Scottish "Independence" manifesto

[Guynemer]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...itics-25088251

So the plan is a lavish welfare state, and if the money runs out England has to bail them out. Didn't see that coming.

I am honestly surprised that Scottish "Independence" is still a thing. I mean... come on, for real? What is the upside?

[Alexander's Horse]

The Scots are like a lot of small states in federations - subsidised by the bigger states while resenting it all the while and nursing wistful dreams of independence.

Tasmania is like that. Except Tasmania is so wildly subsidised they are smart enough to know they need the mainland, especially to fund their social benefits.

[C0ckney]

Of course it depends on the cost and availability of child care. As it should. Dude, if it would cost more for child care than for the parent to take care of her kid, SHE SHOULD TAKE CARE OF HER KID. That would be economically most efficient.

it's telling that you can't imagine that the state can find a way to provide child care, which is more efficient than having every mother stay at home to look after their child/children, such as, say, putting lots of children together in one centre. i.e. what is being proposed.

it's like objecting to providing a subsidy for public transport on the basis that it means buying everyone a car, instead of the real proposal for providing a bus service.

[C0ckney]

The Scots are like a lot of small states in federations - subsidised by the bigger states while resenting it all the while and nursing wistful dreams of independence.

once again, england doesn't subsidise scotland. i've already posted the figures in this thread.

[DinoDoc]

once again, England doesn't subsidize Scotland. I've already posted the figures in this thread.

Then what's with the desire to keep the British pound and expectation that you lot will step in if things go wrong even if they leave?

[kentonio]

once again, england doesn't subsidise scotland. i've already posted the figures in this thread.

Depends. All the parts of the union have been running deficits for quite a while now, would an independent Scotland receive the same credit rating and loan terms as the UK as a whole?

[C0ckney]

They claim they aren't going to raise tax, and are going to cut corporation tax.

politicians have, from time to time, being known to be less than honest with the public about tax plans.

There are very real issues and not addressing them is an attempt to decieve the Scottish public. What about Schengen? What about teh UK only vetos that are going to be lost?

they're certainly real issues, but i don't see the deception. some of these questions can only be answered by the EU, who, for understandable reasons, prefer to wait until after any vote to give an answer.

The Scottish don't need us to 'go along with it' if the BoE are going to continue to control the financial levers, but the SNP are claiming that they will retain influence on the BoE which is a complete lie. If they want to use a currency that they have no control over and which the BoE could change interest rates without any regard to the Scottish economy, then they're more than welcome, but they need to be truthful about that.

what happens to the bank of england will no doubt be a matter for negotiation if the scots vote yes.

So basically you think Scotland should have no global defense ability and just take advantage of its neighbours defending it by proxy without any Scottish contribution?

what is a 'global defence ability' and why would a nation of 5 million odd need it?

what the SNP are proposing seems more than adequate for scotland's defence needs.

[C0ckney]

Depends. All the parts of the union have been running deficits for quite a while now, would an independent Scotland receive the same credit rating and loan terms as the UK as a whole?

in the short term probably, yes. there may be some divergence in the medium term, though.

[C0ckney]

It's not just the ratio of workers to the (increasing) raw numbers of pensioners that poses the problem.

There's also the unprecedentedly and high and rising lifespans. And also the unprecedentedly generous terms (set to outstrip wages and inflation).

rising lifespans contribute to the ratio. as i said, productivity has always grown faster than the ratio and will probably continue to do so. more generous terms would mean that everyone's living standards still rose, just more slowly, as a greater proportion of society's wealth is directed towards the old.

That escalation measure is more generous than I've seen on the current conditions of any final salary pension scheme. The fact that "we've always managed it before" is no guarantee of future succes, particularly with all those unprecedented factors coming into play.

as i understand, this is for the state pension, which is fairly modest. anyone who has a final salary pension will be receiving considerably more.

it's a complicated issue, and the delay in raising the retirement age, something i think must happen, is concerning. there are also related issues like long term care which need to be addressed.

[pchang]

A bunch of half-naked guys covered in blue paint and waving around swords would be enough to defend Scotland from her enemies.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

as i understand, this is for the state pension, which is fairly modest. anyone who has a final salary pension will be receiving considerably more.

You're misunderstanding my point. I used final salary schemes as a reference point because they have the most generous escalation terms people could realistically expect to get (typically RPI or CPI to a max of 5%, with 2.5% max becoming increasingly the norm). This mooted Scottish state pension scheme has more generous escalation terms even than that.

It guarantees inflation-busting returns every year, regardless of economic conditions and regardless of market performance. How long do you think that could be sustained for?

[Dinner]

A bunch of half-naked guys covered in blue paint and waving around swords would be enough to defend Scotland from her enemies.

It worked against the Romans.

[C0ckney]

You're misunderstanding my point. I used final salary schemes as a reference point because they have the most generous escalation terms people could realistically expect to get (typically RPI or CPI to a max of 5%, with 2.5% max becoming increasingly the norm). This mooted Scottish state pension scheme has more generous escalation terms even than that.

It guarantees inflation-busting returns every year, regardless of economic conditions and regardless of market performance. How long do you think that could be sustained for?

the current UK state pension works like this.

1. Overview

The basic State Pension is a regular payment from the government that you can get when you reach State Pension age.

To get it you must have paid or been credited with National Insurance contributions.

The most you can currently get is £110.15 per week.

The basic State Pension increases every year by whichever is the highest:

earnings - the average percentage growth in wages (in Great Britain)
prices - the percentage growth in prices in the UK as measured by the Consumer Prices Index (CPI)
2.5%

this is what the SNP are proposing.

Pensioners’ incomes protected with the triple lock so that pensions
increase by either inflation, earnings, or 2.5 per cent, whichever is highest

the only novelty is possibly delaying the increase in pensionable age.

[C0ckney]

oh, there is this as well

ensure that from 6 April 2016, new pensioners will receive a Scottish single-tier pension, set at the rate of £160 per week – £1.10 a week higher than the rate currently expected for the UK

this, by the way, is a slight alteration to an already planned UK wide reform which establish a flat rate for new pensions from 2016. £1.10 is a pretty small difference, and when lower life expectancy in scotland is taken into account, the impact on public finances is likely to be minimal.

[Dauphin]

once again, england doesn't subsidise scotland. i've already posted the figures in this thread.

This is predicated on the argument that Scotland currently contributes, and will get in the divorce, 90% of the oil. National assets won't necessarily split that way.