|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jan 13, 2023 11:45:45 GMT
Heres what the cuthberts have said on GERS...
The Cuthberts have spent many years pointing out the methodological flaws in GERS, some of which were deliberately designed into the figures by a hostile UK government.
 I struggle to believe that public spending in an independent Scotland is going to be lower than it is now. |
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Jan 13, 2023 13:00:42 GMT
Hi morayloon Do you not think, for the sake of independence planning, it's safer to assume that GERs are correct. I have my doubts about some of the costs for reserved matters, but don't want nasty surprises post independence either. If Scotland did have a deficit, our government would do what other countries do - borrow. At present Scotland only has very limited borrowing powers, something which is holding us back. Borrowing, the last refuge of the Indy economic cover-up.
Governments do borrow and there is obviously a place for borrowing, but it is not a panacea for all that ails. There is only so much debt that a government can sustainably honour and service.
The publication below presents a straightforward and non-partisan view on the issues that borrowing would present for Indy Scotland. This was produced when interest rates were at, or close to, record lows, but have been inexorably on the rise since then, and when our fiscal deficit as a percentage of GDP was 4% lower than it is now (although this might come down a bit as the Covid bump continues to fade). Factor these changes into the scenario and you will soon realise that borrowing would not be the answer. It would have to be massive cuts in public services and/or crippling hikes in taxation, not borrowing, for an Indy Scotland. That would be a price too great for me given the relatively small scale of the problem, but for the “Indy at any cost” types who are prepared to inflict deep and long-term damage on their fellow Scots in pursuit of an ideology, presumably a price worth paying. www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/sites/default/files/publications/borrowing-independent-scotland.pdf |
|
|
|
Post by morayloon on Jan 13, 2023 14:49:47 GMT
1. You really don’t need to explain who the Cuthberts are, the high regard in which they are held across the political spectrum in Scotland, or their role in driving through serious improvements in the GERS figures. If you thought that I didn’t already know that, why do you think I have been highlighting that it was Margaret Cuthbert who said that Richard Murphy’s description of GERS was “verging on ingnorance”? 2. Of course there was a political motivation behind the introduction of GERS in the first instance. Politicians being politically motivated is hardly headline news. Political motivation is also why Indy Fanatics seek to deny the inconvenient truth of GERS as evidenced by the desperate efforts we are currently seeing on here from our little band of Indy Fanatics. 3. I agree that GERS doesn’t tell us anything about the choices that a future Indy Scottish government might make. Nobody, as far as I am aware, claims that it does. Nor should they because GERS is neither designed to do that nor does it seek to do that. All that GERS seeks to do is to tell us, at the end of each financial year, what Scotland’s net fiscal balance is and, at the end of 2021/22 it was circa -£23.7 billion ie 12.3% of GDP. This means that Scotland currently enjoys the benefit of receiving £23.7 billion worth of public sector benefits and facilities that it would not be able to provide for itself based upon current Scottish revenues. So it means that if a future Indy Scotland government wants to maintain our current public benefits and facilities standard of living then it is going to have to find £23.7 billion from somewhere each and every year. Either that or it reduces the level of public benefits and facilities by that amount each and every year. As FAI says, a stark choice indeed. 4. GERS is a reliable assessment of Scotland’s net fiscal balance. Everybody knows that, and SNP ScotGov acknowledges that every year when they sign off the GERS report and when they issue statements saying that. So everybody does not know that GERS is crap, not even SNP ScotGov. Only Indy fanatics argue that, and they only do so because they can’t acknowledge the truth for fear that it will damage the prospects for independence (which, of course, it would). So they deny the undeniable and mislead the Scottish people about the financial challenges of independence. The above, in a nutshell, is the reality. You can huff and puff as much as you like, but you won’t blow that house down. If you, or anybody else comes up with something credible that challenges any of that, then I will take it on board and try to respond (provided I read that post in the first place, of course, which is regularly not the case with yours, and those from other Indy fanatics posts, on here. Sorry, but life is too short!). 1. As I said previously she was mainly concerned with his use of words to describe GERS. She acknowledges that the figures are not perfect and Murphy accepts that the methodology has improved dramatically over the years 2. "Desperate efforts"? I think that you need to look at your own posts before criticising others. A quote from (I presume) Kevin Hague and a 3 minute video concocted to show Murphy in a negative way (also from the hands of Hague). In response I provided the video of the full committee meeting for you to check out. From what you have posted since I can only assume that you haven't looked at it. 3. GERS can only be as good as the data the statisticians are fed. All five of the guests agreed that data collection was a problem, a lot of available data remains unused 4. Not what I heard when I listened to the proceedings. The final outcome is only as good as the info provided and as I mentioned above a lot of available date is not used It is obvious that you did not watch the committee meeting proceedings, nor have you read any of Murphy's blogs I provided. The situation now is that you are on the back foot, with no real evidence to back your case: Kevin Hague?  You have resorted to lashing out at those of us who have given you evidence to show that GERS is not the be all and end all of Scotland's finances. Deliberately not reading, or watching, material that might damage your case is no way to carry on. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 13, 2023 15:35:40 GMT
Dont have the time to deal with all your latest british nationalist drivel , but i will get back to you .
