50 Years

[piratelassie]

Now that its been publicly recognised that an independent Scotland would be better off in the short term but the oil and gas COULD run out in 45 or 50 years time. The phrase "OIL FUND" springs ot mind.

[Bobinovich]

I understand the issue with this is that any future Scottish Government would need to use all the income from those (reducing) sectors to make the books balance. - in other words there wouldn't be a lot of surplus to fund the fund! I have no issue with an independent Scotland but I want to see untainted facts & figures from a neutral source, something I just don't see happening - at present we have very partisan Yes & No camps but no-one to rationally say 'Right here's the truth as it stands...'

[golach]

Now that its been publicly recognised that an independent Scotland would be better off in the short term but the oil and gas COULD run out in 45 or 50 years time. The phrase "OIL FUND" springs ot mind.

I hope you are not quoting official Snp figures, as their ways of calculating have resulted in 2 embarassing apologies at Holyrood

[Moira]

Now that its been publicly recognised that an independent Scotland would be better off in the short term but the oil and gas COULD run out in 45 or 50 years time. The phrase "OIL FUND" springs ot mind.

In other words Piratelassie you have nothing new to report or inspire us with...... :roll:

[piratelassie]

Scotlands natural resorses is enough to inspire me. That should be enough to inspire all of us.
In other words Piratelassie you have nothing new to report or inspire us with...... :roll:

[weezer 316]

Inspiring indeed.

[Oddquine]

I understand the issue with this is that any future Scottish Government would need to use all the income from those (reducing) sectors to make the books balance. - in other words there wouldn't be a lot of surplus to fund the fund! I have no issue with an independent Scotland but I want to see untainted facts & figures from a neutral source, something I just don't see happening - at present we have very partisan Yes & No camps but no-one to rationally say 'Right here's the truth as it stands...'

To be fair...only if you are going to assume that an Independent Scotland would be no different in the way things worked as they are within the Union....which is how the media, and Unionist politicians look at it. They appear to think that we would simply go along with everything they have imposed on us, as if we had no other option. Right now, we don't..if we vote for independence we would!

Just as a starting point, without Trident and our share of UK military attack spending, we could save £1.3 billion every year to spend on more useful things. As it is, within the Union, that £1.3 billion, plus the cost of a Scottish defence force, is being pumped into fighting people we would prefer not to fight, and maintaining, on our soil, nuclear weapons we'd rather not have. Into the Union bargain, that £1.3 billion is around the amount the UK austerity budget is going to be taking out of our pocket money annually so we can't spend it at all on anything we ourselves deem useful, while we are still paying silly money into ensuring the UK can wage war at the behest of the USA so we can feel important in the world...and it seems that it is going to be the case, according to current forecasts, until around 2017 at least.

So with a no vote, we are stuck with paying around £3.3 billion annually for UK attack capabilities (and that is before they get round to replacing Trident at Faslane with bigger and better killing machines) PLUS we will also be having our pocket money reduced so the SNP can't do all the stuff the Scottish people kinda appreciate and which encouraged them to vote SNP in the last two elections in increasing numbers, regardless of their long-held political beliefs.

But if we are all going to be honest, there is absolutely no way on earth anyone sitting on the fence sooking the thumbs stuck in their mouths, and waiting for a certainty bed-time story from either side of the Independence "debate" is going to be rocked to a peaceful sleep any time this side of 2014......because there is no such animal in global politics as certainty. If the financial meltdown has taught us nothing else it is exactly that nothing in life is certain, because too much can come along and make a fool of the forecaster...like stupid knee-jerk, ill-thought out policies which are not properly costed and thought through. Isn't that the reason for so many Coalition U-turns this Parliament, because they didn't think the consequences through to a logical conclusion. No Scottish Government, no UK Government and no "Neutral" source can do any more than forecast what might happen , IF THE ECONOMY TURNS OUT THE WAY THEIR COMPUTER MODELS SAY IT WILL! And we have seen just how good the UK Computer models have been, haven't we? They would be the same ones which didn't foresee the banking crisis as a result of deregulation and trusting the bankers to police themselves!

Given my age and health, I'm unlikely to be in whatever happens come 2014 for the long haul...but my children will be, my grandchildren will be, and my expected great grandchild will be.....and I'd prefer to live my last days, and enable them to live the rest of their lives, in a country in which the already well-off aren't enabled, by career politicians who are mostly nowadays millionaires, with an eye to lucrative post-political careers, to enrich themselves at the expense of the poor, the disadvantaged and the disabled, godamnit...even the terminally ill... who are being trashed by private companies at the behest of our government and whose profitable thirty pieces of silver are being paid for by us.

