Scottish Independence

[MuckleMoo]

This guy?

http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/time-to-liquidate-scotland-and-sell-off-her-assets-says-expat-historian-1-686107

Must be. Can't be that many historian's around that can come across as being so utterly unhinged. The fact that the BBC thought it appropriate to give his rantings any airtime is also completely mind blowing

[The_Kincardine]

The annual cost of running Trident on top of this, is considered to be £2 billion, each and every year:

So absolutely no doubt then, that the cost of establishing state institutions for Scotland is less than the opportunity reward for offloading Britain's laughable pretence as a nuclear superpower. Thanks for playing anyway.

So Scotland's contribution to Trident would be 8ish% so maybe £160M pa.

Are you suggesting that the infrastructure cost of iScotland would be less than £160M pa? Are you even suggesting that all the costs associated with a new state amortised over the life of Trident would be less than £160M per annum?

If you are then you are an utter fool.

Larger economy doesn't = less risky. Particularly when the IMF tells that large economy to stop acting in a "risky" manner.

Firstly, The IMF got it wrong on the UK economy. Secondly, 'large' need not mean less risky but 'new' certainly does.

Do it our way. Cut our own cloth.

That is idealistic tosh. Scotland is conjoined with The UK economically, socially and culturally.

[vikingTON]

So Scotland's contribution to Trident would be 8ish% so maybe £160M pa.

Are you suggesting that the infrastructure cost of iScotland would be less than £160M pa? Are you even suggesting that all the costs associated with a new state amortised over the life of Trident would be less than £160M per annum?

What "infrastructure cost", specifically, would cost the Scottish state £160 million per annum, but doesn't cost Scotland the same or similar amount as part the United Kingdom's state "infrastructure"? The cost of replicating the infrastructure the UK has is estimated at a top end £1.5 million. That is 10 years of Trident's annual running costs, and would likely be entirely covered by erm... not creating a replacement nuclear warhead system in the first place. You've simply been caught talking shite.

For some who desperately stalled for time asking for empirical evidence earlier, it's noteworthy that you've actually provided f**k all for your own crock of shit so far. So until you do that then you'll be left at the kiddies table talking to Mr Bairn.

[The_Kincardine]

For some who desperately stalled for time asking for empirical evidence earlier, it's noteworthy that you've actually provided f**k all for your own crock of shit so far. So until you do that then you'll be left at the kiddies table talking to Mr Bairn.

Take your juvenile shite elsewhere.

it is abundantly clear that you and your fellow-travelers have been hugely exposed by this notion that Trident-savings will pay for the cost of iScotland.

By your own reference it'll be penny-numbers compared to the price of a new state.

[AberdeenBud]

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/09/scottish-independence-tns-poll-1-per-cent-gap-yes-no

[dave.j]

Take your juvenile shite elsewhere.

it is abundantly clear that you and your fellow-travelers have been hugely exposed by this notion that Trident-savings will pay for the cost of iScotland.

By your own reference it'll be penny-numbers compared to the price of a new state.

Jesus, Man! Step away from the keyboard.

[paolo2143]

Unbelievable i could hardly believe what i was seeing last night.All the National UK News channels who normally barely seem to realise Scotland Exists devoted half their airtime to the Independence debate and all of course we got was panic stories about what might happen. if we dare to Vote YES.Then if that was not enough we saw leading politicians from all parties in Westminster coming out with all kind of apparent Goodies for us if we only say will say No.

Of course if Scotland does say NO then within a couple of weeks all the National News channels will of course forget we ever exist again and all these Westminster Politicians who say they love us will again probably never been seen North of the Border for months.

Perhaps even more amazing was that they chose to run with the stories of how all the big city financial markets,banks etc were in a panic as though they were the voice of reason,yet wasn't it these same serving greedy financial institutions,Brokers & Greedy Bankers that got us all into this huge mess of Debt in the First place.

[git-intae-thum]

Oh. Kincardine. Here is your wee list of doom revised....

