Clarkston5 Posted November 14, 2014 Author Share Posted November 14, 2014 Utter bollocks. And this was one of the main reasons you lost. Exactly why Salmond, Sturgeon, Robertson, Hosie etc faked rage when they got asked questions in the QT programmes. They have no answers Remember Robertson started rolling his eyes when that wee lassie in the sixth form challenged him on funding education? "We want 16 year olds to vote" as long as they're thick enough to vote for independence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Exactly why Sturgeon and Hosie fake rage when they got asked questions in the QT programmes. They have no answers Hosie is a semi functional cretin. I absolutely LOVE the fact he is the deputy leader. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clarkston5 Posted November 14, 2014 Author Share Posted November 14, 2014 Hosie is a semi functional cretin. I absolutely LOVE the fact he is the deputy leader. Robertson would be my preferred choice but Stewart's a prize c**t. Yep he'll do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Robertson would be my preferred choice but Stewart's a prize c**t. Yep he'll do They've had to scrape a particularly talentless barrel regardless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFC90 Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 I think you'll find this was already dumped in the WP. What FURTHER cuts would be made? What was dumped ? That's a lot of cuts I've gave you which amounts to a lot of money. The wastage through being part of the UK is huge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 What was dumped ? That's a lot of cuts I've gave you which amounts to a lot of money. The wastage through being part of the UK is huge. Have you factored in all the additional costs associated with being a new entity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tubbs Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 The plan (in as much as you can call it that with aspirational costs, arrangements and agreements) was to run with a significant deficit; albeit one that was going to be less than rUK. That was with oil at the predicted prices. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFC90 Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Have you factored in all the additional costs associated with being a new entity? Yep. 400 million was it not. 1 and a half billion per year saving on defence costs trumps the lot and that doesn't include our share of 100 billion on Trident renewal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Yep. 400 million was it not. Eh, no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFC90 Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Eh, no. http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jun/22/independent-scotland-startup-costs-200million Oh sorry, 200 million then and let's say an extra 400 million on IT systems. IT that we'll need to pay for inside the union anyway. So that's 600 million in one off costs. Let's say we take defence savings over 5 years. That's 7.5 billion. Easily covers everything. That doesn't include 10% of Trident renewal, HS2, Crossrail, Hinkly point, House of Lords etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jun/22/independent-scotland-startup-costs-200million Oh sorry, 200 million then and let's say an extra 400 million on IT systems. IT that we'll need to pay for inside the union anyway. So that's 600 million in one off costs. Let's say we take defence savings over 5 years. That's 7.5 billion. Easily covers everything. That doesn't include 10% of Trident renewal, HS2, Crossrail, Hinkly point, House of Lords etc. The SNP refused to give a cost. Fail I'm afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFC90 Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 The SNP refused to give a cost. Fail I'm afraid. You're the one failing. Doesn't matter what the figure is, it's a drop in the ocean compared to the savings made from not being part of the British state. Unlucky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Doesn't matter what the figure is, Ooft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFC90 Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 ^^^^^ clutching at straws. Maybe you can answer a question Will the start up costs come anywhere close to 1.5 billion per year ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Will the start up costs come anywhere close to 1.5 billion per year ? Where does this 1.5 billion a year come from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUFC90 Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Where does this 1.5 billion a year come from? Answers a question with a question. The refuge for the failed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 Answers a question with a question. The refuge for the failed. I've answered your question. We have no idea what the "start up costs" would have been as the SNP refused to quantify it. It also wouldn't just be "start up costs" - it would be a budgetary addition for each year following to maintain. Now, why did you put "1.5 bn" there? What is that figure for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted November 14, 2014 Share Posted November 14, 2014 What was dumped ? That's a lot of cuts I've gave you which amounts to a lot of money. The wastage through being part of the UK is huge. All the things you mention were already factored OUT. You are attempting to save money TWICE here and ignoring the fact state revenues will be massively down on the figures produced by the SG and bunged in their WP. So. Try again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 $66 dollars a barrel for Brent crude. What was it the SNP were basing their entire economic plans around again? $113 wasn't it..? Oh dear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doulikefish Posted December 9, 2014 Share Posted December 9, 2014 Is it 2016 already?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.