On 16/05/15 17:16, d wrote:
You think all those SNP MPs are professionals? The majority of them
are a bunch of clueless idiots who under normal circumstances wouldn't
have got within a mile of being elected.

You still haven't said what disasters you think have resulted from eight
years of SNP government in Edinburgh or from a week of high SNP
representation in Westminster.

Ian

On Sat, 16 May 2015 17:20:04 +0100
The Real Doctor wrote:
On 16/05/15 17:16, d wrote:
You think all those SNP MPs are professionals? The majority of them
are a bunch of clueless idiots who under normal circumstances wouldn't
have got within a mile of being elected.

You still haven't said what disasters you think have resulted from eight

I never mentioned disasters, you did. Clearly as a feeble attempt at
a straw man argument. But since you ask, how about the disaster that
would have occured if Scotland had gone independent with the SNP
basing all its economic projections on the high oil prices at the time.

Around about now with an independent Scotland Sturgeon would be heading
off to Brussels with a begging bowl to join the queue behind greece
and spain.

--
Spud

In uk.railway d twisted the electrons to say:
I never mentioned disasters, you did. Clearly as a feeble attempt at
a straw man argument. But since you ask, how about the disaster that
would have occured if Scotland had gone independent with the SNP
basing all its economic projections on the high oil prices at the time.

This would be the alternative timeline where the SNP formed a majority
rather than minority government in the period 2007-2011 and was thus able
to pass it's referendum bill in that session of parliament, and in a
further change to our timeline people voted for it?

Because in our timeline, the proposal from the SNP was (in the event of
"Yes" winning) that independence would come about in May 2016. Meanwhile
Better Together was claiming that was agressively optimistic and that it
might take much longer than that to achieve independence in the event of
a yes vote. Or to put it another way, no disaster would've occured yet
as even the "agressively optimistic" independence date wouldn't have
occured let alone the much later "sober, realistic" date ...
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...

On Sun, 17 May 2015 11:06:24 +0000 (UTC)
Alistair Gunn wrote:
a yes vote. Or to put it another way, no disaster would've occured yet
as even the "agressively optimistic" independence date wouldn't have
occured let alone the much later "sober, realistic" date ...

So you think the oil price will have gone up sufficiently by 2016 for the
SNP to wheel out its knackered economic policy once more and for people to be
dumb enough to fall for it?

Lets face it , Scotland has to suck from the teet of somewhere, be it
Westminster or Brussels because it doesn't have much of an economy to speak
of. Its half that of yourshire FFS. The SNP knows this which is why its so
pro EU because once its waved bye bye to westminster and the hand outs stop
it'll need Brussels to provide the money. Of course the privosos that will
come with it will be far worse than Westminster would ever ask for but by
then Salmond and Sturgeon will be doing the after dinner circuit basking in
their self righteousnous and won't give a ****.

--
Spud

In uk.railway d twisted the electrons to say:
On Sun, 17 May 2015 11:06:24 +0000 (UTC)
Alistair Gunn wrote:
a yes vote. Or to put it another way, no disaster would've occured yet
as even the "agressively optimistic" independence date wouldn't have
occured let alone the much later "sober, realistic" date ...
So you think the oil price will have gone up sufficiently by 2016 for the
SNP to wheel out its knackered economic policy once more and for people to
be dumb enough to fall for it?

Nope, I've no real opinion on the future price of oil (other than it
having a general upward direction). I was commenting on the absurdity of
your apparent belief that Scotland would've been inpendenct already if
the vote had gone the other way back in September.

However you really should try getting your economic "facts" from
somewhere other than the Daily Wail! As it happens it isn't the case
that everyone in Scotland either works in the oil industry, the public
sector or lives on benefits ...
--
These opinions might not even be mine ...
Let alone connected with my employer ...

On 17/05/15 12:35, d wrote:
Lets face it , Scotland has to suck from the teet of somewhere, be it
Westminster or Brussels because it doesn't have much of an economy to speak
of. Its half that of yourshire FFS.

The per capita GVA of Scotland is greater than any part of England
(including Yorkshire) except for London and the South-East.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countri...GVA_per_capita

Ian

On 17/05/2015 16:54, The Real Doctor wrote:

On 17/05/15 12:35, d wrote:
Lets face it , Scotland has to suck from the teet of somewhere, be it
Westminster or Brussels because it doesn't have much of an economy to
speak
of. Its half that of yourshire FFS.

The per capita GVA of Scotland is greater than any part of England
(including Yorkshire) except for London and the South-East.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countri...GVA_per_capita

Never an entirely good idea to base ones country's future on oil wealth
though - its pretty toxic around most of the world, Norway being an
exception though they only got it right third time round.

On Mon, 18 May 2015 19:19:00 +0100, Mizter T
wrote:

Never an entirely good idea to base ones country's future on oil wealth
though - its pretty toxic around most of the world, Norway being an
exception though they only got it right third time round.

Almost every country (he UK & Iraq are exceptions) with significant
oil income invests it in an oil fund. The return from the investments
is more stable than the oil income. Norway's oil fund is worth 800
billion, the UK is 1500 in debt.

"The Real Doctor" wrote in message
...

The per capita GVA of Scotland is greater than any part of England
(including Yorkshire) except for London and the South-East.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So how would you apportion the national debt if Scotland became independent?
On a per capita basis, on a per head basis or based on a geographical % of
the UK?

Ian

International law states that if a country splits, then in the absence of any other mutual agreement the national debt is split according to population size.