A postive case for the union

[Malky3]

2 hours ago, git-intae-thum said:

Against my better judgement to engage with you as you are clearly a closed mind.......but:

GERs figures and methadology work for the public finances of a Scotland in union.....NOT the public finances of Scotland.

As patiently explained....the figures collected and produced.... and the methadolgy applied.........has no bearing to the finances of an independent nation. To attempt to use them as such is all wrong.

Can you not see the difference?

Of course I can see the difference. I've repeatedly stated it for months now. Right now Scotland get's it's money in the form of a grant - the size of which is determined through the Barnett Formula. Currently that see's Scotland get £13Bn more to spend than we raise in revenue. That is the true picture of Scotland within the Union as you appear now to be agreeing. 

Scotland outside of the Union won't be getting any Barnett Formula grants. Instead the only money it will have is what it raises in revenue - which is £13Bn short of what the Scottish Government currently spends. 

I keep asking what services you would cut, or what taxes you would raise to cover what would by then be the largest fiscal deficit in Europe and all I'm getting in response is some trash about how an Independent Scotland would pay less than it does currently for it's public services - despite the SNP saying it plans to use the same service providers - and that somehow being Independent will mean loads of magic money trees sprout and sales of Scottish unicorns and Kelpies will be the next global phenomenon. 

[Rizzo]

Just popped in to see if anyone had managed to make a positive case for the union yet.

That'll be a "no" then.

[Mark Connolly]

3 hours ago, Rizzo said:

Just popped in to see if anyone had managed to make a positive case for the union yet.

That'll be a "no" then.

I believe the current view is "It's shit, but it would be so much shitter if independence!!!!!!!11!!"

[Malky3]

7 hours ago, Rizzo said:

Just popped in to see if anyone had managed to make a positive case for the union yet.

That'll be a "no" then.

I did loads of times. 

Scotland, through the Barnett Formula, gets £13Bn per annum more to spend than we raise in revenue. 

[AUFC90]

Just a shame about the thick c***s that still quote him.

Thanks for telling us all how smart you are.

I'd rather a couple of people didn't just let him spout his pish forever more without countering it regardless of him being a trolling sadact or no. Better yet, he should be banned just for being a spamming fanny. There's too many on the politics forum and they don't tend to be from yes voters who have been posting on here for at least the last 5 years.

Thanks none the less for being the ONLY person to see Malky for the sadact he is....or maybe not.

[AUFC90]

I did loads of times. 
Scotland, through the Barnett Formula, gets £13Bn per annum more to spend than we raise in revenue. 

I want £25bn and some new trains or it's a yes from me.

[BawWatchin]

Positive case for the Union:
The Scottish Courts know they can just troll the **** out of Westminster now.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

The Supreme Court . . .