Does Scotland want away from the UK not England.

2

Comments

  • LyricalisLyricalis Posts: 57,958
    Forum Member
    Adamsk wrote: »
    Is core of Scottish Independents being hype up by the press over Scotland hate toward the English and England feeling being the same.But is it more the other way round that Scotland hate being apart of the UK the same way Catalans and Basque feel about being apart of country that has not,nothing to do with the culture so the core issue is does Scottish people hate bing apart of the UK.

    80%+ of the UK population is in England, so it's pretty much impossible for such a dominant partner not to be, um, dominant. Even with all that dominance, the fact that Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have managed to retain their cultural identities shows that it's perfectly possible to be part of the UK and also remain distinct.

    While there were totally inexcusable attempts to wipe out those cultural differences in past centuries, that's a thing of the past now and those differences are now seen as something to be celebrated. We shouldn't let past grievances get in the way of considering what's best for us all in the coming centuries.

    Personally, I'd prefer to see more powers devolved to the regions of England, as well as Scotland, Wales and NI. Only make the decisions at the UK level that make sense to made at that level, such as defence, diplomacy and law (well most of it anyway).
  • JAMCJAMC Posts: 226
    Forum Member
    jjwales wrote: »
    Now I know you are definitely confusing me with someone else - I have said nothing of the sort. An apology from you seems in order!

    I think you're being mistaken for me... :D
  • MajlisMajlis Posts: 31,362
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    JAMC wrote: »

    I didn't claim that the funding taps were turned off completely (a step which would have been absurd) – I claimed that measures were taken throughout the past 35 years, not just in Scotland but throughout the whole of the UK, which made it easier for the wealthy to hang on to a greater proportion of their wealth rather than see that wealth redistributed more extensively to the poorer areas that BrokenArrow mentioned. Want some examples?

    Yes please
    - The top rate of income tax in 1979 was 83%, in 1990 it was 40%

    But then the proportion of tax paid by the richest 10% went up - is that not what you wanted?
    - VAT (a regressive tax) was 8% in 1979, 17.5% in 1991 and stands at 20% today.

    High VAT rates are a feature of the type of Left-wing 'progressive' governments that the the Indy posters want - or dont you want to model yourselves on the Scandinavian model now?
    - The scope of VAT was significantly expanded in 1993 to include gas and electricity

    again - a feature of left wing progressive governance
    - The right-to-buy scheme offered a massive bung in terms of subsidised property prices to those who could afford to take out a mortgage but offered nothing to those who couldn't.

    there are no policies by any government that treat all sectors of the community identically - its a daft idea.

    - The attempted (and thankfully botched) attempt to impose the regressive poll tax as a replacement for the system of local rates which preceded it. And please don't forget Scotland was used as a guinea pig for this particular warped social experiment by virtue of having it imposed there a year before everywhere else.

    Scotland wanted an early transition to the Poll Tax because they didnt want to go through another Rates revaluation - nothing to do with experimentation.
  • niceguy1966niceguy1966 Posts: 29,560
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Majlis wrote: »
    Yes please

    But then the proportion of tax paid by the richest 10% went up - is that not what you wanted?

    High VAT rates are a feature of the type of Left-wing 'progressive' governments that the the Indy posters want - or dont you want to model yourselves on the Scandinavian model now?

    again - a feature of left wing progressive governance

    there are no policies by any government that treat all sectors of the community identically - its a daft idea.

    Scotland wanted an early transition to the Poll Tax because they didnt want to go through another Rates revaluation - nothing to do with experimentation.

    This is the first time I've heard that high VAT is a left wing policy.
    On 1 January 1973 the UK joined the European Economic Community and as a consequence Purchase Tax was replaced by Value Added Tax on 1 April 1973. The then Conservative Chancellor Lord Barber set a single VAT rate (10%) on most goods and services.

    In July 1974, Labour Chancellor Denis Healey reduced the standard rate of VAT from 10% to 8% but introduced a new higher rate of 12.5% for petrol and some luxury goods. In November 1974 Healey doubled the higher rate of VAT to 25%. Healey reduced the higher rate back to 12.5% in April 1976.