Just want to quickly pick up on your use of Margaret Cuthbert as somehow endorsing the GERS figures as credible by calling Richard murphys view vergin on ignorant .
Heres what the cuthberts have said on GERS...
. JIM AND MARGARET CUTHBERT
Jim Cuthbert was Chief Statistician at the UK government’s Scottish Office. He has an MA in mathematics and economics, an MSc in mathematics and statistics, and a PhD in probability theory. He lectured in statistics at Glasgow University, and worked for the cash limits division of the UK Treasury.
His wife Margaret has a degree in Economics and Statistics, and worked as an economist for ICI before lecturing in econometrics at Glasgow University.
The Cuthberts have spent many years pointing out the methodological flaws in GERS, some of which were deliberately designed into the figures by a hostile UK government.
GERS are crap data , and everyone knows GERS are crap data. The Cuthberts have been pointing out for years much to unionists dimsay the fallacy and flaws of these crystal ball gazing figures , guesswork , missing data and flaws inherent in GERS , as well as the fact they are quite obviously politically motivated .
Unionists such as merryn somerset web backed this view up regarding GERS as fantasy guesswork for an independent scotland....
Everyone acknowledges and knows GERS is absolutely meaningless drivel for the finances of an independent scotland. Three cheers for happy jack hanging his coat on the shoogly peg of the GERS fantasy once again to keep scotland in his rotten out of date union.
1. You really don’t need to explain who the Cuthberts are, the high regard in which they are held across the political spectrum in Scotland, or their role in driving through serious improvements in the GERS figures. If you thought that I didn’t already know that, why do you think I have been highlighting that it was Margaret Cuthbert who said that Richard Murphy’s description of GERS was “verging on ingnorance”? Actually i did.
Just because the cuthberts have criticised Murphy doesnt mean they hold your unionist view regarding GERS.
They have been long term critics of GERS going back twenty years at least , and despite the attempts to improve the figures , they still tell us there are serious flaws because the uk government and its departments wont relese data to them.
The point about richard murphy is that he isnt a lone voice in the wilderness rubbishing GERS.
yawn. Fantasy economic figures invented by british accountants while cooking nations books to show deficits are nothing new. Its a tried and worn system , with a high failure rate in discouraging countires to leave london rule.
Famous example being India , as shashi tharoor says , where for 2 centuries of british rule , they told the indians they were running a deficit and couldnt afford independence till the indians woke up.
As do most sensible people not embalmed in a butchers apron. So what are you dribbling about then?
Well as people have said time and again , if scotland is doing so badly as part of the union after 300 years , then its clear westmisnter cannot be trusted to run our finances and one of many reasons why we need independence.
The house is being dismantled bit by bit.......
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 13, 2023 15:47:02 GMT
Heres what the cuthberts have said on GERS...
The Cuthberts have spent many years pointing out the methodological flaws in GERS, some of which were deliberately designed into the figures by a hostile UK government.
I struggle to believe that public spending in an independent Scotland is going to be lower than it is now. If you believe in the GERS figures i can see why.
Heres what the cuthberts said in thier paper in 2005 regarding how GERS overestimates expenditure...
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 13, 2023 15:49:54 GMT
– GERS was first established in 1992 by the Conservative Secretary of State for Scotland, Ian Lang. He envisaged it explicitly as a political tool, rather than a serious set of accounts.
– In 1999, as part of the delivery of a Scottish Parliament, GERS was enshrined as the primary tool for identifying income and expenditure relating to Scotland.
– the effort to ascribe an accurate share of UK expenditure to Scotland between 1999 and 2007 was at best farcically incompetent and at worst a deliberately disingenuous effort to cook the books and load Scotland’s balance sheet with “costs” it didn’t incur, and credit the UK government with expenditure in Scotland that was never actually spent there.
|
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Jan 13, 2023 16:13:14 GMT
For someone who does not want to engage in nit-picking you certainly pick a lot of nits, Morayloon.
