tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post2318974131692798222..comments2024-03-28T04:29:22.717+00:00Comments on mainly macro: The Independent, the Union and utter nonsenseMainly Macrohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09984575852247982901noreply@blogger.comBlogger58125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-56629534128707603402015-05-07T03:19:05.153+00:002015-05-07T03:19:05.153+00:00SWL, "acting in bad faith" would be to p...SWL, "acting in bad faith" would be to pretend that "the vow" promised something other than "extensive new powers", nothing else. They've dishonestly suggested that since the referendum by using quotes from Gordon Brown, a backbench MP, about "near-federalism", "home rule" (which means devolution, as in Irish devolution), and "devo max". Scottish Labour have not defended themselves over this. No nat has read the vow. Look on social media. Thus the SNP can force a showdown over the Smith Commission legislation and falsely claim to be getting a "promise" kept.<br /><br />Labour's manifesto, which again no nat has read and nor has any English journalist, is to the left of the SNP's. Where they differ, the SNP have left out a ban on employment tribunal fees, media ownership controls (because they are friends of Murdoch and the Scottish Sun so he can get a majority stake in Sky), 2 new High Street banks for increased competition, and they only want 100 000 houses a year to Labour's 200 000.<br /><br />Nats think they are going to "kick these Red Tories into touch" but they are inferior in policy terms to a stable, more left-wing Labour majority government.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-17962102031103985042015-05-07T02:32:16.411+00:002015-05-07T02:32:16.411+00:00Simon, on what indy Scotland can afford check out ...Simon, on what indy Scotland can afford check out Frances Coppola's article "Smith, Barnett and the Wily Salmond" and Kevin Hague's chokka blog. Oil is central, not a 'bonus', and even when oil tax revenues are included iScotland would consistently have a budget deficit higher than rUK's, even in 11 of the last 15 years. Without the oil, the hole would be bigger still. Solution? Slash spending permanently? Raise taxes 14-odd percent? Just borrow more? (If keeping sterling, what if iScotland cannot earn enough sterling to cover its borrowing?)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-37543099233288011862015-05-06T23:02:20.439+00:002015-05-06T23:02:20.439+00:00Sam Miller, Sturgeon has succeeded in convincing p...Sam Miller, Sturgeon has succeeded in convincing people she wants a "massive increase in spending" but her manifesto says she wants an increase of 0.5%! That's what, 0.2% of GDP or so? Not massive by the standards of economic stimuli.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-81208419586725172562015-05-06T18:49:34.013+00:002015-05-06T18:49:34.013+00:00"As you said yourself: it plays into the unju..."As you said yourself: it plays into the unjustified Nationalist sense of grievance. |<br /><br />There is totally justified grievance. But here Scotland shares something with the regions. The Union, particularly since the deindustrialisation of Britain, has worked for the benefit of London where power and money is concentrated. Geographical inequality is another form of social inequality. This is another example why you need to study other schools of thought and social sciences. The tendencies towards inequality in capitalism and concentrations of power are not well handled in neo-classical theory and the ideology was never properly set up to foresee it. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-43241698838486545822015-05-06T10:50:45.517+00:002015-05-06T10:50:45.517+00:00This is absolutely hilarious!
SpinningHugo5 May 20...This is absolutely hilarious!<br />SpinningHugo5 May 2015 at 04:48<br /><br />1. The word 'disenfranchised' has a meaning.<br /><br />Aye! spinningHugho, and so have such terms as, "United", Kingdom", "Country", Treaty, Sovereignty and Establishment.<br />Pity you either have no concept of their meaning or are attempting to fool others.<br /><br />The United Kingdom is a royal realm and the Westminster Establishment is, "The Parliament of that United Kingdom", but the Royal Realm is a bipartite agreement as the former Kingdom of England had annexed the realm of the Prince of Wales in 1284 and king of Ireland in 1542. So the Westminster Establishment is legally a bipartite Union. There is no democracy in that parliament since, from 1 May 1707, the concept that each, roughly equal, constituency representative was equal. They not only ignored the concept of a United Kingdom by the larger number of members voting as English members but then forming political parties. <br /><br />Westminster's parliament is no more democratic than the local primary school playground where the bullies insure the principle of, "Might is right", and if you don't believe it, "I'll kick yer head in".<br /><br />533 English MPs elected as UK members, and 117 other UK members that the 533 want to prevent voting in the UK Parliament on English only matters, decided as which by the 533 English MP and the UK parliament being the de facto parliament of England.<br /><br />Yet the English are now squealing like stuck pigs with their snouts being surgically removed from the Englander feeding trough.<br /><br />Until the Parliament of England is removed from that of the United Kingdom and all four countries having equal per capita funding there is no actual United Kingdom, (except as a royal realm), it is not a country, it is not now a UK parliament and it is certainly not a democracy.