|
|
Post by jaydee on Jan 2, 2023 10:26:16 GMT
What do you not believe?. And if you think England is not bankrupt. Give me another name for a £2.8 trillion debt. Yes that really is £2,800,000,000.000 and rising at over £5,000 per second. Once Scotland goes its merry way. England will have to borrow at a minimum £100 billion more than it does now. just to stand still. That PSBR stood at £321 billion last year. Double like the debt. From the day they took power. They are the most incompetent clueless bunch of wanker ever to take power. That level of incompetence has nothing to do with Putin or covid. It has a QE problem of over £800 billion that will have to be paid back by your grandkids grand kids grand kids. On top of the £600 billion energy problem about to descend. I have just posted. And the reason I gave you for the Scots pay more in energy is exactly as described. It does nogt take much mathematic to work out a two tier energy system. One singular for Scottish need and one for export. Not to mention England and lets be frank has the worst performing economy in the G7. Beaten only by Russia. On local authority in England on the NHS alone. The PFI debt is over 300 billion. That local author NHS debt in England on its own is more than the entire gold reserves held by the BofE. And the Scottish tax p;ayer is paying for this. On top of its own NHS. That does not cost the English tax payer one penny. Let me put it another way. Image if the Scottish water had been put in the hands of the Westminster wankers. It is going to take billions south of the border to sot out. Like energy Paid for by you. I know the uk has a lot of debt but that doesn't add up to bankruptcy. The uk has its own currency so cannot go bankrupt. The price for all the financial measures to protect against bankruptcy will be high inflation and currency devaluation and the uk is currently paying that price. So I would affirm that the uk is a declining economy, not a bankrupt one. You're point about it's relative performance in the g7 would seem to confirm that. Its called bankruptcy. I will agree to disagree. But whaever it is called. It does not alter one fact one jot. That in my vocabulary. Energy rich Scotland can no longer afford bankrupt England. Replace the word bankrupt with your description. I am sure you and I will arrive at or near enough, the same conclusion. I will add. For once it has been a decent debate. despite minor disagreements. The usual four thread wrecking arse holes from south of the border have mainly stayed out. So far.. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 2, 2023 10:59:10 GMT
Further , Ireland became independent of the uk in 1922. Since joining the old EEC in 1973 , its trade with the uk has doubled , but its trade with the EU is five times greater than its trade with the uk. Im not sure why ireland can be successfull outside the uk , but scotland couldnt ?
I'm not saying that Scotland could not be successful - simply pointing out that exactly the same arguments can be made against Scottish independence as were made for Brexit. Leaving a single market with your largest customer is going to put barriers to trade in place (that is what it is designed to do). And so if you apply the same formula to Scotland as happened at Brexit, Scotland will be 6% worse off. Of course the decision to be made is whether the forecasts of economic doom and gloom from leaving a single market are overblown. Ive used ireland as an example of how they too were forced to have england as thier biggest trading partner when they were in the uk , and how gradually over the years they diversified their trade , for example its trade with the EU is now five times greater than its trade with the uk , which has also doubled since 1973.
Scotland wont be 6% worse off , as even unionist economists admit no one knows the full extent of scotlands financial position outside of the union, quite clearly , and figures such as 6 % are nothing more than cherry picked bits of propaganda.
The simple fact is 62 countires left london rule , every one of them were warned they would be worse off financially , some like the american colonies went on to become the number one economy in the world , while others like ireland , with the republic being 10% smaller than scotland , a popualtion 12 % smaller, but as an indy country its GDP is 33 % higher , doing far better out the uk than scotland in.
Not one single nation has asked to come back under london rule , of 62 countires around the world , and that speaks volumes.
Whatever the financial arguemnt for or against scot indy , and i wasnt swayed last time by the doom and gloom , clearly brexit has blown a large hole in brittannias hull as the safety of the uk economy looks grimmer by the day.
Clearly scotland and england do not agree over the eu , and if anything the attitude is hardeneing against the union with england with an ever rising number wanting to leave and rejoin the eu , potentially starting with efta.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 2, 2023 11:00:25 GMT
Scotland could do fine, as could any nation with a half decent barrow boy or girl in charge.
In 1922 the Irish government decided that that it wanted a country fit for poets and pig farmers, with the result that for the next 50 years its main export was people. Then they got to thinking, bhuel, sod seo le haghaidh cluiche na saighdiúirí and set about attracting foreign investment.
