Economic Argument For Independence "is Deluded"

[Toepoke]

According to Alex Salmond's former head of policy, Alex Bell...

https://www.holyrood.com/articles/news/snp-model-independence-dead-claims-alex-salmonds-former-policy-chief-alex-bell

[stocky]

they fell out a long time ago... I think Alex Bell wanted our own currency.

he has a point.

[Haggis_trap]

The media continue to try and make it clear (as a "fact") that Scotland "could never afford independence".

... So it is no surprise that seize any opportunity or quotes such as this these.

Anyone who looks at the economic facts would realise that Scotlands GDP could clearly allow us to be a successful independent nation. Being better off, or not, would depend on the long term decisions we take as a nation. People who tell you we "cant afford it" are simply lying.

Douglas Frasers blog on the BBC really winds me up.
it is 1 year after the referendum and every week he still plays down the Scottish economy / oil industry.

Interestingly Brian Taylor usually has a BBC blog that runs in parallel (and is usually more upbeat or balanced). Seems that many in the "establishment" are still genuinely scared the independence question hasn't been answered : and will eventually resurface ?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-34788448

Edited November 17, 2015 by Haggis_trap

[Rossy]

The referendum was lost because the Yes campaign made a complete arse of presenting the economic case for independence, of that there's no doubt.

[Alan]

It's not the affordability issue it's the honesty issue. It was "land of chocolate" gobbled up by dreamers, those young to never really experience economic turmoil like high inflation or interest rates in the double figures and the economic illiterate.

The White Paper was the guide to Scotland's Future. It has proven to be false and debunked by people who gave early input.

Costs of setting up a new state were ridiculously low.

The oil price was ridiculously hyped. Lied about in truth.

Definite untruths on how we could use the currency of a country we have left.

Statements on debt, interest rates and lender of last resort unfounded.

[Alibi]

Alex Bell is frequently involved in the media where he is always introduced as Salmond's former adviser - with the unspoken and incorrect implication that he is providing balance to the unionists on the programme. I suspect he earns income from those appearances. Incidentally he says Scotland can't afford to be independent, but is that assuming we spend billions on nukes and allow Westminster to take all of our whisky duty and count it as their own income? Financial viability looks different when you include everything we WOULD have as an independent nation. Instinctively everybody knows full well that we are at least as capable of being independent as any other nation and far more so than most.

[Alibi]

It's not the affordability issue it's the honesty issue. It was "land of chocolate" gobbled up by dreamers, those young to never really experience economic turmoil like high inflation or interest rates in the double figures and the economic illiterate.

The White Paper was the guide to Scotland's Future. It has proven to be false and debunked by people who gave early input.

Costs of setting up a new state were ridiculously low.

The oil price was ridiculously hyped. Lied about in truth.

Definite untruths on how we could use the currency of a country we have left.

Statements on debt, interest rates and lender of last resort unfounded.

That bit in bold happened within the union. The rest of your post is just your views, not facts.

[Armchair Bob]

Alex Bell might be making the mistake that we would want to continue UK spending plans - which includes stuff we wouldn't need to pay for - and that it is proposed that we run a zero debt regime. Because the fundamentals - GDP, exports, debt share, self-sufficiency in food, water and energy - are pretty healthy.

[AlfieMoon]

Regardless of whether there has been fall-outs or whatever - the issues in the article are real.

There is a big discussion which needs to take place about an economic roadmap for independence. They failed in making that case previously and do appear to be ignoring the issue for the time being.

There would be a considerably larger deficit than what we had been preparing to deal with before the substantial drop in the oil price. The deficit at the previous level was considerable and now looks more concerning. There needs to be a coherent argument to counter this and simply saying that we will grow our economy more quickly than rUK will not wash with the public.

[Auld_Reekie]

If you put the hyperbole to one side, he makes some pertinent points that need to be taken on board by Yes campaign. If he thinks we would have won with a radical proposition in 2014 though, he's kidding himself on.