<br /><br />I fear that if it does not soon become a real federal democracy there will be insurrection with bloodshed and violence the likes of which always results when the rich more than double their wealth while telling the poor they must suffer austerity. Auld Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17280730302148441808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-75605468793756790312015-05-06T10:07:35.821+00:002015-05-06T10:07:35.821+00:00Twaddle, Stadius, Let us take reality instead of p...Twaddle, Stadius, Let us take reality instead of propaganda influenced perception. The Establishment at Westminster is nominally, "The Parliament of the United KINGDOM", and the title, "United KINGDOM", correctly describes itself as, "A KINGDOM". A, Kingdom is defined as a Royal Realm. It is not a country. That United Kingdom is a bipartite agreement and not a quadratic union of countries. Thus Westminster has become a fraudulent concept designed to delude the natives. <br /><br />Devolution created a quadratic government of countries, (which may have been acceptable), except for the reality that by devolving powers unequally to only three of the countries, retaining the title as the UK Parliament, and having no parliament of England, the nominal UK parliament has become the ,unelected as such, de facto parliament of England with 533, not elected as such, English parliament Members who are also UK MPs. They now campaign to prevent other country's MPs, properly elected as UK members, from voting upon what they designate England only matters.<br /><br />What we have now is what Mundell quoted from a UK funded study paper as, "The Treaty of Union extinguished the Kingdom of Scotland and renamed the Kingdom of England as The United Kingdom".<br /><br />There, Stadius, is the reality. Auld Bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17280730302148441808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-89237131597262718732015-05-06T09:21:44.375+00:002015-05-06T09:21:44.375+00:00Or you could say the lesson from the SNP is to mak...Or you could say the lesson from the SNP is to make up numbers to advance your cause:<br /><br />http://mainlymacro.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/scotland-and-snp-fooling-yourselves-and.html<br /><br />The SNP pushing an anti-austerity line is welcome, but I'm not sure you can draw the conclusions you do from it. Mainly Macrohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09984575852247982901noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-51566662123148481562015-05-06T09:21:34.833+00:002015-05-06T09:21:34.833+00:00*Should read "it is not in 1 to make Westmins...*Should read "it is not in 1 to make Westminster work too well, even if this is in 2"Stadiushttps://disqus.com/by/Stadius/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-39383234909057537012015-05-06T09:14:22.739+00:002015-05-06T09:14:22.739+00:00I think the SNP should be a good lesson for macro-...I think the SNP should be a good lesson for macro-economists with an interest in policy about how they do their business. It is a big contrast to the New Labour/Porter et al way of doing things. The SNP is much closer to the grassroots. They listen to what people want and then make the policy position. They do not have an idea based on theory about what is best, implement it in a top-down fashion and after the fact tell people why it is good for them. You might not think that the Conservatives position is theoretically sound, but it fits in very well with much pre-Keynesian classical theory and post 1970s macro theory. Macro should be about implementing an elected government's economic agenda. It should not be about implementing a social optimal position as dictated by (dubious) micro theory that includes artificially imposed constraints and emphasises incentives. It is up to governments and the plebiscite to decide what is socially optimal.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-33650511562451060962015-05-06T09:01:06.390+00:002015-05-06T09:01:06.390+00:00Demetrius: I agree about the need for electoral re...Demetrius: I agree about the need for electoral reform.<br /><br />Aaron McDaid: Of course it's not a zero-sum game, but for the SNP, there are three relevant considerations in every decision:<br /><br />(1) The interests of the cause of Scottish independence.<br />(2) The interests of the Scottish people<br />(3) The interests of the rest of the UK<br /><br />Clearly, 1 and 2 do not always coincide. As I mentioned, it is not in 1 to make Westminster work too well and thus undermine 2. 1 and 3 also clash for obvious reasons, both because rest-of-UK opinion and sentiment is against independence, and because the resentment caused by harming 3 can cause resentment south of the border, which furthers 1. Therefore we should by no means assume that the SNP will act in either 3 (especially when 2 and 3 diverge), or even 2 in some cases.Stadiushttps://disqus.com/by/Stadius/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-27496865083785012282015-05-06T08:45:45.606+00:002015-05-06T08:45:45.606+00:00I'd like Nicola Sturgeon to be PM of the Union...I'd like Nicola Sturgeon to be PM of the Union. The only one talking sense about the economy. