After calling for

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BCram

Thanks Deeranged. I understand the point t you make a out the ta es send to Westminster being more than we get back than the block grant. I thought the point was that the government expenditure on pensions and health and education etc was more than the money we raise in taxes and send to Westminster. Westminster has been spending more than it collects for decades so perhaps Scotland spends more than the taxes they collect?
As for your economist friend could you find out if he is still of the same opinion? I can't remember the name of the report that showed if S otland got the oil revenues we would be a very rich country. It was buried y Westminster because of the post it would give to Scottish nationalism. Gordon Wilson's slogan It's Scotlands Oil was a great rallying cry.:blue:

---

Unfortunately my friend passed away in June this year BCram but he was of that opinion to the end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BCram

Islay. The GERS and the Barnet formula are vehemently disputed by the SNP supporters. I can't understand a word of their rebuttals. How about trying to understand why they think these figures are wrong and that Scotland can operate on it's own as independent from Westminster but part of the EU.

---

The SNP supporters think that the GERS figures are wrong because it does not suit their idealistic views that Scotland can operate on its own.
I recently read that thanks to the rules of the Barnett Formula each person in Scotland receives the equivalent of £1,452 per head extra compared to England.
I attended my nephew’s wedding in Chester-le-Street, County Durham in November 2014 which was two months after the Scottish independence referendum.
All the English people at the wedding told me that they were delighted that the electorate of Scotland had voted in favour of Scotland remaining part of the U.K. but they were not happy about all the extra perks that the residents of Scotland get compared to people living in England.
Thanks to the block grant that the Scottish Government receives from the Barnett Formula in Scotland there are;
Free Prescriptions for everyone in Scotland (people aged 60 and over in England)
Free eye tests for everyone in Scotland. Every year for people aged 60 and over, once every two years for people aged between 16 and 59.(People in England have to pay for their eye tests).
Free bus travel for everyone age 60 and over throughout Scotland (people in England aged 60 and over only receive free bus travel in their local area).
The Scottish Government also receives extra funds under the Barnett consequential rules but unlike England the money is not ring fenced.
If the chancellor of the Exchequer gives NHS England £10 Billion extra the Scottish Government receives £1 Billion extra under the Barnett consequential rules but importantly this extra money is not ‘ring fenced’ and it can be spent on any SNP controlled Scottish Government ‘pet project’ such as the nationalisation of the Ferguson Marine shipyard or giving £9.5 Million in commercial loans to another of Nicola Sturgeon’s ‘dreams’ the ‘not for profit’ Our Power energy power company in Scotland which went bust on 25th January 2019 (Burns Night) which was a convenient time to release bad news.
If Scotland was able to join the EU they would lose all the opt outs that the U.K. Government have negotiated from the EU.
VAT on Domestic Electricity, Gas and Oil bills would increase from 5% (which is the minimum that the EU permits to be charged) to 20%
VAT on books, newspapers, children’s clothing and footwear which is currently Zero rated would increase to 20%.
VAT would be charged on all food on sale where at present it is only charged on a number of goods bot not things like beef and pork.
The pro EU supporters in Scotland are going to get a shock next year as the result of a vote which quietly took place in the EU Parliament last year and all will be revealed during 2021.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by islaydarkblue

I recently read that thanks to the rules of the Barnett Formula each person in Scotland receives the equivalent of £1,452 per head extra compared to England.

---

That's impossible because the Barnett formula ensures that the cash allocation for each person in Scotland is the same amount of money as each person in England is allocated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by islaydarkblue

The pro EU supporters in Scotland are going to get a shock next year as the result of a vote which quietly took place in the EU Parliament last year and all will be revealed during 2021.

---

Do tell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by islaydarkblue

If Scotland was able to join the EU they would lose all the opt outs that the U.K. Government have negotiated from the EU.
VAT on Domestic Electricity, Gas and Oil bills would increase from 5% (which is the minimum that the EU permits to be charged) to 20%
VAT on books, newspapers, children’s clothing and footwear which is currently Zero rated would increase to 20%.
VAT would be charged on all food on sale where at present it is only charged on a number of goods bot not things like beef and pork.

---

You don't know any of that for certain, it's your opinion and you're entitled to it but don't state it as fact when it just isn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by islaydarkblue

Thanks to the block grant that the Scottish Government receives from the Barnett Formula in Scotland there are;
Free Prescriptions for everyone in Scotland (people aged 60 and over in England)
Free eye tests for everyone in Scotland. Every year for people aged 60 and over, once every two years for people aged between 16 and 59.(People in England have to pay for their eye tests).
Free bus travel for everyone age 60 and over throughout Scotland (people in England aged 60 and over only receive free bus travel in their local area).

