 |
Our Scotland - www.our-scotland.org
Scottish Politics Discussion Forum / Messageboard - Dedicated to online discussion about Scottish Politics and an Independent Scotland, as well as Scottish Society today. We also have a section dedicated to Banter, Sport and Recommended Sites.
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Please Register and Login to this forum to stop seeing this advertsing.
|
![]() Posted: Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Fidget
Standing in a Council Ward
Joined: 21 Jan 2007
Posts: 576
|
 Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2009 5:43 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| The link in your last post it says "try downloading this document". That doesn't give anybody much to go on and so it remained un-clicked. You still haven't mentioned the point of it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dave Coull
Independentista
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 2845
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2009 7:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fidget wrote: | | I always treat with caution any "off their own back" works where the author has a vested interest in their conclusions. |
So, you are saying you treat the British governments's GERS reports sceptically? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fidget
Standing in a Council Ward
Joined: 21 Jan 2007
Posts: 576
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2009 7:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I wondered who'd be first to ask that. But yes, the GERS and not just even GERS but any official statistics are to be treated with caution. There's always some ambiguity. The difference with between GERS and Niall's reportings though is that GERS is churned out year in, year out. Niall has gone out of his way to substantiate his foregone conclusions before he had put pen to paper. His research did not lead him to his conclusions. He had already decided what they were. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
The Lithgae Jambo
Helping with the Count
Joined: 05 Jul 2006
Posts: 362
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2009 8:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fidget wrote: | | The link in your last post it says "try downloading this document". That doesn't give anybody much to go on and so it remained un-clicked. You still haven't mentioned the point of it. |
And if you looked at it properly, you'd have seen that "this document" is a hyperlink.
As to the point of it ? Why don't you download it and read it ?
Or have you already done that and don't want to acknowledge its findings ?
_________________
Visit Scotsgait then follow us on Twitter !! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dave Coull
Independentista
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 2845
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 2:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Fidget wrote: | | The difference with between GERS and Niall's reportings though is that GERS is churned out year in, year out. Niall has gone out of his way to substantiate his foregone conclusions before he had put pen to paper. His research did not lead him to his conclusions. He had already decided what they were. |
That's a non-existent "difference".
The GERS reports are churned out by the BRITISH GOVERNMENT.
All British governments, by definition, are against independence for Scotland. All British governments intend their GERS reports as "evidence" against independence for Scotland. That is what GERS reports are FOR.
All GERS reports go out of their way to substantiate foregone conclusions. That is what they are intended to do. Sometimes, the methods used in GERS reports are exposed as being so ridiculously biased, they are forced to amend their ways a wee bit, in later GERS reports. That is what happened over the oil revenues, for example. Since Niall proved that it was obviously ridiculously biased to treat one hundred percent of oil revenue as being London/UK revenue, in response to Niall, the British government amended their line slightly in later years' GERS reports. But the INTENTION of the GERS report remained the same, to seek to provide ammunition against independence for Scotland.
Okay, so maybe (like the British Government) Niall was a bit biased from the start. So what? Maybe Newton was biased in favour of the idea of Gravity from the start, maybe Einstein was biased in favour of the idea of Relativity from the start. What matters is not where they started from, but the evidence they came up with. Even if Niall was biased, he came up with very strong evidence in favour of his prejudices. His views on GERS have been shown to be mathematically, scientifically, correct. Whereas the bias of GERS has been shown to be mathematically, scientifically, wrong. Neither you nor any other Unionist has managed to come up with any MATHEMATICAL proof that GERS is right and Niall is wrong. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aventinian
1 Strike
Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 5574
Location: Oh, I get about a bit.
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 5:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dave Coull wrote: | | The GERS reports are churned out by the BRITISH GOVERNMENT. |
Nope. By the Chief Economic Advisor to the Scottish Executive.
| Quote: | | All British governments, by definition, are against independence for Scotland. All British governments intend their GERS reports as "evidence" against independence for Scotland. That is what GERS reports are FOR. |
Not all eliminations of the state are politicised.
| Quote: | | All GERS reports go out of their way to substantiate foregone conclusions. That is what they are intended to do. |
A methodical year-on-year comparison makes such accusations impossible to substantiate.
| Quote: | | Since Niall proved that it was obviously ridiculously biased to treat one hundred percent of oil revenue as being London/UK revenue, in response to Niall, the British government amended their line slightly in later years' GERS reports. But the INTENTION of the GERS report remained the same, to seek to provide ammunition against independence for Scotland. |
In response to Niall? Hmm...