I don't know what little Nicky has in mind. Maybe she is going to hang Jaydee up in a cage at Waverley Station and charge visitors a silver penny a time to poke him with a stick, which is certainly a step in the right direction. But other than making Scotland a land fit for kiddie fiddlers, I have not heard much of her plans, economy wise
Irelands economic rise is an outlier though - it was built on a unique set of circumstances that wouldn't apply to Scotland. It wouldnt because scotland is better placed economically to do even better than ireland outside the union. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 2, 2023 11:02:28 GMT
who knows, they couldn't last time. they wanted to stay in the EU last time , and they cant have that and remain in the uk , as england doesnt want to be part of a league of nations of our european continent.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 2, 2023 11:03:25 GMT
It's contingent on the way they've already voted (and rejected what you want). Democracy is a never endum vinny. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 2, 2023 11:11:33 GMT
Hi pacifico Why this blanket assumption that the SNP will win the first Scottish general election. I suppose it's possible but extremely unlikely. Well somehow I struggle to believe that an independent Scotland is going to have a Conservative Government that embraces the extraction of fossil fuels. So given that Scotland is highly unlikely to become an energy superpower (sorry Alec Salmond) I'm unsure what the future economic plan is. Pacifico , i highly doubt labour conservative or the snp will survive politically in an indy scotland. Why would they ?
The snp was originally a broad church of differing political views united in one thing only , scotland independence. The snp will split im sure , into various factions .
Same with labour. Again , apart from the labour name is now so tarnished in scotland as a british nationalist party , i think again we will see centrist and socialist groups emerge from this old british party.
The modern uk conservatives also will no longer exist in scotland quite obviously. We may get a reincarnation of the old scottish conservative party from the sixties without the unionist in the name , but certainly we should see a slightly right of centre scottish party emerge.
I fully expect scotland to become a modern proportionally represented european democracy without the unionist baggage we have just now . The votes of most scots will be up for sale to the highest bidder.
Certainly the old british names of labour and conservative are damaged goods and im sure will be cast aside.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 2, 2023 11:15:51 GMT
Hi pacifico You're correct in that respect. The favourite to win the first election would be the labour party. I believe that scotland - or the uk if scotland stays in the UK - does have the potential to be an energy superpower. In renewables not fossil fuels. Either the uk or Scotland just have to be clever enough. I can see that Scotland would have a great future in renewables if they stay in the UK - why would we when the british conservative government has been cutting subsidies and funding for renewables in the uk?
Clearly scotlands best interests lie outside the uk in terms of energy and renewable.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 2, 2023 11:19:45 GMT
This is what I am struggling with - who is going to buy it if the UK does not?. What technology would you use (that is economically viable) to export wind and hydro power? Scotland and the rest of the uk have to work together. Whatever the constitution including full Scottish Independence. Like the Scandinavian countries tend to work together. England cant work with others countires quite clearly. If it isnt a master slave relationship , they dont want to know.
The only way england will be working with scotland long term is via the european union. Scotland has a long history stretching back a millenia working hand in glove with european nations like Ireland and FRance, where we spent that same millenia largely at war with england.
We arent british , we are scottish and european , and european countires tend to work together.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 2, 2023 11:23:15 GMT
Hi pacifico I've said from the beginning that it would be better if the uk fixed itself. Scotland on it's own would find it more challenging. But not close to impossible. The energy would be so valuable that someone would buy it.
What's left of the uk would surely not cut off their nose to spite their face. This is what I am struggling with - who is going to buy it if the UK does not?. What technology would you use (that is economically viable) to export wind and hydro power? If you dont want to buy our energy , thats up to you. There is an energy crises across the continent , where we could easily find a new market.
May i just point out in the links i gave you above , englands over reliance on scottish energy is now up 67 % over the last twenty years and growing. 39 % of scotland energy was being exported to england and northern ireland in 2019 .