Seems to me if we, as the Scottish population, are going to end up up to our sodding ears in debt.....estimated to be, by 2015, around 100% of UK GDP....we should at the very least be allowed to choose for ourselves what we spend our money on and what we want to borrow to buy/pay for. Would any of you be handing your wages over to your next door neighbour, who was up to his own ears in debt, because he can't manage his own money, and allowing him to tell you you that you are not allowed to get into debt and you are rather privileged to get some of your own wages back as pocket money, along with a list of all you are NOT going to be allowed to do with it? Damn sure I wouldn't!

[fred]

Now that its been publicly recognised that an independent Scotland would be better off in the short term but the oil and gas COULD run out in 45 or 50 years time. The phrase "OIL FUND" springs ot mind.

First of all I don't believe it has been publicly recognised that an independent Scotland would be better off. As usual Salmond has cherry picked the bits that suit him out of a report and ignored the rest.

The fact is it is impossible to predict at the moment, there are too many variables, it's a big "if" that there will be an independent Scotland to start with but even if it happens then that is when the horse trading will begin, Salmond isn't going to get everything he demands nor anything like.

So suppose the Nationalists win the referendum, suppose oil prices stay stable and suppose they can trade off enough things they are promising we will definitely get so that Scotland ends up better off, that doesn't mean we will have a surplus, that only means the deficit won't be quite as big.

[weezer 316]

Seeing as reading isnt anyones strong point these days, I will put this here in hope rather that expectation.

Anyway, the point is how will the SNP avoid clearly obvious problems independence will cause with respect to calculating and balancing the budget? The silence has been deafening, as has the willful ignorance of some folk here.

http://www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk/scotlandoffice/16142.html

Or 2009 Analysis if you will that's even more damning: http://www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk/scotlandoffice/16142.html

[fred]

Seeing as reading isnt anyones strong point these days, I will put this here in hope rather that expectation.

Anyway, the point is how will the SNP avoid clearly obvious problems independence will cause with respect to calculating and balancing the budget? The silence has been deafening, as has the willful ignorance of some folk here.

http://www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk/scotlandoffice/16142.html

Or 2009 Analysis if you will that's even more damning: http://www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk/scotlandoffice/16142.html

I think the report which prompted this thread was the Institute for Fiscal Studies one, http://www.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn135.pdf, which Salmond says shows that an Independent Scotland could be better off. Which it does if you interpret the word "could" as meaning "might just", as in "I could win the lottery on Saturday".

[weezer 316]

Yes and the two I linked to are what has happened in the past and aint subject to the same conjecture.

[EOS]

The SNP have claimed an independent Scotland would be able to build up a large oil fund the same as Norway has,or use this money to grow other industries,but a report from the institute if fiscal studies has shown this would not be the case

Scotland spends £1200 more per person on public spending than the rest of the UK

So to keep this level of spending after Independence the revenue from oil and gas would have to be spent there just to remain static
or there would have to be cut backs or tax rises.

It seems the SNP would have us believing there would be millions of spare cash floating around

[Oddquine]

Seeing as reading isnt anyones strong point these days, I will put this here in hope rather that expectation.

Anyway, the point is how will the SNP avoid clearly obvious problems independence will cause with respect to calculating and balancing the budget? The silence has been deafening, as has the willful ignorance of some folk here.

http://www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk/scotlandoffice/16142.html

Or 2009 Analysis if you will that's even more damning: http://www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk/scotlandoffice/16142.html

Problems are only obvious when you are incapable of thinking outside the box which which constricts you....in your case. a box built by the Union.

Everything produced, ad nauseam, in the pro-Union media, is always predicated on either what has happened in the last 305 years, and won't happen after Independence..and is proven, to their minds, by using figures which are historical and only applicable in Union circumstances and not to those which would pertain in an Independent Scotland. Are you not aware that the Scottish Office is the Scottish thumb of the Union government, which is meant to be controlling the Scottish Government (and is another example of the waste of Westmonster setting up expensively financed jobs for the boys) ...and if you are, why would you be expecting the Scottish Office to be doing other than frantically trying to justify their existence by producing opinionated and inaccurate crap?

Lets do some sodding accuracy here, as far as you can get accuracy from UK Government figures or posts on here. The Scotland Office, like all Unionists, appear to think that an Independent Scotland is intending to rely forever on the income from Scottish Sector oil and gas, and without that income will fall into the abyss of the bankrupt state. It is rather telling that both your links refer to exactly the same Scottish Office justification for the Union.