The type of detail that you raise above is much the same as the type of detail that I raised which led to your accusations of nit-picking.
You need to be consistent.As I pointed out to you very recently, double standards is not a good look.
1. At a stretch, she might just be so sensitive to the use of unsavoury language that she considers the use of the word “crap” to be offensive and therefore “appalling”, but even if that is true that can’t explain why she said that his description of GERS as such “verges on ignorance”. That clearly indicates what she thinks of Murphy’s position, not his choice of adjective.
2. I have no need to resort to desperate measures as (1) I have no ideology to defend only the truth to pursue and (2) I have nothing to be desperate about. The weight of all expert opinion is enough for me and, as with any issue, there will always be the odd crank or maverick enlightened soul (depending upon your point of view) who will kick against the perceived wisdom. In my view Murphy falls solidly into the crank category.
3. The weight of expert opinion overwhelmingly considers GERS figures to be reliable for their intended purpose, including that of SNP ScotGov and, presumably therefore, SNP leadership.You seem keen on researching things so why don’t you do that with an open mind. You will quickly realise that what I describe is, indeed, the case. It is only Indy fanatics who argue otherwise and that comes from a position of necessity.
4. It might well not be what you heard, but you have demonstrated repeatedly that you are incapable of receiving, processing and understanding anything that does not closely match your Indy fantasies, so that is not a surprise.
And of course GERS is not the be all of Scotland’s finances, but it is a reliable indicator of its net fiscal balance. That’s all it has ever been. I did read the links to Murphy’s pronouncements that you relied upon on the old site, but I also knew that he was a discredited commentator and a cranky outlier, so I treated his comments as such. As for the full proceedings that you posted, you are right, I didn’t give up over 2 hours of my life to watch them and I won’t be doing that either. Are you saying that the events on the little clip didn’t happen? I suspect that you are not, but even if you are then so what. The links I posted were only quick and snappy examples posted for illustrative purposes, not the basis of dismissing Murphy’s pronouncements. The reality is that Murphy’s opinions are rejected by the overwhelming weight of expert opinion. Nit-picking won’t change any of that one iota.
|
|
|
|
Post by research0it on Jan 13, 2023 17:32:50 GMT
Hi everyone
Is this not all a monumental waste of time?
However accurate gers are and however big or small the deficit is, both the uk and independent Scottish governments would be capable of dealing with it. If they're smart and if there's a will.
The point of this thread is to assess who's going to be smart and who'll have the will.
Neither side would get me to jump off the fence with all this.
|
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Jan 13, 2023 18:15:35 GMT
Yes, it is - but equally, my instinct that the Indy fanatics need to be called out every now and again on their twisted rhetoric kicks in and I get involved against my better judgement..
Not that that matters very much on a forum like this with double figure membership and readership probably not much greater than that - and which is likely never to expand beyond that.
Also, from my perspective, it is arguably counter-productive to even engage with the. Indy fanatics on GERS because every time that someone does this, whether on here on in the wider world, we are just giving them and their rhetoric an air of unmerited credibility.
And, of course, thinking wider again, since the recent Supreme Court judgement on another referendum, the prospect of indyref2 or any other mechanism for independence has been knocked deep into the long grass, probably for a generation - so discussing anything Indy related is really just a monumental waste of time for the foreseeable future.
|
|
|
|
Post by happyjack on Jan 13, 2023 18:30:49 GMT
1. You really don’t need to explain who the Cuthberts are, the high regard in which they are held across the political spectrum in Scotland, or their role in driving through serious improvements in the GERS figures. If you thought that I didn’t already know that, why do you think I have been highlighting that it was Margaret Cuthbert who said that Richard Murphy’s description of GERS was “verging on ingnorance”? Actually i did.
Just because the cuthberts have criticised Murphy doesnt mean they hold your unionist view regarding GERS.
They have been long term critics of GERS going back twenty years at least , and despite the attempts to improve the figures , they still tell us there are serious flaws because the uk government and its departments wont relese data to them.
The point about richard murphy is that he isnt a lone voice in the wilderness rubbishing GERS.
yawn. Fantasy economic figures invented by british accountants while cooking nations books to show deficits are nothing new. Its a tried and worn system , with a high failure rate in discouraging countires to leave london rule.
Famous example being India , as shashi tharoor says , where for 2 centuries of british rule , they told the indians they were running a deficit and couldnt afford independence till the indians woke up.