Anyway, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe GERS papers have always shown these extra-regio resources, albeit separately from what goes on in Scotland proper.
| Quote: | | Neither you nor any other Unionist has managed to come up with any MATHEMATICAL proof that GERS is right and Niall is wrong. |
GERS is entirely correct in what it states. Niall simply believes in including different things within it. That does not make statistics any more or less correct. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
magister ludi
Gaining a Reputation
Joined: 13 Dec 2008
Posts: 234
|
| Posted: Tue Sep 15, 2009 10:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
At school I had a Maths teacher who one day got a "sum" wrong on the big blackboard.
Of course as kids we delighted in pointing this out to him.
One, usually dozy, chap gleefully said "Sir, Sir you made a mistake!"
The teacher replied " I NEVER make mistakes; but I do occassionally make errors".
He left us to reflect on the difference.
There are mistakes in the Gers Report. These mistakes lead to errors.
The numbers themselves may be correct ( ie accurate).......but clearly the methodology, grouping, categorisation etc are flawed.
That's a mistake.
The numbers are not just open to misinterpretation, they are deceptive. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
No Longer a Wean
Joined: 15 Apr 2007
Posts: 93
Location: Orlando, FL
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 9:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The Lithgae Jambo wrote: | | Fidget wrote: | So, other than what you and babykitten like what you see in Niall's musings, give us all something else as to why anybody should take it seriously.
You can't, can you?
You two are a pair of nationalists caught out. Mabybe Nial should start his his own bible. At least he'd have you two on your knees. |
Try downloading this document |
LJ, that is some document - if anyone has trouble sleeping, please review it and count the number of times the word "Scotland" shows up - you'll be surprised 
_________________
"Scotland's stunningly beautiful, and utterly captivating capital city, Edinburgh" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Alasdair
Our Scotland = 2nd Job!
Joined: 01 May 2008
Posts: 1040
Location: Clydesdale
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 25, 2009 10:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mac wrote: | | The Lithgae Jambo wrote: | | Fidget wrote: | So, other than what you and babykitten like what you see in Niall's musings, give us all something else as to why anybody should take it seriously.
You can't, can you?
You two are a pair of nationalists caught out. Mabybe Nial should start his his own bible. At least he'd have you two on your knees. |
Try downloading this document |
LJ, that is some document - if anyone has trouble sleeping, please review it and count the number of times the word "Scotland" shows up - you'll be surprised |
twice?
_________________
My blog - http://manaboutthehouse.wordpress.com
My arts and crafts site http://madestuff.co.uk |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mairead
'Our Scotland' Fossil
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 4302
Location: Argyll, Alba
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 26, 2009 7:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
I'd believe Niall any day. In spite of whay some may think, he Knows what he is talking about and I wish I had a fraction of his economic knowledge.
_________________
I fear not hell, nor English strife,
For Scotland, I will give my life |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
No Longer a Wean
Joined: 15 Apr 2007
Posts: 93
Location: Orlando, FL
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 01, 2009 5:50 am Post subject: The Micawber principle |
|
|
That's really what it is - our perceived contribution to the GB economy is less than the resented amount received.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr_micawber
Maybe, just maybe in my lifetime, "Something will turn up".
_________________
"Scotland's stunningly beautiful, and utterly captivating capital city, Edinburgh" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
magister ludi
Gaining a Reputation
Joined: 13 Dec 2008
Posts: 234
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Reluctant Hero
Jim Baxter is God...........really!!!!
Joined: 17 Sep 2005
Posts: 3188
|
| Posted: Fri Oct 02, 2009 8:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The comments at the end of that article are hilarious!
And what is even funnier is that it was recommended 6 times!!
| Quote: | derek guthrie wrote:
Scotland couldn't manage on its own. The country is an economic basket case. It needs England to manage its money wisely in order to ensure it doesn't get into debt. It is far better off with pocket money while England does all the nasty budgeting for wars and things which the Scots would probably never have done for themselves because they are too small and inconsequential to host Olympic Games and World Cups, democratise Iraq and Afganistan,and of course, save the financial world. Anyway, think of the cost!
September 29, 2009 10:34 PM BST on community.timesonline.co.uk Recommend? (6) |
_________________
Visit the Our Scotland Blog at http://our-scotland.blogspot.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
No Longer a Wean
Joined: 15 Apr 2007
Posts: 93
Location: Orlando, FL
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 03, 2009 6:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yet after all that, there is still opposition for the Scots to vote on the prospect of independence - the Scots should be allowed the opportunity - that's what the western world wants, except in Britain... 