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-85236502528991662272015-05-06T08:41:24.349+00:002015-05-06T08:41:24.349+00:00You are right, thanks for the common sense. The In...You are right, thanks for the common sense. The Independent's argument is utter nonsense. And an affront to democracy. But we have seen a lot of this since the Scottish referendum. A lot of scaremongering about people who do not like it when people stand up to the elite establishment. Jobs, high rates of immigration undermining local communities and making it unaffordable to live where jobs are, waits at doctor's surgeries, these are issues that concern people, but the elite come up with classic neo-classical arguments that somehow the magic market will sort it out and the government and their advisers with their models know better than they do what is good for them. Apparently if the Scots don't know their place and bow to Westminster and the City they are doomed. <br /><br />I hope the Scots go for SNP, this is healthy democracy.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-47384335486741549712015-05-06T08:24:11.639+00:002015-05-06T08:24:11.639+00:00Oil certainly influences what an independent Scott...Oil certainly influences what an independent Scottish government could afford. This is just maths, not media invention. There has recently been a minor recovery in prices after a major fall - just look at the data!Mainly Macrohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09984575852247982901noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-52531142997035269922015-05-06T07:36:44.820+00:002015-05-06T07:36:44.820+00:00Hugo - stop spinning!Hugo - stop spinning!bill mcleanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04045724077823452099noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-77972967258452392462015-05-06T07:34:00.600+00:002015-05-06T07:34:00.600+00:00The oil has NEVER been central to Scottish Indepen...The oil has NEVER been central to Scottish Independence. That is a figment of your foul press' imagination. Without oil Scottish GDP is within half a percentage point of the rUK. But regardless have you seen the latest surge in prices? You are supposed to reason your way to a conclusion. Not come to a conclusion then fit the story to it. Or at least that is the logical way to do it!bill mcleanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04045724077823452099noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-4801513771913280742015-05-06T07:28:23.734+00:002015-05-06T07:28:23.734+00:00Excellent riposte Aaron!Excellent riposte Aaron!bill mcleanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04045724077823452099noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-90000534505381782232015-05-05T23:58:16.509+00:002015-05-05T23:58:16.509+00:00Totally agree, Jacques. See my comment below.Totally agree, Jacques. See my comment below.Samuel Millerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02686449963558402772noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-48217956405437439352015-05-05T23:43:50.213+00:002015-05-05T23:43:50.213+00:00People who are opposing a Labour-SNP Coalition par...People who are opposing a Labour-SNP Coalition partnership because it would revive the issue of Scottish independence and put the Union under fresh strain, could learn a lesson from Canada. The Bloc Québécois is a federal political party in Canada devoted to the protection of Quebec’s interests in the House of Commons of Canada, and the promotion of Quebec sovereignty.<br /><br />In the 1993 federal election, the Bloc Québécois won 54 seats (out of 75) in Quebec, sweeping nearly all of the francophone ridings.<br /><br />The Bloc won four seats in the 2011 federal election, fewer than the 12 required for official party status in the House of Commons, and by August 2014 had been reduced to two seats due to resignations and expulsions. It remains a registered political party, but is currently tied with the two-seat Green Party and the Forces et Démocratie as the smallest party in the House of Commons of Canada.<br /><br />My point is that the election of the Bloc Québécois in Canada did not result in the breakup of my country, and Quebec ultimately gained more powers within confederation. The fear-mongering surrounding a possible Labour-SNP Coalition partnership may not be justified.<br /><br />Moreover, the British media has it wrong. There is a greater threat of 'Devo Max' failing and of Scotland separating from the Union if the Cameron Tories are elected. Westminster will most certainly rebuff Nicola Sturgeon because plunging oil prices harms the case for Scottish home rule, and because she wants a massive increase in spending to end austerity.<br /><br />Full disclosure: Since January 2012, I have been reporting voluntarily to the UN’s human rights office, in Geneva, on the welfare crisis for Britain’s sick and disabled. [Fellow Canadian Leilani Farha (@leilanifarha) is the UN Special Rapporteur on adequate housing; see http://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Housing/Pages/LeilaniFarha.aspx. You can tweet her on UK housing issues or e-mail her at the UN’s human rights office: srhousing@ohchr.org; she does follow my Twitter account.]<br /><br />I'm a lifelong resident of Quebec and have voted in two sovereignty referendums.<br /><br /><br /><br />Samuel Millerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02686449963558402772noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-21493290925971836872015-05-05T21:16:18.527+00:002015-05-05T21:16:18.527+00:00If those of a Unionist persuasion were smart, they...If those of a Unionist persuasion were smart, they would point at an SNP Bloc, and say, "Look, the Union works". Instead, we get hysteria, which viewed from North of Hadrian's Wall, (which for the benefit of Mr Farage, is in England), is simply turning the reluctant Nos into Hell Yessers.