As do most sensible people not embalmed in a butchers apron. So what are you dribbling about then?
Well as people have said time and again , if scotland is doing so badly as part of the union after 300 years , then its clear westmisnter cannot be trusted to run our finances and one of many reasons why we need independence.
The house is being dismantled bit by bit.......
Apart from your spin on what the Cuthberts say about the reliability of the current GERS figures, you have said precisely zero that adds anything of relevance to the discussion or anything that I wasn’t aware of before. As I keep repeating, the overwhelming weight of expert opinion from the commentators on, and contributors to, the GERS process is that the figures are reliable for their intended purpose. That, just to remind you, includes SNP ScotGov and therefore, presumably, SNP party leadership.
Now, as I have just acknowledged in my response to research0it, all of this discussion in a monumental waste of time. Having done so, I would make myself look rather foolish by continuing to engage on this further, for the reasons outlined to research0it, so I won’t. |
|
|
|
Post by morayloon on Jan 14, 2023 2:40:50 GMT
For someone who does not want to engage in nit-picking you certainly pick a lot of nits, Morayloon. The type of detail that you raise above is much the same as the type of detail that I raised which led to your accusations of nit-picking. You need to be consistent.As I pointed out to you very recently, double standards is not a good look. 1. At a stretch, she might just be so sensitive to the use of unsavoury language that she considers the use of the word “crap” to be offensive and therefore “appalling”, but even if that is true that can’t explain why she said that his description of GERS as such “verges on ignorance”. That clearly indicates what she thinks of Murphy’s position, not his choice of adjective. 2. I have no need to resort to desperate measures as (1) I have no ideology to defend only the truth to pursue and (2) I have nothing to be desperate about. The weight of all expert opinion is enough for me and, as with any issue, there will always be the odd crank or maverick enlightened soul (depending upon your point of view) who will kick against the perceived wisdom. In my view Murphy falls solidly into the crank category. 3. The weight of expert opinion overwhelmingly considers GERS figures to be reliable for their intended purpose, including that of SNP ScotGov and, presumably therefore, SNP leadership.You seem keen on researching things so why don’t you do that with an open mind. You will quickly realise that what I describe is, indeed, the case. It is only Indy fanatics who argue otherwise and that comes from a position of necessity. 4. It might well not be what you heard, but you have demonstrated repeatedly that you are incapable of receiving, processing and understanding anything that does not closely match your Indy fantasies, so that is not a surprise. And of course GERS is not the be all of Scotland’s finances, but it is a reliable indicator of its net fiscal balance. That’s all it has ever been. I did read the links to Murphy’s pronouncements that you relied upon on the old site, but I also knew that he was a discredited commentator and a cranky outlier, so I treated his comments as such. As for the full proceedings that you posted, you are right, I didn’t give up over 2 hours of my life to watch them and I won’t be doing that either. Are you saying that the events on the little clip didn’t happen? I suspect that you are not, but even if you are then so what. The links I posted were only quick and snappy examples posted for illustrative purposes, not the basis of dismissing Murphy’s pronouncements. The reality is that Murphy’s opinions are rejected by the overwhelming weight of expert opinion. Nit-picking won’t change any of that one iota. If you read your Scotsman article, instead of just the headline, it says " in her submission to the inquiry, statistician Ms Cuthbert said describing Gers as “crap” was “appalling and verging on ignorant”. She may think that of Murphy's musings but is not reported as saying so. You are defending the indefensible. All five guests at that committee meeting were as one in speaking about problems with data collection and that some of the statistics produced are difficult to understand. It is typical of Brit Nats to claim that they "have no ideology to defend" and I fully expected you to come away with that one sooner or later. You can't pursue the truth by looking at only one side of the argument while dismissing the other side's point of view out of hand. That's how the apartheid regime worked in disseminating info. Maggie even called Mandella a terrorist - in line with the official 'truth' coming from South Africa. I have been researching with an open mind, and that is more than I can say for you. You refuse to read anything by Murphy - because it does not fit in with what you have erroneously come to believe - and you refuse to check out the committee meeting, at which a lot of interesting info came out, probably because Murphy was involved. As for your No 4, I throw it right back at you. You obviously haven't a clue how to actually do some objective research - that means looking at both sides of the discussion don't you know. Dismissing a person because of opinions of others is rather telling. You have to come to a personal view based on what that person says, not what others tell you he says, I doubt very much that you have read anything of Murphy's writings and your refusal to watch the video beggars belief. Oh that three minute clip was there but it was actually two separate clips joined together as I said, to show Murphy in a negative way. Murphy's responses have been cut out. As you would know if you watched the video. |