If the Scots want to remain in the Union, then fine - let them vote on it FFS 
_________________
"Scotland's stunningly beautiful, and utterly captivating capital city, Edinburgh" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aventinian
1 Strike
Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 5574
Location: Oh, I get about a bit.
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 03, 2009 10:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mac wrote: | | Yet after all that, there is still opposition for the Scots to vote on the prospect of independence - the Scots should be allowed the opportunity - that's what the western world wants, except in Britain... |
If you think the world generally likes secession and the break-up of states like the UK then you're very wrong indeed.
| Quote: | | If the Scots want to remain in the Union, then fine - let them vote on it FFS |
Why? No-one here has yet come up with a credible argument for why any Unionist should ever support a referendum on Scottish independence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Holebender
Ready For Afterlife!
Joined: 04 Apr 2007
Posts: 2766
Location: Here or There
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 03, 2009 11:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Because it would settle the question for a while and allow all those Unionists to move on to the much more important things they have on their agendas? Surely you'd like to remove the uncertainty and instability you believe all this constitutional wrangling causes?
_________________
"My instinct is to agree with your opinion of his verse, but I've never so much as glanced at it." - agentmancuso |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aventinian
1 Strike
Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 5574
Location: Oh, I get about a bit.
|
| Posted: Sat Oct 03, 2009 10:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Holebender wrote: | | Because it would settle the question for a while and allow all those Unionists to move on to the much more important things they have on their agendas? Surely you'd like to remove the uncertainty and instability you believe all this constitutional wrangling causes? |
As far as I'm concerned, the question would be far more easily settled by the three pro-union parties simply stating that they will not vote for an independence referendum. As it stands, I hope the SNP are mature enough to accept defeat when their referendum bill fails, and not bother introducing another one until there's actually a chance of anyone supporting it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Holebender
Ready For Afterlife!
Joined: 04 Apr 2007
Posts: 2766
Location: Here or There
|
| Posted: Sun Oct 04, 2009 12:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
Stating they will not vote for something is not equivalent to saying they will vote it down. It is perfectly possible to abstain or even absent oneself from the vote and still truthfully claim not to have voted for the motion.
Until a referendum bill is put to a vote there is no way of knowing the outcome of that vote.
_________________
"My instinct is to agree with your opinion of his verse, but I've never so much as glanced at it." - agentmancuso |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mac
No Longer a Wean
Joined: 15 Apr 2007
Posts: 93
Location: Orlando, FL
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 7:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Aventinian wrote: | | mac wrote: | | Yet after all that, there is still opposition for the Scots to vote on the prospect of independence - the Scots should be allowed the opportunity - that's what the western world wants, except in Britain... |
If you think the world generally likes secession and the break-up of states like the UK then you're very wrong indeed.
| Quote: | | If the Scots want to remain in the Union, then fine - let them vote on it FFS |
Why? No-one here has yet come up with a credible argument for why any Unionist should ever support a referendum on Scottish independence. |
Av, am I understanding you correctly? Are you saying that the Unionist parties need to give agreement or "blessing" to the right for the Scots to vote on their own determination, meaning supporting the union, warts and all, or going it alone?
I think the Scots just want the chance to vote on it, that's all.
_________________
"Scotland's stunningly beautiful, and utterly captivating capital city, Edinburgh" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Braveheart
Gaining a Reputation
Joined: 30 Oct 2009
Posts: 237
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 7:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
mac said:
| Quote: | Av, am I understanding you correctly? Are you saying that the Unionist parties need to give agreement or "blessing" to the right for the Scots to vote on their own determination, meaning supporting the union, warts and all, or going it alone?
I think the Scots just want the chance to vote on it, that's all. |
It's not the "unionist" parties that need to give agreement or "blessing" to a referendum, it's the Scottish people, and they have not given it.
The non-nationalist parties represent the vast majority of the Scottish people. The non-nationalist parties did not have a referendum in their manifesto, so they can rightly assume that anyone who really wanted a referendum would have voted SNP or Green.
In the 2007 election, the SNP and the Greens got 33% of the vote between them. So 67% of those who voted did not vote for a referendum.
(In fact, as the turn out was 51.7%, less than 17% of the Scottish electorate voted for parties that actively want a referendum...)
conclusion:
It's not the non-nationalist parties that are your problem, mac, it's the Scottish people: they don't want independence and they don't want a referendum....
The non-nationalist parties are merely reflecting the will of the majority of Scots.
Can you respect the will of the majority of Scots, mac?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Join! (free) 
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
