The less-deserving pro-independence website

Wings Over Scotland


Better Together 1776

Posted on March 10, 2016 by

It turns out Scotland isn’t the first country to be too wee, too poor and too stupid for independence from the mighty and benificent United Kingdom.

bt1776

(Source.)

Print Friendly

1 Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. 10 03 16 23:43

    Better Together 1776 | Speymouth

138 to “Better Together 1776”

  1. Giesabrek says:

    The British Empire must have been the first empire in history to subsidise the lands it conquered, rather than exploit them, and the UK the most wealthy small island to have ever existed. In that respect, it must have been an abject failure as an empire… But we all know that’s not true.

  2. theMadMurph says:

    No doubt there will be similar passages for every one of the nations who got independence from our imperial masters!

  3. Proud Cybernat says:

    The Yoon propaganda TWTPTS meme just never changes. Scotland is slowly but surely wisening up to it. The TWTPTS pill has as much effect now as a placebo.

    SNP x 2 + 1 x EU = FREE

  4. David Mills says:

    Maybe someone should have reminded President Obama of that history before his well prepared comments in 2014

  5. Brenda says:

    Well found!

  6. ScottieDog says:

    And so what did they do stu? They created the Pennsylvania scrip. Their own version of the pound..
    http://positivemoney.org/2016/01/qe-for-people-where-you-least-expected-it-a-history-of-qe-for-people-part-4/

    And we can do the same.

  7. ScottieDog says:

    “It is, therefore, no surprise that many economists agree that Pennsylvania’s system of money creation was “to the manifest benefit of the province” and that “Favourable testimony can be found in nearly all commentators, modern or contemporary” (Fergusson, 1953). Adam Smith even praised the Pennsylvanian case study, and suggested that much of its success depended “upon the moderation with which it was used”. Indeed, Smith goes on to say:”

  8. crisiscult says:

    ha ha. Brilliant. I remember arguing with a Yoon lady at work. One of her main obsessions was that Independence was about a myth of cultural oppression and that the Scots were not culturally different. I said, in response, but isn’t it largely about where your territory is run from, regardless of how big or small the cultural difference are. She said no. I asked, so when the American revolution happened, you’d have been on the Brit side of the debate?

  9. Bob Mack says:

    It is only a fair commemtary on how a parasitic organism requires a host to feed from. England has been doing this for centuries,firstly on the European continent ,then throughout the globe.It is how they lived and prospered and has become a way of life.

    Scotland is just another host.

  10. One of the Hundred says:

    That would be a good investigation to do Stu. A collection of all the insidius propaganda and tactics against each nation. This stuff for the US, Lord MacAuley for India, The Boers concentration camps, Tasmania, Chagos, acts of settlement etc, etc. Expose their whole rotten scheme.

  11. Gary Grant says:

    You just put that up for the Philosopher’s Stone reference didn’t you?…Rowling, Rowling, Rowling, you’re obsessed ;o)

  12. Arbroath1320 says:

    Apologies for O/T so early here.

    Is it just me or is Porky’s *ahem* “Special Relationship” starting to get rather frayed around the edges these days? 😀

    http://archive.is/PFD69

  13. Andy Macneil says:

    This is perhaps the best example of why attempting to extrapolate economic estimates, based on gross assumptions, is fatally flawed.

    What will it take for Yoons to put away their slide rules and recognise that an independent Scotland would be run according to its own means, capitalising on its own resources, rather than mirroring a rUK system that categorically wouldn’t fit its needs? The concept is so simple to understand.

  14. msean says:

    Looks like it worked out ok for those American separatists in the end. 🙂

  15. Alan says:

    Back then, as now, everything was run for the benefit of fat cats and their companies, the East India Company being the most notorious. The Boston Tea Party involved the dumping of EIC cargo into Boston harbour. Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations is an extended critique of the economic system epitomised by the EIC and the corrupt political system that supported it.

  16. Derek Henry says:

    The other issue that nobody has mentioned is Scotland could end up like Greece.

    Yes, I am using an extreme example to get my point across but let me explain.

    Scotland cannot decide how much currency it can spend that is controlled by HM Treasury. Therefore it has no control over what size of deficit it can run. Scotland is not the monopoly issuer of its own currency.

    Greece or any country within the Eurozone is exactly the same. None of them can decide how much currency it can spend that is controlled by the ECB. Therefore none of them has control over what size of deficit they can run.