Currency....The pound. CU or or no CU

Central banking.... Not in place. Agreed. Will depend on when rUK stopping being arses over CU.

Financial regulation. In place. Existing UK legislation will be enforced until a new regulatory setup. Can't see temporary legislature to keep existing UK in place being too much of an issue.

A plethora of other regulatory authorities...... As above

A constitution......Not in place agreed. However the formation of such is one of the great plus points of independence

Tax regime both personally and for companies.. Already in place. See financial regulation.

Welfare regime.....Already in place. Again all thats need is a temp legal statute, until such time as Holyrood decides change.

Welfare systems..... Already in place. As above

Possibly the largest IT project in world history to write new programs from scratch....Absolute bollocks unless you have evidence to counter.

An approach to diplomacy. Not in place. Duh. Obviously...However more a political issue than one of cost

Diplomatic missions.... Err...we will have our share of UK embassy property etc thanks. Would think a similar setup to other small EU countries would do nicely.

Relationships with entities like NATO and The UN.... No cost inherent. Again a political issue

Consulates....As above...see diplomatic mission

European Union integration, timescales and conditions.... Without going over the whole EU thing. Its a political not cost issue

Defense policy. Not in place. Err obviously. Again a political issue. And one where we can reasonably expect a big saving.

So there we go. Fixed it for you. By the way if you are going to call someone else an "imbecile"...best learn tae fuckin spell it first eh.

[vikingTON]

Take your juvenile shite elsewhere.

it is abundantly clear that you and your fellow-travelers have been hugely exposed by this notion that Trident-savings will pay for the cost of iScotland.

By your own reference it'll be penny-numbers compared to the price of a new state.

Learn to read champ: by my own reference the cost of replacing Trident would likely entirely account for the cost of establishing new state institutions. With a substantial dividend each year by not spunking money away to maintain it.

I'm afraid you've been caught making a claim that you couldn't substantiate, then desperately hoped to find a way to make the actual numbers that you requested support your argument. You have failed. You have also failed to evidence your claim that "Infrastructure costs" would have any impact whatsoever.

Gutted for you*, failed Britnat.

* Nah not really

[AberdeenBud]

Is it just me or does Kincardine need a hug?

[Guest]

The Scottish State needs a strong restructuring budget - Kincardine.

[Guest]

Btw I don't think we should all line up to pick apart Kincardine's arguments. If we do it'll look like a crowd ganging up on one person who'll never have a chance of winning the argument because he's so heavily outnumbered. Much better to let one person have a one on one chat and fucking destroy his points bit by bit, that's much more fair.

VT, your turn tonight but I want a go at least once this week.

ETA: Ooft, that's given me a belting idea for a thread. We should have an official online debate at some point before the 18th. Three Yes voting PnBers, three No voters and a curator, and a two hour window where only these seven can get involved. Three one on one debates like on STV, with a group discussion at the end. Scenes.

[Blaven]

That is idealistic tosh. Scotland is conjoined with The UK economically, socially and culturally.

You mist out that It's also conjoined geologically.

Has absolutely no bearing on the matter what so ever.

You are arguing that it can't be done or not without a monumental cost and it won't be worth it.

I for one am telling you to *uck off and that it can be done and will be WELL worth it.

[banana]

This seethe from The The Kincardine is fucking glorious.

[AberdeenBud]

The Independent reporting that "Westminster and Whitehall are in a state of sheer panic because the consequences, not just for England, but Wales and Northern Ireland, are frankly unimaginable,"

[Blaven]

Just viewed a clip of England fans at the game tonight chanting " *uck off Scotland, we are all voting YES ".

That Scotland - England game is gearing up to be a doozy.

[The_Kincardine]

Oh. Kincardine. Here is your wee list of doom revised....

Currency....The pound. CU or or no CU. A big risk to Scotland and the markets. I have a better currency strategy than Eck.

Central banking.... Not in place. Agreed. Will depend on when rUK stopping being arses over CU. No it won't. If iScotland want a CU then it needs to have its budget approved by rUK. Anything less would be absurd.