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Jan 2, 2023 11:30:34 GMT
Let me make this nice and simple for you. In 2022 Scots paid 40 - 50% more on energy bills than the south of England. Energy is a retained power and is part of the National Grid that runs the entire length of the UK and across the channel. Business all over the world are in business of making money and do not give a rats crap where they source there products to run that business. On average renewable costs 3.7 pence per KW hour to produce While on average Nuclear and fossil fuel costs around 50 pence per KW hour to produce. Scotland can now produce all it needs and more to spare on renewable. On wind and wave power alone Scotland holds some 30% of the European capacity. It's a power house. To cut a long story short. When renewable enters the national grid. That 3.7 pence turns into 50 pence on that product that Scotland exports by the bucket load. On indy the Scottish Government will operate two markets. On singular to Scottish needs and the other to the national grid. That 3.7 pence will give a return to the Scots of 50 pence. Simple mathematic. If business can produce a widget for 3.7 pence. Then the one that costs 50 pence to make is going to have a problem. That is the scale. Next. England is simply going to be reliant on Nuclear and fossil fuel for ever. Although it is clear despite the fanny there is more left in the North sea than has been taken out. That is why the Westminster wankers have issued over 100 licences to explore, and plunder more of Scottish assets. . The question the English need to ask. Not the Scots. What will happen when the North sea finally runs out. Buy it from Russia. Now the reality. England has to close down 8 existing out of dat4e nuclear power plants. And rebuild 9 new ones. Going by Hinkley Point,owned by the French now 5 years overdue and billions over cost. Will come in at around £600 billion. Plus a never ending £1 billion a year decommissioning. You put your cost on it. Not to mention. That when Hinkley point does come on line. It has now been established that 50 pence will now cost in the region of £1 for it to make a profit. Now if you cannot see the difference between 3.7 pence and £1pound. I cannot help you. That is the good bit. That £600 billion.Tthe way the wankers in Westminster have put it of since they took power. By he time it happens. Double it. That is to be paid for by the UK tax payer. That's me and thats you. Paying for a product that Scotland exports by the bucket load. On top of that. The wankers in Westminster signed the deal. That when, not if, a nuclear disaster happens. That will be funded by the UK tax payer. That's me and that's you. When Sellafield came on line decades ago. A slight leakage occurred. It has not made a profit since. Many have died of cancer in the area. Well over the national average. The Irish Government are in the process of suing and it has cost millions on lawyers fees. Paid for by you. And paid for by me. Not to mention. Acres of ground have been cordoned of for the next 10 million years half life. As cows produce milk that glows in the dark. As an aside and as Thomas has pointed out. Scotland holds some 90% of the UKs fresh water. There is more fresh water in Loch Ness than the entire UK put together. Including Scotland. Take Loch Ness out of the equation and the same applies to Loch Lomond. Take those two out of the equation and the same applies to Loch Katrine which supplies Glasgow,. The point I am making is this. England is going to run out of water in the next 25 years. It has two choices. Build desalination plants and produce shitty water. Going by America. That will come in at around £3-£5 to fill your average cold water tank in the attic. Do not forget. Many rural areas in England as well as Scotland simply do not have access to gas. And before stupid Englishmen start ranting. They are not my figures or facts.. They are from the ONS. And the best reason known. Why Scotland can no longer afford bankrupt England. inews.co.uk/news/environment/england-run-out-of-water-25-years-scotland-is-the-answer-270651 It might be produced in Scotland but it's not scotland or the UK's property. It's been given away. energy is not a devolved issue , its under the control of the uk government , hence why scotland needs independence as learly both labour and tory governments have proven over the last twenty years that they canont be trusted with energy security and providing the peoples of the disunited kingdom an energy policy fit for the future.
How would energy be cheaper in an independent Scotland?
|
|
|
|
Post by jaydee on Jan 2, 2023 11:35:37 GMT
Of all the bilge that you spout that might even be your most correct statement yet. I have been making that observation for quite some time. It is simply because they are unable to present a convincing case for independence that they pour out their aggressive nonsense, parroted by their hard of thinking supporters including jaydee, perhaps they will surprise us and convince the Scottish electorate to vote YES next time, or perhaps not, who knows, they couldn't last time. And I have seen for some time that you spew nonsense like the Euro or the Shetlands want to leave Scotland. Or your recent garbage about pot hoies. It is so stupid it is unbelievable. Every utterance of your bile and nonsense has been shot down in flames And not once over the years have you or certain other clowns manged to correct one thing I have said. So instead of being a little Englander Clarkson motor mouth. How about you picking any one of my post. The last one will suffice and here it is again verbatim. Or you pick one.. How about correcting it. Let me make this nice and simple for you. In 2022 Scots paid 40 - 50% more on energy bills than the south of England. Energy is a retained power and is part of the National Grid that runs the entire length of the UK and across the channel. Business all over the world are in business of making money and do not give a rats crap where they source there products to run that business. On average renewable costs 3.7 pence per KW hour to produce While on average Nuclear and fossil fuel costs around 50 pence per KW hour to produce. Scotland can now produce all it needs and more to spare on renewable. On wind and wave power alone Scotland holds some 30% of the European capacity. It's a power house. To cut a long story short. When renewable