<br /><br />The SNP surge, is as much about a hollowed out Scottish Labour party collapsing in on itself, as it is about a an energised SNP capitalising on a good ( if losing) referendum campaign.<br /><br />How much longer the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland will continue to exist, depends very much on how those who claim to be Unionists choose to behave in the next few months.Melhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04431575639308629650noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-45195430060261731012015-05-05T20:44:45.945+00:002015-05-05T20:44:45.945+00:00Stadius: "given the choice between honestly p...Stadius: "given the choice between honestly participating in government for the good of the whole country (the UK, that is) and the chance to sow resentment and instability, they'll go for the latter;"<br /><br />The error in this logic is the assumption that this is a zero sum game. The assumption that what is good for Scotland must be bad for the rest of the UK. The assumption that what is good for the SNP must be bad for all the other parties.<br /><br />The SNP could lead a change in economic policy which is good for the whole of the UK. Everybody would gain, except the current plutocrats. This would of course make the SNP, and their preference for independence, become more popular. But the obvious response is for the Westminster parties to remember that they are supposed to represent the people also and to "out-progressive" the SNP.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17204472992759448532noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-85669504307144989912015-05-05T19:41:56.595+00:002015-05-05T19:41:56.595+00:00Between 1993 and 2011, most Québec seats in the Ca...Between 1993 and 2011, most Québec seats in the Canadian Parliament were held by the Bloc Québécois. From 93 to 97 , they even were the official opposition. They often called the best behaving party in the House and their leader, especially Gilles Duceppe, usually chosenbest parliamentarian by Hill newspaper. Eveything went well. Why would it be different with the SNP?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-53397138140200075502015-05-05T17:17:56.553+00:002015-05-05T17:17:56.553+00:00It would be absurd to shut out the SNP - it is jus...It would be absurd to shut out the SNP - it is just cheap politics. The Telegraph argues that success for the SNP might be good for the Union. http://bit.ly/1c1j3UA I don't think anyone knows at this point.<br /><br />It might be true if the Tories repudiated these tactics, but if the SNP has success as expected, those tactics will create divisions that need not exist <br /><br />Cameron sees no downside in attacking the Scots because he has no prospects there and thinks it will scare up Tory votes elsewhere. I say Scots, not SNP, because his comments will likely be perceived that way and because it questions in advance the legitimacy of the voting in Scotland.<br /><br />That won't be helped by those who "explain" in such detail how a Scottish vote results should be repudiated. <br /><br />Political opportunism sometimes has serious consequences. <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-55792029088258150522015-05-05T17:13:52.534+00:002015-05-05T17:13:52.534+00:00Do you think that it is wrong for the UK governmen...<i>Do you think that it is wrong for the UK government to stand up for the UK’s rights in international bodies because it represents a geographical minority within those bodies?</i><br /><br />Imagine how the Germans would feel if the UK acquired a veto over Eurozone policy.JDnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-63454852794322524782015-05-05T17:12:52.582+00:002015-05-05T17:12:52.582+00:00If the SNP take all or close to all the Scottish s...If the SNP take all or close to all the Scottish seats at 50% of the vote then that leaves half the electorate without representation of their Scottish interest, whatever that may be. Down in London, there will be large groups unrepresented because Labour might clean up there. In swathes of the country there are large groups who have long had little or no representation because of the first past the post electoral system. This system has always had a disaster in waiting and now it may have arrived.Demetriushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17198549581667363991noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2546602206734889307.post-17155067828997306282015-05-05T16:47:54.022+00:002015-05-05T16:47:54.022+00:001) Of course the SNP are not fascists (or anything...1) Of course the SNP are not fascists (or anything like it). I was trying to illustrate how it is not a problem to object to having a group of MPs on whose votes a government is dependent (see also Galloway). It was the claim of disenfranchisement I was attacking.<br /><br />2) I think I have addressed that above.<br /><br />3) Not at all. The SNP position is that independence would be better. Lopsided devolution is not their fault at all.<br /><br />On devolution you need to differentiate devolution of administration and devolution of law-making. It is the latter which matters. We aren't going to have devolution of law-making to the English regions.<br /><br />4) A perfectly valid reason for a Scottish voter to act upon. There are many reasons that have to be balanced.SpinningHugonoreply@blogger.com