    The fiscal discipline is ensured by the growth and stability pact by requiring each Member State, to implement a fiscal policy aiming for the country to stay within the limits on government deficit (3% of GDP) and debt (60% of GDP);

    Just look at the state of the Eurozone because of it. This insanity is eating away at the Eurozone from within.

    London could if it wanted to turn off the tap of £’s flowing into Scotland any time it wanted and starve Scotland of the currency it needs to function.Then force austerity measures and neoliberal privatisations any day it chooses.

    That and that reason alone is why we should become an independent country.

    The colonies of America knew this as well.

    http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2016/02/debt-free-money-part-4-american-colonial-currency.html#more-10069

    The colonies were prohibited by England from issuing coin, so as to protect the King’s monopoly of coinage. The colonies obtained coin from export, but of course as a major mercantilist power, England wanted to limit exports to the raw materials she needed. The colonies had to import finished goods, shipping the coins back to England. The King wanted to limit expenditures on its empire, so the colonies were largely responsible for funding their expenses, which included fighting wars with the French, the Canadians, and Native Americans. Colonial governments were chronically short of coins, obtained through taxes such as poll taxes and taxes on imports of slaves and tobacco.

    Virginia’s colonial government in 1755 knew the truth long before the majority of voters in 2016.

    As the official documents state below:

    The Virginia legislature took note redemption and its effect on controlling the value of its paper money seriously. Such is illustrated in the March 1760 paper money act which stated, ‘And whereas it is of the greatest importance to preserve the credit of the paper currency of this colony, and nothing can contribute more to that end than a due care to satisfy the publick that the paper bills of credit, or treasury-notes, are properly sunk, according to the true intent and meaning of the several acts of assembly passed for emitting the same; and the establishing a regular method for this purpose may prevent difficulties and confusion in settling the publick accounts.

    Be it therefore enacted, by the authority aforesaid, That Peyton Randolph, esquire, Robert Carter Nicholas, Benjamin Waller, Lewis Burwell and George Wythe, gentleman, or any three of them, be, and they are hereby appointed a committee, to examine at least twice in every year (and oftener, if thereto desired by the treasurer for the time being) all such bills of credit, or treasury-notes, redeemable on the first day of March, one thousand seven hundred and sixty five, as have been or shall be paid into the treasury, in discharge of the duties and taxes imposed by any former act of assembly; and upon receipt of the said bills or notes, the said committee shall give to the treasurer for the time being a certificate of the amount thereof, which shall avail the said treasurer in the settlements of his accounts as effectually, at all intents and purposes, as if he produced the said bills or notes themselves: And the said committee are hereby required and directed, so soon as they have given such certificate, to cause all such bills or notes to be burnt and destroyed.’ (Hening 1969, v. 7, p. 353)

    Yep, they knew hundreds of years ago to protect the value of the government’s paper currency, you’ve got to redeem it in taxes and burn the revenues generated.

    Just like the Bank of England does in the reserves today.

  17. Derek Henry says:

    No need to investigate it.

    Farley Grubb has just authored a very nice paper on American colonial currency. Farley is a, or perhaps THE, expert on the topic. His exposition confirms my account, both in the details and in the terminology.

    http://lerner.udel.edu/sites/default/files/ECON/PDFs/RePEc/dlw/WorkingPapers/2015/UDWP2015-11.pdf

    Stephanie Kelton Bernies economic advisor and Wrandy Wray
    have already done a paper on it.

    It’s part 4 of the debt free money series they done.

    http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2016/02/debt-free-money-part-4-american-colonial-currency.html#more-10069

    It proves without a shadow of doubt an independent Scotland needs its own central bank that issues its own currency and we’ll be fine.

    It also shows without question taxes don’t fund government spending. The colonies knew this and used it to their advantage.

    They burned all the taxes collected to control inflation.

    The bank Of England does the very same thing today. Every night in the overnight interbank market when they add or drain the reserves to meet the overnight interest rate target.

  18. Tam Jardine says:

    O/T Ruth Davidson making a case for abolishing Westminster, Stormont, the Welsh Assembly and Holyrood and elevating the Queen to supreme ruler on Question Time: “I actually think she has probably done more than all elected politicians put together for the last 65 years”.

    What a loser mentality for a parliamentarian!

  19. Derek henry says:

    Look at the Goverment cash flow model from HM Treasury website

    http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200102/cmselect/cmpubacc/349/349ap02.htm

    HM Treasury are telling you themselves that taxes don’t fund goverment spending.