[Doric]

The referendum was lost because the Yes campaign made a complete arse of presenting the economic case for independence, of that there's no doubt.

That played a big part in the defeat, The Brits manipulated the public with the not accepting the currency ploy knowing that folk wouldn't risk it. Yes campaign should have wised up to it and changed the plan even although their plan would have fallen into place had we voted Yes but Scots folk would be scared of taking the gamble and the Brits knew it. We fell into the trap.

[Toepoke]

Scots folk would be scared of taking the gamble and the Brits knew it. We fell into the trap.

Could it be called a trap if both options would result in a No vote?

[stocky]

It's not the affordability issue it's the honesty issue. It was "land of chocolate" gobbled up by dreamers, those young to never really experience economic turmoil like high inflation or interest rates in the double figures and the economic illiterate.

The White Paper was the guide to Scotland's Future. It has proven to be false and debunked by people who gave early input.

Costs of setting up a new state were ridiculously low.

The oil price was ridiculously hyped. Lied about in truth.

Definite untruths on how we could use the currency of a country we have left.

Statements on debt, interest rates and lender of last resort unfounded.

Havering again Alan

There was no land of chocolate promised, only a land better than we have .

The cost of setting a new state are un costable. and the estimate was from the UK treasury, those were the figures used.

the white paper was A guide to the future, not the guide, a significant difference that u cant grasp.

Scotland gdp without oil is 99% of the UK's GDP, ie 1% below, Oil took us to 107% at the time , prob 100% at the mo.

The pound IS our currency, we could use it, we could use any currency, no one can stop us,the un truths all came from Westminster.

Debt, Interest rates and Lender were all to be negotiated, the YES side thought that the other side would be reasonable, the NO side presumed the other side would be tyrants and be absolutely brutal . History shows that there would have been give and take, Scotland was/is in a strong position, as was the RUK., You were taken in by the scares because you think Scotland has nothing to offer,.

Edited November 17, 2015 by stocky

[Alan]

Stocky - Good answer. Textbook. You have learned nothing. Keep it up.

Alibi - Whisky Duty? What mythical duty is this? The only duty on whisky is collected internally i.e. when you, me or your neighbour buys it from a shop. There is NO WHISKY DUTY ON EXPORTS. It is an internal tax.

[stocky]

deflection as usual Alan.,..

The Truth and some facts really get on your nerves dont they.?

T

[Jaggy Jim]

The oil price was ridiculously hyped. Lied about in truth.

The Scottish government's projection pre-referendum was $113 a barrel. The UK govt's was $120! The OBR's projection of $99 was the lowest by anyone on the planet. Some were forecasting as high as $150. Everyone got it wrong.

[Auld_Reekie]

I love how you can lie about a projection. A projection!

[Rossy]

I love how you can lie about a projection. A projection!

Let's not forget that there was nothing during the referendum campaign about the years of austerity and attacks on the poor that Unionism would bring us.

Project Fear's promises about 'prosperity and economic safety for all' under the Union flag turned out to be complete bollox and the biggest lie of them all.

Despite that, the Yes campaign made such a mess of putting forward the economic case all was lost regardless of Project Fear's lies.

[Bzzzz]

Anyone who thinks for a second that we can't "afford" to be independent is an idiot. How many independent countries are there in the world that do just fine? and then, how many independent countries are there in the world with our wealth of resources?

The unionists roll out the usual pish whilst ignoring the fact that we would not have the same level of spending on all shite union related. Saying that they are self loathers so probably get off on being able to hate themselves a little more with their grovelling.

[Auld_Reekie]

Let's not forget that there was nothing during the referendum campaign about the years of austerity and attacks on the poor that Unionism would bring us.

Project Fear's promises about 'prosperity and economic safety for all' under the Union flag turned out to be complete bollox and the biggest lie of them all.

Despite that, the Yes campaign made such a mess of putting forward the economic case all was lost regardless of Project Fear's lies.