Do you really think that people who can read would see a lot of difference between
http://www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk/sco...ice/16142.html (http://www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk/scotlandoffice/16142.html), which you appear to want us to take as the up-to-date situation and http://www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk/sco...ice/16142.html (http://www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk/scotlandoffice/16142.html) which you have referred to as something different as in Or 2009 Analysis if you will that's even more damning. Believe me, I have read both and they are exactly the same, and both put into the public arena by the Scottish Office on 24th October 2011. I congratulate you on your unthinking adherence to the union mindset.

Why do I think you are a pensioner, like golach, sh1t scared of not being able to maintain your current lifestyle in an independent Scotland? I'm a pensioner and it doesn't worry me.


Edited to say.....just noticed I cocked up C&Ping from two different versions of my reply on notepad. Removed the duplicated bit. Makes more sense than it did..but not as much as was intended. I'll get back to posting what I meant to add, once I find the text file in my bourach of a hard drive. Don't like deleting posts in case someone has responded to it.

[golach]

Why do I think you are a pensioner, like golach, sh1t scared of not being able to maintain your current lifestyle in an independent Scotland? I'm a pensioner and it dosn't worry me.

Where do you get the idea I am scared of living in a bankrupt country as an independant Scotland will be, I will not be living in an independant Scotland, because you and your kind will lose the neverendum, your losing it now.

[Oddquine]

The SNP have claimed an independent Scotland would be able to build up a large oil fund the same as Norway has,or use this money to grow other industries,but a report from the institute if fiscal studies has shown this would not be the case

Scotland spends £1200 more per person on public spending than the rest of the UK

So to keep this level of spending after Independence the revenue from oil and gas would have to be spent there just to remain static
or there would have to be cut backs or tax rises.

It seems the SNP would have us believing there would be millions of spare cash floating around

Can't say I've ever noticed that The SNP have claimed an independent Scotland would be able to build up a large oil fund the same as Norway has ....or do you think the SNP is stupid enough not to be aware that for the last 35+ years the UK Government has sent the oil and gas income for that time into the black hole of welfare benefits and military spending...so it is lost forever? That doesn't mean an oil fund is not possible, given that the Oil Companies, who are not known for super optimism or extrapolating possibilities for centuries ahead, are looking at at least another 40/50 years of North Sea Oil extraction.

Do you know how the Barnett formula works, out of interest? Are you aware that what we get depends on what England gets? Are you aware that what we get has nothing to do with what we need.....or could allocate if we were not part of the Union..... but what it is perceived as our proportionate share of what England needs? A read of Wiki might be illuminating. So the really logical would assume that, if the UK, out of OUR, the UK taxpayers' money, needs to spend silly money on, for example. NHS facilities in England, infrastructure in England etc, we are entitled to get our share out of our own input to the Union economy which helps pay for the benefits accruing to England. The Barnett Formula returns to Scotland, as a perceived "subsidy" courtesy of and paid for by the English taxpayer less than half of what we actually pay into the UK Treasury.

The fact is that the Barnett formula takes no account of different needs or different costs in different areas and is not allocated in proportion to population, and a particular expenditure decision in England will lead to different percentage changes in different areas... which means we get a proportionately larger input than anywhere but London and Northern Ireland (and how much of that larger input is down to the fact that Barnett only came up his formula after the McCrone report was hidden from sight and before the abortive 1979 referendum is anybody's guess). I wonder how, exactly that is a subsidy accruing to us...but not perceived also as a subsidy, applicable to London and Northern Ireland to produce English/Union taxpayer whining all over the place as to "subsidising" London and Northern Ireland? The Barnett formula does not provide for proper fiscal independence of the devolved governments. They still have to work within a total budget that is not of their choosing or under their control.

To keep this level of spending after Independence the revenue from oil and gas would have to be spent there just to remain static or there would have to be cut backs or tax rises. is the Unionist mindset, which simply cannot/will not accept that there is a life outside the Union. That is the same Unionist mindset which says, unequivocally, that we should happily accept the "security blanket" of the UK with its social inequality, fuel poverty, austerity cuts, involvement in foreign wars, Trident replacement, massive subsidies to London etc...despite the fact that Scotland, currently, is as near as any part of the UK comes to solvency in this Global economic climate.