    Conservative Chancellor Geoffrey Howe increased the standard rate of VAT from 8% to 15% and abolished the higher rate in June 1979. The rate remained unchanged until 1991, when Conservative Chancellor Norman Lamont increased it from 15% to 17.5%. The additional revenue was used to pay for a reduction in the hugely unpopular community charge. During the 1992 general election the Conservatives promised not to extend the scope of VAT, but, in March 1993, Lamont announced that domestic fuel and power, which had previously been zero-rated, would have VAT levied at 8% from April 1994 and the full 17.5% from April 1995. The planned introduction of VAT on domestic fuel and power went ahead in April 1994, but the increase from 8% to 17.5% in April 1995 was scuppered in December 1994, after the government lost the vote in parliament.
    The poorest spend a higher proportion of their disposable income on VAT than richest.

    An Office for National Statistics report showed that in 2009/10 the poorest 20% spent 8.7% of their gross income on VAT whereas the richest 20% spent only 4.0% of their gross income on VAT. Similarly, the poorest 20% spent 9.7% of their disposable income on VAT whereas the richest 20% spent only 5.2% of their disposable income on VAT.
  • MajlisMajlis Posts: 31,362
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    This is the first time I've heard that high VAT is a left wing policy.

    The countries with the highest VAT rates are precisley those countries that the SNP/Yes Campaign keep comparing Scotland with - Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark etc.

    So are you aiming to be like them or not?
  • spiney2spiney2 Posts: 27,058
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    thatcher shut down northen england. scotland seceding will complete her triumphant destruction of great britain.
  • spiney2spiney2 Posts: 27,058
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Majlis wrote: »
    The countries with the highest VAT rates are precisley those countries that the SNP/Yes Campaign keep comparing Scotland with - Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark etc.

    So are you aiming to be like them or not?

    is scotland cold enough to be nordic ? it does already have some good crime writers ......
  • LyricalisLyricalis Posts: 57,958
    Forum Member
    spiney2 wrote: »
    is scotland cold enough to be nordic ? it does already have some good crime writers ......

    Lots of wearing of sweaters and other knitwear too.
  • niceguy1966niceguy1966 Posts: 29,560
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Majlis wrote: »
    The countries with the highest VAT rates are precisley those countries that the SNP/Yes Campaign keep comparing Scotland with - Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark etc.

    So are you aiming to be like them or not?

    So you are just going to ignore the history I provided showing that Conservative governments introduced VAT and increased VAT many times.

    And ignore the data that shows it hits the poor harder than the rich.

    It must be a left wing tax, obviously.
  • momma11momma11 Posts: 3,843
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Majlis wrote: »
    Yes please



    But then the proportion of tax paid by the richest 10% went up - is that not what you wanted?



    High VAT rates are a feature of the type of Left-wing 'progressive' governments that the the Indy posters want - or dont you want to model yourselves on the Scandinavian model now?



    again - a feature of left wing progressive governance



    there are no policies by any government that treat all sectors of the community identically - its a daft idea.




    Scotland wanted an early transition to the Poll Tax because they didnt want to go through another Rates revaluation - nothing to do with experimentation.



    No , it was Scottish Tories who wanted the Poll tax as apparently Scotland was due an overhaul in the rates system .

    The Poll Tax was anathema to Scots and was the last thing most of the country wanted .
  • trevgotrevgo Posts: 28,241
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Lyricalis wrote: »
    Lots of wearing of sweaters and other knitwear too.

    Can't see them adopting a Finnish style diet somehow.
  • JAMCJAMC Posts: 226
    Forum Member
    Majlis wrote: »
    High VAT rates are a feature of the type of Left-wing 'progressive' governments that the the Indy posters want - or dont you want to model yourselves on the Scandinavian model now?
    There are three pieces of information you need to know;
    1. I'm not Scotish
    2. I'm not an independence supporter – just a neutral 3rd party down south.
    3. I'm not a fan of the so-called nordic model

    I'm simply making the point that if Scotland chooses independence in a few weeks time, Margaret Thatcher and her legacy will have been the single largest contributing factor to that decision. What the Yes campaign may or may not be saying about emulating Norway is irrelevant.
    Majlis wrote: »
    But then the proportion of tax paid by the richest 10% went up - is that not what you wanted?
    Firstly, this is a statistician's ruse of not comparing like-for-like. If you slash the top rate of tax in half and redefine all the bandings, not only do you change the total size of the tax take but you also immediately re-define who actually constitutes the top 10% and their relationship to the other 90%.