---

Thanks to alternate uses of the fair allocation of central funds as determined by the Barnett formula from the UK treasury you mean?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Deeranged

There is no Barnett subsidy, it's another Westminster fallacy.

As it stands Scottish public sector revenues are collected by either the Scottish or UK government and sent to the UK treasury, revenue collected by the Scottish government is not retained in Scotland for its sole use. The current Barnett formula uses a fairly simple (on the face of it it's simple) calculation and is designed to allocate the same £ per person change PA to the devolved nations that is experienced by England. This amount is then applied to the base amount and awarded to Scotland as a block grant. However the hidden aspect of the formula is that it's designed to reduce the amount of annual spending overall in devolved nations in comparison to England. It doesn't allocate back to Scotland from the UK treasury the full amount that it gives the UK treasury; the block grant is not based on the needs of Scotland or indeed on the revenue raised in Scotland - it's a fiddle. if the full amount transferred to the UK was retained within Scotland we'd instantly be better off as a nation. For me this is why the Westminster government is so reluctant to lose Scotland from its grip, it would result in a net reduction of earnings to the UK (let's face it English) treasury.

My understanding is that the GERS figures are irrelevant as they are representative of a point in time (right now), are an estimate only and are not intended as a forecast. The major flaw in GERS is that if Scotland applied revenues in the same way as they are applied by the UK government then, as things stand right now, they would be a reasonable estimate of where Scotland would be right now. However in any different situation it's more than reasonable to assume that any other government would apply the revenue in an entirely different way. This can of course work two ways and finances could improve or could decline. There's no way of knowing what would happen and GERS figures are not an attempt to show what would or could happen in any other circumstances other than those prevailing now. So, an irrelevance in any process resulting in any degree of change.

I don't do politics and am not an economist but as I've said previously a great friend of mine, an Englishman for the record, who was a retired professor of economics at St. Andrews University was adamant that Scotland, Wales and NI would each be better off away from the union with Scotland positioned to be as wealthy as England if not more so. If a man like him is saying that I'm inclined to believe it.

---

I am sorry but I do not agree with your post.
I will explain.
The Scottish tax rate and frozen personal allowances for higher rate taxpayers has resulted in anyone working in Scotland and earning more than £26,000 per year paying more tax than people earning more than £26,000 per year throughout the rest of the U.K.
The money raised from Scottish tax rate is deducted from the Barnett Formula block grant.
Unfortunately Derek MacKay the now disgraced Scottish Government Cabinet Secretary for Finance did not listen to warnings that higher taxes in Scotland would drive higher earning taxpayers away from working in Scotland. The projected Scottish tax amount raised has been a lot lower than expected and the U.K. Treasury to date has picked up the shortfall but that cannot continue.The Scottish Government will have to learn to stand on its own two feet.
The projected income from the Land and Buildings Tax (formerly called Stamp Duty) has been lower than expected with the Scottish Government again having to be bailed out by Westminster.
I assume that you have worked out the Common Denominator.
The Scottish Government and their advisers did not do their homework nor listen to warnings before introducing these new Scottish only taxes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Deeranged

Thanks to alternate uses of the fair allocation of central funds as determined by the Barnett formula from the UK treasury you mean?

---

Everyone living throughout the UK should operate under the same set of rules, taxes and receive the same perks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by islaydarkblue

Everyone living throughout the UK should operate under the same set of rules, taxes and receive the same perks.

---

But we have a devolved parliament.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Deeranged

You don't know any of that for certain, it's your opinion and you're entitled to it but don't state it as fact when it just isn't.

---

Deeranged.
I despair with you.
I know a person who lives in Holland and she told me that VAT is charged on all all food on sale in Holland.
It is a well known fact that the U.K. achieved the opt outs I have listed but if you will not accept them then there is no point in me wasting my time trying to have a sensible discussion with you.
You are like the rest of the Pro Independence supporters throughout Scotland who think that everything will be far better once Scotland leaves the U.K. becomes an independent country.
Independence is for life not for a five year term and then go crawling back and begging to rejoin the the U.K. because it is not what the SNP and Green MSPs and SNP MPs said it would be.
What happens if the Scotch whisky industry suffers another major downturn as happened n the late 1970’s and early 1980’s.