Meh. We've gone over this several times and nothing is going to change it now. I think we'd have lost regardless of what we did - the only thing that's up for debate is the margin of the defeat. Of all the people I knew who wanted a more independent/radical/definite economic case put forward weren't doing so in order to persuade them to vote Yes, it was to find another reason to criticise, another reason to find holes, another reason to defer thinking about possibly voting Yes.

Another way to think of it is this: with a base support of 45%, if the SNP offered a radical proposition tomorrow, independent of the BoE, Scottish Pound, a more detailed economic independence, do you honestly, think support for independence would move that much? I honestly don't. I think we'd see a slight boost but I think we'd lose marginal votes who wanted the safety blanket.

We need to stop beating ourselves up and just accept there might have been nothing we could have done to win in 2014. But we need to cut through the hyperbole of the likes of Bell and think about the underlying points which are sound... we've done very little to give convincing, more definite answers on many issues. It's a shame he's decided the best way to refine the argument is doing so in this manner though - feels a bit too personal for me. Meh. Whatever. Need to look forwards not just back.

[Toepoke]

I've no doubt the idea of an independent Scottish currency would've been destroyed by the Unionists before the referendum. I don't think 45% Yes would've been achieved on the back of that proposal...

[stocky]

Meh. We've gone over this several times and nothing is going to change it now. I think we'd have lost regardless of what we did - the only thing that's up for debate is the margin of the defeat. Of all the people I knew who wanted a more independent/radical/definite economic case put forward weren't doing so in order to persuade them to vote Yes, it was to find another reason to criticise, another reason to find holes, another reason to defer thinking about possibly voting Yes.

Another way to think of it is this: with a base support of 45%, if the SNP offered a radical proposition tomorrow, independent of the BoE, Scottish Pound, a more detailed economic independence, do you honestly, think support for independence would move that much? I honestly don't. I think we'd see a slight boost but I think we'd lose marginal votes who wanted the safety blanket.

We need to stop beating ourselves up and just accept there might have been nothing we could have done to win in 2014. But we need to cut through the hyperbole of the likes of Bell and think about the underlying points which are sound... we've done very little to give convincing, more definite answers on many issues. It's a shame he's decided the best way to refine the argument is doing so in this manner though - feels a bit too personal for me. Meh. Whatever. Need to look forwards not just back.

aye, good points, goal posts were changed to give them more to criticise. they asked a question, we gave an answer, they couldnt comprehend that there was an answer, so they changed the question,

I dont think Scotland was ready for Independence last year, ( well obviously)

The NAW side cant cope just now and they won, imagine what they would be like if they lost.

Scotland will be ready for it by 2024.

30% in 2011, 45% in 2014, 50% 2015, its going up every year, there is only one direction.

[Haggis_trap]

There is no doubt currency was defining issue of the campaign.

However did we really lose the overall debate ?

I still cant believe we have 53 SNP MP.

We have come a long way since 2007.

Scotland wasnt ready.... Yet.

However the referendum went a long way to making the end goal a mainstream and reasonable poltical ideal.

[jockodile]

The referendum if it done anything was to normalise the concept of indy. Not some pie in sky dream like it was in previous generations, the realm of romantics.

The default position for most is No. We have been conditioned for generations, it takes a lot to break through that.

But once you do, it is highly unlikely you ever go the other way.

45% was one hell of a beach head and it is only going to go in 1 direction. Only thing that can derail is a snap indy2 that (just) fails again. Timing everything

[Alibi]

Why does there have to be an economic case for independence at all? We should be an independent nation, full stop. It's the right thing to do.

This economic case thing (and frankly to anyone with any commonsense it is self-evident that Scotland could be a prosperous independent nation) is only needed to convince people who have no self-confidence and no self-esteem. Obviously there are quite a lot of them about.

What would help immensely would be if we had balance in the mainstream media. Having most of our media owned and run by non-Scots doesn't help there. Having a few papers backing Indy would sway enough people.