    And secondly, I'll go as step further than that and say that the answer to your rhetorical question is no – that is not what I wanted. The purpose of having a tax rate of more than 80% isn't to raise as much revenue as possible for the exchequer or to make a certain segment of the population pay more than another segment; the purpose is to maintain a level economic playing field by ensuring that those at the top of society aren't able to race away from the rest of us (like they have done over the last 30 years) and that social mobility doesn't collapse.
    Majlis wrote: »
    again - a feature of left wing progressive governance
    Norman Lamont was “a feature of left wing progressive governance” was he? I don't care about what other countries do with their VAT rates – I care about what we do with ours.
    Majlis wrote: »
    there are no policies by any government that treat all sectors of the community identically - its a daft idea.
    For a start, you're simply wrong. It doesn't matter who calls the fire brigade, they will show up and put out a fire.

    And in addition, you're defence of a policy by arguing that “people should be treated differently” makes no mention of the idea that people should be treated fairly. Was the right-to-buy fair? Not only were there large numbers of people who couldn't take part in the original sale in the 1980s because they couldn't afford to get a mortgage, there were also discounts of anything up to 60% (80% for flats) depending on how long you'd lived in your council house – was that fair? What of those people who moved house the year before the scheme came in and lost their discount? What about the next generation who now face the stark choice of living the lifestyle of Eastern European migrants by housesharing 20 to a house that's supposed to hold 6 in order to be able to afford the rent – or living with their parents until the age of 48, which I believe is the current average age of a first time buyer. Is any of that fair? I've no objection to treating people differently – I have a massive objection to using the idea of treating people as individuals as an excuse to justify brazen unfairness.
    Majlis wrote: »
    Scotland wanted an early transition to the Poll Tax because they didnt want to go through another Rates revaluation - nothing to do with experimentation.
    Awfully convenient for Mrs T though, wouldn't you say? It would have been very easy to simply roll the same rates forward through 1989 in Scotland, perhaps adjusting a percent or two here and there, to allow for a nationwide switch in 1990. Easier in fact than having two different roll-outs across different parts of the country. And I'm fully aware that local conservative associations in Scotland were champing at the bit to get the change implemented in Scotland before everywhere else; I for one don't think it makes the decision any more palatable because the policy itself was disgraceful.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 464
    Forum Member
    I am Scottish. Born and bred and proud!
    I don't live in Scotland at the moment.
    I don't hate English people!!
    I wish circumstances worked for me and I could live at home.
    I bring my kids up to be proud of being Scottish.
    I would vote no...
  • trevgotrevgo Posts: 28,241
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    JAMC wrote: »
    I'm simply making the point that if Scotland chooses independence in a few weeks time, Margaret Thatcher and her legacy will have been the single largest contributing factor to that decision

    Ne'er a truer word spoken. Or posted, for that matter.
  • grassmarketgrassmarket Posts: 33,010
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    momma11 wrote: »
    [/B]


    The Poll Tax was anathema to Scots and was the last thing most of the country wanted .

    If the Poll Tax was anathema to the Scots, why haven't we got rid of it since devolution, then?
  • grassmarketgrassmarket Posts: 33,010
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    JAMC wrote: »
    T I for one don't think it makes the decision any more palatable because the policy itself was disgraceful.

    If the policy was so disgraceful, why did successive devolved Governments not get rid of it.
  • momma11momma11 Posts: 3,843
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    If the Poll Tax was anathema to the Scots, why haven't we got rid of it since devolution, then?

    :confused:

    We don't have the poll tax .
  • JAMCJAMC Posts: 226
    Forum Member
    If the policy was so disgraceful, why did successive devolved Governments not get rid of it.

    Educate yourself
  • MajlisMajlis Posts: 31,362
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    So you are just going to ignore the history I provided showing that Conservative governments introduced VAT and increased VAT many times.

    And ignore the data that shows it hits the poor harder than the rich.

    It must be a left wing tax, obviously.


    Well I will stick to the reality of today - and as I have pointed out that is that it is mainly progressive leftist governments who like high levels of VAT. Care to name any right wing governments with VAT around 25%?
  • BluescopeBluescope Posts: 3,432
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Is it just me or do half the people posting in this topic appear to be still living in the 1970's ? Talk Margaret Thatcher, poll taxes and what happened in the 30/40 years ago. You do know it is 2014 the world is a whole different place.

