Scotland's biggest trading partner, representing over 70% of your GDP. But Scotland represents only 10% of the GDP of the rest of the UK.

In other words, Scottish independence will have a negative effect for both our economies (that's why the 'no' campaign is running under the 'Better Together' banner), but it'll hurt Scotland a f**k of a lot more than it hurts England.

If you want to go, then go; if that's the way you feel, then good luck, but good riddance.

You'll be cutting off your face to leave yourself with a spited nose...

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
daviep

posted on 28/8/14 at 08:10 PM Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Sam_68
quote:
Originally posted by daviep
Sam you are being disingenuous


I was actually being tongue-in-cheek, but there's a serious point, of course...

Scotland's economy is a small fraction of the size of that of the rest of the UK.

At the moment it's losing a mere £13 billion or so a year, but even if you could turn that around, you're never going to be contributing significantly to the UK economy, over all, and the situation will only get worse as the oil and gas revenues run down. As discussed earlier every western country except Norway is running a deficit.

The current figures for deficit as a percentage of GDP are as near the same as makes no real difference (you've again, understandably, picked the most favourable figures to support your own argument), so to the rest of the UK, it's not going to make a whole hell of a lot of difference whether you stay or you go. Anybody who is taking any serious interest will know that I have used the figures which are the closest representation of an independent Scotland which is representative of what the UK would lose.

You seem to be missing (or conveniently ignoring) two fundamental problems, though:

1) Where government services and bureaucracies are concerned, there are certain economies of scale. If you find yourself in a system with 1/10th the GDP you're part of now, you won't be able to cut your public sector costs by anything like the same proportion. Given the freedom to go all socialist worker as well, without that nasty, evil, right-wing UK Government to moderate you, you'll almost certainly find that public sector spending will spiral out of all control, but that's a different argument. Even if you just try to maintain the status quo, in the long term, either your services will need to be cut dramatically, or your taxes will need to go up dramatically to pay for the reduced efficiency.I've never claimed to be an economist so I can't prove or disprove your claim that bigger institutions are more efficient, in my experience the opposite is usually the case, as organisations expand bureaucracy increases. It is interesting to note that many of the richest countries (GDP per capita) in the world are small European countries, which would lead me to believe that being smaller isn't an automatic disadvantage. As I stated earlier I have no intimate knowledge of the effect of institution size versus efficiency, my beliefs are based on nothing more than observation and logic.

2) It's been said earlier on this thread that it's in neither of our interests to stop playing together, independence or not, because Scotland and the UK are each other's biggest trading partners. Except that's not quite true, is it? England is Scotland's biggest trading partner, representing over 70% of your GDP. But Scotland represents only 10% of the GDP of the rest of the UK.

In other words, Scottish independence will have a negative effect for both our economies (that's why the 'no' campaign is running under the 'Better Together' banner), but it'll hurt Scotland a f**k of a lot more than it hurts England. Is there a definitive reason why trade will change significantly?

If you want to go, then go; if that's the way you feel, then good luck, but good riddance.

You'll be cutting off your face to leave yourself with a spited nose...


Cheers
Davie





“A truly great library contains something in it to offend everyone.”

View User's Profile E-Mail User View All Posts By User U2U Member
Sam_68

posted on 28/8/14 at 08:57 PM Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by daviep
As discussed earlier every western country except Norway is running a deficit.



And your point is?

Nobody disputes that the majority of western countries are running a deficit at the moment, and nobody but an idiot would suggest that it's anything but a bad thing; one which we should be trying to deal with.

The suggestion was that Scotland is an 'asset' to the UK.

Are you suggesting that we should be grateful for your extra £13 billion a year in debt?

quote:
Originally posted by daviep
Anybody who is taking any serious interest will know that I have used the figures which are the closest representation of an independent Scotland which is representative of what the UK would lose.



There are a wide range of heavily disputed figures. It's fairly safe to say that the organisations who came up with them are all taking a serious interest, don't you think?

Or do you imagine that they are just doing it for a bit of a wheeze, because it's more fun than going out, getting drunk and chasing women?

quote:
Originally posted by daviep
I can't prove or disprove your claim that bigger institutions are more efficient, in my experience the opposite is usually the case, as organisations expand bureaucracy increases.



It's about efficient disposition of resources. It's about not having two separate organisations, each with an identical, mirrored structure, carrying duplicated amounts of dead weight.

It's the reason that many smaller local authorities are choosing to share a particular department (HR, Planning, Legal or whatever), perhaps slightly larger than they would each need individually, rather than each having their own small department with its duplicated deadwood and overhead.

You are right: large institutions are less efficient than small ones, but nothing like to the degree that by doubling the size, you double the inefficiencies and overhead (which is exactly what you're doing by simply duplicating a smaller organisation).



[Edited on 28/8/14 by Sam_68]

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
daviep

posted on 29/8/14 at 06:34 AM Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Sam_68

Nobody disputes that the majority of western countries are running a deficit at the moment, and nobody but an idiot would suggest that it's anything but a bad thing; one which we should be trying to deal with.



I agree entirely, unfortunately the British government don't share our sentiments.

quote:
Originally posted by Sam_68
The suggestion was that Scotland is an 'asset' to the UK.



Are you suggesting that it isn't? The rest of the UK are expending a lot of time and effort attempting to retain Scotland in the UK, this doesn't seem logical if Scotland isn't an asset.

Cheers
Davie





“A truly great library contains something in it to offend everyone.”

View User's Profile E-Mail User View All Posts By User U2U Member
Sam_68

posted on 29/8/14 at 06:52 AM Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by daviep
I agree entirely, unfortunately the British government don't share our sentiments.


I suggest you review their policies; reducing the deficit is a key aim.

You seriously believe that a socialist government in Scotland would be better able to control its public spending and reduce Scotland's deficit on its own?


quote:
Originally posted by daviep
Are you suggesting that it isn't?

It's running at a £13 billion loss, so yes, I'm most certainly suggesting that in simple financial terms. And Scotland's position is set to get worse: at the moment, the thing that's saving them from having an absolutely disastrous deficit is North Sea oil and gas, which is on the decline.

As explained above, there are strengths (both financial and political) to a larger, combined economy, and economies of scale to be made on public spending, so we are 'BETTER TOGETHER', but if you're determined to commit economic suicide, then we'll manage a lot better without you, than you'll manage without us.

Good luck and goodbye!

We might consider bailing you out again, as we did after the Darien misadventure when you f***ed up your economy last time around, but I really wouldn't count on it...







[Edited on 29/8/14 by Sam_68]

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
<<  5    6    7    8  >>
New Topic New Poll New Reply


go to top






Website design and SEO by Studio Montage

All content © 2001-16 LocostBuilders. Reproduction prohibited
Opinions expressed in public posts are those of the author and do not necessarily represent
the views of other users or any member of the LocostBuilders team.
Running XMB 1.8 Partagium [© 2002 XMB Group] on Apache under CentOS Linux
Founded, built and operated by ChrisW.