enters the national grid. That 3.7 pence turns into 50 pence on that product that Scotland exports by the bucket load. On indy the Scottish Government will operate two markets. On singular to Scottish needs and the other to the national grid. That 3.7 pence will give a return to the Scots of 50 pence. Simple mathematic. If business can produce a widget for 3.7 pence. Then the one that costs 50 pence to make is going to have a problem. That is the scale. Next. England is simply going to be reliant on Nuclear and fossil fuel for ever. Although it is clear despite the fanny there is more left in the North sea than has been taken out. That is why the Westminster wankers have issued over 100 licences to explore, and plunder more of Scottish assets. . The question the English need to ask. Not the Scots. What will happen when the North sea finally runs out. Buy it from Russia. Now the reality. England has to close down 8 existing out of dat4e nuclear power plants. And rebuild 9 new ones. Going by Hinkley Point,owned by the French now 5 years overdue and billions over cost. Will come in at around £600 billion. Plus a never ending £1 billion a year decommissioning. You put your cost on it. Not to mention. That when Hinkley point does come on line. It has now been established that 50 pence will now cost in the region of £1 for it to make a profit. Now if you cannot see the difference between 3.7 pence and £1pound. I cannot help you.That is the good bit. That £600 billion.Tthe way the wankers in Westminster have put it of since they took power. By he time it happens. Double it. That is to be paid for by the UK tax payer. That's me and thats you. Paying for a product that Scotland exports by the bucket load. On top of that. The wankers in Westminster signed the deal. That when, not if, a nuclear disaster happens. That will be funded by the UK tax payer. That's me and that's you. When Sellafield came on line decades ago. A slight leakage occurred. It has not made a profit since. Many have died of cancer in the area. Well over the national average. The Irish Government are in the process of suing and it has cost millions on lawyers fees. Paid for by you. And paid for by me. Not to mention. Acres of ground have been cordoned of for the next 10 million years half life. As cows produce milk that glows in the dark.As an aside and as Thomas has pointed out. Scotland holds some 90% of the UKs fresh water. There is more fresh water in Loch Ness than the entire UK put together. Including Scotland. Take Loch Ness out of the equation and the same applies to Loch Lomond. Take those two out of the equation and the same applies to Loch Katrine which supplies Glasgow,. The point I am making is this. England is going to run out of water in the next 25 years. It has two choices. Build desalination plants and produce shitty water. Going by America. That will come in at around £3-£5 to fill your average cold water tank in the attic. Do not forget. Many rural areas in England as well as Scotland simply do not have access to gas. And before stupid Englishmen start ranting. They are not my figures or facts.. They are from the ONS. And the best reason known. Why Scotland can no longer afford bankrupt England. inews.co.uk/news/environment/england-run-out-of-water-25-years-scotland-is-the-answer-270651Oh Look not one correction forthcoming
|
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jan 2, 2023 11:47:46 GMT
I do not see scotland and what would be left of the uk ever getting to a situation where one refuses to buy and/or one refuses to sell. If Scotland was in the EU it would do as it was told and in the event of a crisis then if the EU insisted that Scotland give priority to EU supplies of energy then the UK could find itself in the dark - hence the need for the UK to be self sufficient and not reliant on Scotland or anyone else. Not sure how changing the licencing system would change the available technology to export renewables. |
|
|
|
Post by jaydee on Jan 2, 2023 11:52:02 GMT
Scotland could do fine, as could any nation with a half decent barrow boy or girl in charge.
Oh you mean like Bojoke and Truss. Your idea of decent barrow boys and girls. One a out and out lying homophobic racist prat, ending up as a criminal while in office. While trying to defend corruption and sleaze while holding the highest office in the land. I bet you went out during the pandemic to test your eyes. Having swallowed that fanny hook line and sinker. Then the other. In a space of 44 days wrecked the UK economy to a total tune of around £70 billion and the pensions of millions. That will never recover. Lets say I am underwhelmed by your versions of half decent barrow boys or girls. Now the incumbent. Voted to the highest office in the land by nobody. Realising he is the patsy. AWOL for weeks. Anyone seen him. Lets say I am underwhelmed by your versions of half decent barrow boys or girls. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Jan 2, 2023 11:53:59 GMT
This is what I am struggling with - who is going to buy it if the UK does not?. What technology would you use (that is economically viable) to export wind and hydro power? If you dont want to buy our energy , thats up to you. There is an energy crises across the continent , where we could easily find a new market. \ Yes - that is the point, what technology are you going to use to export all this energy if the UK has no use for it?. I suppose an interconnect cable to Ireland and thence to the European mainland is feasible. |
|
|
|
Post by research0it on Jan 2, 2023 12:01:33 GMT
I do not see scotland and what would be left of the uk ever getting to a situation where one refuses to buy and/or one refuses to sell. If Scotland was in the EU it would do as it was told and in the event of a crisis then if the EU insisted that Scotland give priority to EU supplies of energy then the UK could find itself in the dark - hence the need for the UK to be self sufficient and not reliant on Scotland or anyone else. Not sure how changing the licencing system would change the available technology to export renewables. Hi pacifico Those are really separate issues. Champing the license system would keep more control. Developing technology is a different thing. If I were the EU, I'd be putting connectors all over the EU and pool energy resources. On the other hand the individual nations would probably be too selfish to support such a scheme. |
|