    You not voting to become a time lord so you can go back and right the ills of yesterday year. You need to consider the future and if you worried about tax now wait till to have to use the euro or your own currency and watch the prices rise. You should look more to what happened in Ireland (2 euro shops) than what happened in Norway.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,283
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    both, but if you asked the scots they would probably say england.
  • JAMCJAMC Posts: 226
    Forum Member
    Majlis wrote: »
    Well I will stick to the reality of today - and as I have pointed out that is that it is mainly progressive leftist governments who like high levels of VAT. Care to name any right wing governments with VAT around 25%?

    It's utterly irrelevent, but for the record...

    Right wing countries with high VAT rates;
    Hungary = 27%
    Croatia = 25%

    Left wing countries with low VAT rates;
    Bolivia = 13%
    Ecuador = 12%
    Venezuela = 12%
  • mimik1ukmimik1uk Posts: 46,701
    Forum Member
    Bluescope wrote: »
    Is it just me or do half the people posting in this topic appear to be still living in the 1970's ? Talk Margaret Thatcher, poll taxes and what happened in the 30/40 years ago. You do know it is 2014 the world is a whole different place.

    You not voting to become a time lord so you can go back and right the ills of yesterday year. You need to consider the future and if you worried about tax now wait till to have to use the euro or your own currency and watch the prices rise. You should look more to what happened in Ireland (2 euro shops) than what happened in Norway.

    good post

    people should be voting based on whats best for the future not to try and right perceived wrongs of the past
  • MajlisMajlis Posts: 31,362
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    JAMC wrote: »
    It's utterly irrelevent, but for the record...

    Right wing countries with high VAT rates;
    Hungary = 27%
    Croatia = 25%

    Left wing countries with low VAT rates;
    Bolivia = 13%
    Ecuador = 12%
    Venezuela = 12%

    So we have had the celtic tiger, the arc of prosperity and now the model for an independent Scotland is some south American dictatorship :D

    I hate to point it out but one of the very reasons that the Nordic countries are cited as a potential model is that they have less of a wealth divide - perhaps high levels of VAT are not that important?
  • JAMCJAMC Posts: 226
    Forum Member
    Majlis wrote: »
    So we have had the celtic tiger, the arc of prosperity and now the model for an independent Scotland is some south American dictatorship :D

    For the second time - I'm neither Scottish, nor an advocate for Scottish independence, just an observer down south. It's not for me to determine what any post-independence Scotland might look like or which policies it might pursue. I'm simply pointing out that there are right wing countries with high VAT rates, and left wing countries with low VAT rates; all combinations are possible.

    And, for the record, I think you'll find that the leaders of the three South American countries listed were all democratically elected. I'm not claiming that they're a model which should be emulated elsewhere – only that they qualify as left wing and have low VAT rates.
    Majlis wrote: »
    I hate to point it out but one of the very reasons that the Nordic countries are cited as a potential model is that they have less of a wealth divide - perhaps high levels of VAT are not that important?
    It is true that the problems inherent to regressive taxes like VAT become smaller if the initial starting position is one of economic equality, but the presence of such taxes also has the effect of eroding equality over time and allowing inequality to grow. One of the reasons I don't advocate for the nordic model is precisely because it hasn't sustained previous levels of equality in the long term. In relative terms Norway, Sweden and co still have lower levels of inequality than we do – and they're still amongst the best out there if you compare Gini Coefficients; but the trend is very much towards increasing inequality and that's no doubt helped by policies like high VAT rates in those Nordic countries. Inequality in Sweden has increased by 25% in a generation and we see an even more acute trend in our own country. Back in the 1970s we had a level of inequality roughly the same that the Nordic countries have today. Changes to the tax system which pushed regressive VAT over progressive income tax have seen our level of inequality rise in Britain by 35-40% compared to a pre-Thatcher baseline level.

    And for clarity, Scotland is doing slightly better than the rest of the UK when it comes to equality (roughly 9% better) but it's still a lot less equal than the Nordic countries. The lesson it would seem is that you don't go for a high VAT rate if you want inequality to be reduced over time.
Sign In or Register to comment.