|
|
|
Post by jaydee on Jan 14, 2023 9:35:13 GMT
It is pipe dreams like this that encourage those without the power of thought to believe the SNP nonsense. All your power is owned by the Spanish anyway, just concentrate on teaching your children the alphabet and fill in your pot holes. I see you are not going to respond to your havering slathering drivel about pot holes in Scotland. See link below. Your next rant was about the NHS in Scotland. And all this on your complete and utter bollocks which only shows everty thing you rant about Scotland is between 10% and 90% worse in bankrupt England. So here is the situation in Scotland re the NHS. Which does not cost you one penny. . You tell me how it is worse than bankrupt England. As you rant the SNP have destroyed the NHS. The number of patients spending over 12 hours in A&E was 0.2 per cent in Scotland, 2 per cent in England. Scottish nurses are the highest paid in the UK. NHS waiting times. 945,072 people waited more than 12 hours in England A&E departments in 2021-22. That’s 48 times larger than the figure for Scotland 19,667. Scottish nurses average pay is £36,631 in England £33,384. Health care spending in Scotland per person is £100 more than in England. The UK wankers in Westminster have spent 20% less on health care than similar EU countries since the wankers took power. Once bankrupt England goes its merry way. It will never catch up. Scotland has 96 GPs per 100,000, to bankrupt England's 76. Scotland has 840 qualified nurses per 100,000 to bankrupt England's 586. Scotland has 68 student nurses and midwives per 100,000. Double that of England's at 36 on both. Scotland student nurses , midwives and paramedics receive a bursary of £10,000 a year. And Scottish students do not pay any tuition fees. The only way I can describe you is that you do bring to a new level the meaning of the word imbecile. I just cannot find another description on your continual rabid hate filled meaningless bile. So perhaps you can explain in your own way. How the figures I have supplied translate to you the SNP have destroyed the NHS in Scotland. And that with a drastic cut on funding under the Barnett consequentials of Scotland own money. Does not bode well for bankrupt England does it, as it cannot live within is means. Take your time as it is just going to end up like your drivel on pot holes and Nuclear power. I will leave it for 24 hours and I will bring up more of your drivel to explain. And once again as your brain is going to tell you to post. The figures I gave are wrong. Then if that is what your brain is telling you. It must be telling you, your figures. Or to put it another way. You must know the correct figures. So correct what I have said. ukpoliticsdebate.boards.net/post/43384/thread |
|
|
|
Post by jaydee on Jan 14, 2023 10:16:50 GMT
3. I agree that GERS doesn’t tell us anything about the choices that a future Indy Scottish government might make. Nobody, as far as I am aware, claims that it does. Nor should they because GERS is neither designed to do that nor does it seek to do that. All that GERS seeks to do is to tell us, at the end of each financial year, what Scotland’s net fiscal balance is and, at the end of 2021/22 it was circa -£23.7 billion ie 12.3% of GDP. This means that Scotland currently enjoys the benefit of receiving £23.7 billion worth of public sector benefits and facilities that it would not be able to provide for itself based upon current Scottish revenues. So it means that if a future Indy Scotland government wants to maintain our current public benefits and facilities standard of living then it is going to have to find £23.7 billion from somewhere each and every year. Either that or it reduces the level of public benefits and facilities by that amount each and every year. As FAI says, a stark choice indeed. Why do you go off on tangents. Pointing out in one post GERs are the bees bollocks. Get it into your swede is all that GERs does. Gives the best reason in the world for Scotland to go its merry way. You are the one claiming Scotland is a basket case economy as you slastered you were waiting to see what happened. Twice I have posted what has happened involving remaining with bankrupt England. How many times do you need it pointed out. . And GERs is Crap. As the wankes who say he is a joke do not correct one word he has stated. It jags the ego. So lets try and get one answer out of you. Do not go into the blue and beyond. Go into your risk assessment mode, I still have no idea what it means. You tell me one economic benefit Scotland would gain remaining part of the UK. The operative phrase being Economic benefit. The other operative phrase being. Scotland would benefit. Which means not England or Scotland part of the UK. I do not know what it takes for you to understand. It gains nothing economically being part of the UK. |
|
|
|
Post by om15 on Jan 14, 2023 12:22:10 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by research0it on Jan 14, 2023 14:53:32 GMT
|
|
You have resorted to lashing out at those of us who have given you evidence to show that GERS is not the be all and end all of Scotland's finances. 