Financial regulation. In place. Existing UK legislation will be enforced until a new regulatory setup. Can't see temporary legislature to keep existing UK in place being too much of an issue. Naive at best. iScotland will need its own regulations and regulators.

A plethora of other regulatory authorities...... As above. Naive at best. iScotland will need its own regulations and regulators.

A constitution......Not in place agreed. However the formation of such is one of the great plus points of independence. This is, again, naive. Establishing a written constitution will be a running sore.

Tax regime both personally and for companies.. Already in place. See financial regulation. You have neither a tax polity nor a means of garnering taxes. You will be paying rUK for many years to use its systems.

Welfare regime.....Already in place. Again all thats need is a temp legal statute, until such time as Holyrood decides change. You have neither a welfare system nor a means of paying welfare. You will be paying rUK for many years to use its systems.

Welfare systems..... Already in place. As above. You have none

Possibly the largest IT project in world history to write new programs from scratch....Absolute bollocks unless you have evidence to counter. How much does it cost to develop a whole IT infrastructure for a new government? The best I can say is "Fucking hunners more than Trident".

An approach to diplomacy. Not in place. Duh. Obviously...However more a political issue than one of cost. Bollocks.. It is both a matter of policy AND of cost

Diplomatic missions.... Err...we will have our share of UK embassy property etc thanks. Would think a similar setup to other small EU countries would do nicely. There has to be some sort of independent Scottish representation. This involves effort and cost.

Relationships with entities like NATO and The UN.... No cost inherent. Again a political issue. No. There has to be some aspect of government that has people focussed on both and some defense element related to both. There will be a cost in time and resources.

Consulates....As above...see diplomatic mission. Again, some consulate effort needed There will be a cost in time and resources.

European Union integration, timescales and conditions.... Without going over the whole EU thing. Its a political not cost issue. You have no way of knowing this. You know not the timescale nor the conditions of EU membership.

Defense policy. Not in place. Err obviously. Again a political issue. And one where we can reasonably expect a big saving. Again, you have no way of knowing what the purpotive govt of iScotland will say or do about defence nor on the costs of setting up a Scottish military arm will be,

OK I emboldened the main headings, kept your statements in normal type and added my comments in italics.

I hope it's fairly easy to read and didn't change your words in any way.

My summary? You are blissful unaware and dreadfully optimistic about the cost and effort in setting-up iScotland and, as I have said a few times, I really cannot see the gain.

[vikingTON]

Dearie me, this is getting into Johann Lamont territory.

[Gordon EF]

ETA: Ooft, that's given me a belting idea for a thread. We should have an official online debate at some point before the 18th. Three Yes voting PnBers, three No voters and a curator, and a two hour window where only these seven can get involved. Three one on one debates like on STV, with a group discussion at the end. Scenes.

Smashing idea.

Do you have three No voters left?

[The_Kincardine]

Learn to read champ: by my own reference the cost of replacing Trident would likely entirely account for the cost of establishing new state institutions. With a substantial dividend each year by not spunking money away to maintain it.

By your own reference it wouldn't. All you said was that the cost of Trident would be, to Scotland, £160M a year. You'd not even be able to assume the costs of running a new Scottish Inland Revenue for £160M a year so dont be so idiotic.

Is it just me or does Kincardine need a hug?

Oh always and thanks for the offer. Finzean car park?

The Scottish State needs a strong restructuring budget - Kincardine.

Of course it does and I am delighted to point out to the potential voters how disingenuous 'Aye' have been here.

Btw I don't think we should all line up to pick apart Kincardine's arguments.

None of you can. It is, to quote Francis Schaeffer, a true truth that the cost of establishing a new Scottish state will be enormous in both money and effort and to little effect. It certainly won't make one person a tittle more Scottish nor will it advance industry a millimeter within my lifetime.

It will, though, make IT consultants, lawyers, accountants and regulators immensely wealthier.