In 2010/2011, including our geographic share of Oil and Gas revenues (the same share as every independent country is entitled to claim, btw), we would if independent, but independent without at the least fiscal control of our economy, and still wedded to UK spending on defence etc, have had a current budget deficit 2.2% less than that of the UK.and a net fiscal deficit 1.8% less..and the UK has had the benefit of every penny of all Oil and Gas Revenues since oil and gas was discovered in the whole geographic area allowed, under international law, to be claimed by the UK, to reduce the UK deficits.

If you care to remove the Union mote from your eye, then it could be perceived that there would be millions of spare cash floating around. There could be about £1.3 billion, annually if we no longer had to pay our share of UK attack military policies and Trident, and even more billions if we are not obliged to pay our share of upgrading the UK nuclear capabilities, and simply defended ourselves, as other small countries do. If we, as I hope we do, decide to go for EFTA membership as opposed to the EU, we could save around £645 million on the £845 million share (on 2010 input figures), we attract of the UK EU handout. Just blatantly obvious examples, and not exhaustive, of course.

[weezer 316]

Problems are only obvious when you are incapable of thinking outside the box which which constricts you....in your case. a box built by the Union.

Everything produced, ad nauseam, in the pro-Union media, is always predicated on either what has happened in the last 305 years, and won't happen after Independence..and is proven, to their minds, by using figures which are historical and only applicable in Union circumstances and not to those which would pertain in an Independent Scotland. Are you not aware that the Scottish Office is the Scottish thumb of the Union government, which is meant to be controlling the Scottish Government (and is another example of the waste of Westmonster setting up expensively financed jobs for the boys) ...and if you are, why would you be expecting the Scottish Office to be doing other than frantically trying to justify their existence by producing opinionated and inaccurate crap?

Lets do some sodding accuracy here, as far as you can get accuracy from UK Government figures or posts on here. The Scotland Office, like all Unionists, appear to think that an Independent Scotland is intending to rely forever on the income from Scottish Sector oil and gas, and without that income will fall into the abyss of the bankrupt state. It is rather telling that both your links refer to exactly the same Scottish Office justification for the Union.

Do you really think that people who can read would see a lot of difference between
http://www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk/sco...ice/16142.html (http://www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk/scotlandoffice/16142.html), which you appear to want us to take as the up-to-date situation and http://www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk/sco...ice/16142.html (http://www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk/scotlandoffice/16142.html) which you have referred to as something different as in Or 2009 Analysis if you will that's even more damning. Believe me, I have read both and they are exactly the same, and both put into the public arena by the Scottish Office on 24th October 2011. I congratulate you on your unthinking adherence to the union mindset.

Why do I think you are a pensioner, like golach, sh1t scared of not being able to maintain your current lifestyle in an independent Scotland? I'm a pensioner and it doesn't worry me.Problems are only obvious when you are incapable of thinking outside the box which which constricts you....in your case. a box built by the Union.

Everything produced, ad nauseam, in the pro-Union media, is always predicated on either what has happened in the last 305 years, and won't happen after Independence..and is proven, to their minds, by using figures which are historical and only applicable in Union circumstances and not to those which would pertain in an Independent Scotland. Are you not aware that the Scottish Office is the Scottish thumb of the Union government, which is meant to be controlling the Scottish Government (and is another example of the waste of Westmonster setting up expensively financed jobs for the boys) ...and if you are, why would you be expecting the Scottish Office to be doing other than frantically trying to justify their existence by producing opinionated and inaccurate crap?

Lets do some sodding accuracy here, as far as you can get accuracy from UK Government figures or posts on here. The Scotland Office, like all Unionists, appear to think that an Independent Scotland is intending to rely forever on the income from Scottish Sector oil and gas, and without that income will fall into the abyss of the bankrupt state. It is rather telling that both your links refer to exactly the same Scottish Office justification for the Union.

Do you really think that people who can read would see a lot of difference between
http://www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk/sco...ice/16142.html (http://www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk/scotlandoffice/16142.html), which you appear to want us to take as the up-to-date situation and http://www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk/sco...ice/16142.html (http://www.scotlandoffice.gov.uk/scotlandoffice/16142.html) which you have referred to as something different as in Or 2009 Analysis if you will that's even more damning. Believe me, I have read both and they are exactly the same, and both put into the public arena by the Scottish Office on 24th October 2011. I congratulate you on your unthinking adherence to the union mindset.

Why do I think you are a pensioner, like golach, sh1t scared of not being able to maintain your current lifestyle in an independent Scotland? I'm a pensioner and it dosn't worry me.

Ill reply to all of this later, not that there is much to reply to, but im a long way from pension age , I'm 28.