    Importantly what this arrangement of accounts tells you, along with the description of the way Reserve accounts work at the Bank of England, is that spending is disconnected from the debt management operation.

    All entities operating at the Bank of England have an interest free overdraft available during the day to absorb flow differentials, and this effectively means that they spend on their accounts and then back fill (or under fill) to the target account balance using standard asset and liability optimisation mechanisms.

    Notice how the so called tax revenues never make it into the deficit / Surplus box. Funny that !

    It also shows clearly spending comes first and always does reguardless of taxation.

  20. Indigo says:

    Anyone watching Question Time – that person who just asked about GERS, Kathy ariberti?, is that not Kathy Wikes, ex labour candidate and hitler youth tweeter?

  21. Clootie says:

    …just switched of QT. I couldn’t stand another minute!
    They must have contacted and secured the attendance of every Tory Party member in Scotland.

    The insult that the audience make up is representative of Scotland is too much.

    The BBC are mocking us openly now.

  22. Derek Henry says:

    Or What happened in Africa in the 1800’s, when the British established colonies there to grow crops.

    Let’s go back to the example of a new country with a new currency, which we’ll call “the crown,” where the government levies a property tax. Let’s assume the government levies this tax for the further purpose of raising an army, and offers jobs to soldiers who are paid in “crowns.” Suddenly, a lot of people who own property now need to get crowns, and many of them won’t want to get crowns directly from the government by serving as soldiers. So they start offering their goods and services for sale in exchange for the new crowns they need and want, hoping to get these crowns without having to join the army. Other people now see many things for sale they would like to have – chickens, corn, clothing and all kinds of services like haircuts, medical services and many other services.

    The sellers of these goods and services want to receive crowns to avoid having to join the army to get the money they need to pay their taxes. The fact that all these things are being offered for sale in exchange for crowns makes some other people join the army to get the money needed to buy some of those goods and services.

    In fact, prices will adjust until as many soldiers as the government wants are enticed to join the army. Because until that happens, there won’t be enough crowns spent by the government to allow the taxpayers to pay all of their taxes, and those needing the crowns, who don’t want to go into the army, will cut the prices of their goods and services as much as they have to in order to get them sold, or else throw in the towel and join the army themselves.

    The following is not merely a theoretical concept. It’s exactly what happened in Africa in the 1800’s, when the British established colonies there to grow crops. The British offered jobs to the local population, but none of them were interested in earning British coins. So the British placed a “hut tax” on all of their dwellings,
    payable only in British coins. Suddenly, the area was “monetized,” as everyone now needed British coins, and the local population started offering things for sale, as well as their labor, to get the needed coins. The British could then hire them and pay them in British coins to work the fields and grow their crops.

  23. Ken500 says:

    QT Unionists lying through their teeth.

    The Westminster tax on the Oil industry is 60/80%. That is why there has been downturn In revenues.

    The Unionists are total and utter liars.

    A Telegraph columnist?

  24. Indigo says:

    Omg how much screen time is that woman getting to stick the knife in?!
    Feeling sick watching her being given that platform on national tv, this whole programme is a stitch up.

  25. Joemcg says:

    Swinney has let this mob away with murder with Dimbleby joining in the onslaught.Screaming at the telly here.

  26. Ken500 says:

    What a shower. Unionists liars. The usual BBC nonsense.

    They voted NO. Vote No you get nothing.

    Imagine having a Telegraph Tory there.

  27. msean says:

    Are we sure this is Dundee? Thought they voted YES!

  28. Training Day says:

    Astonishing amount of English Tories in Scotland’s biggest Yes city tonight.

    And Stuart Cosgrove wants us to move on from ‘grievances’ against the BBC.

    Stuart Cosgrove receives a salary from the BBC.

  29. Conan the Librarian™ says:

    Worst Question Time ever BBC. Counted two token Scots in the audience.

  30. Clapper57 says:

    Been tuning in off and on tonight to BBC QT in Dundee and oh my God , was I tuning in at wrong times ?..Sensed a real hostility towards SNP .

    Thought Dundee was ‘Yes’ ? You’d never know it from this bunch .

    How many political plants were in the audience ?….And what the fuck was that pompous twat Tim Stanley doing on the panel !

    Assume Rennie was , as usual , spreading his sheeite .

    #AudienceAgenda

  31. Ken500 says:

    Ruth Davidson is a liar

    An enemy of the people

  32. Arabs for Independence says:

    Indigo @ 11:23

    You mean Kathy Wiles? I don’t know if it’s Kathy Aliberti who is one hateful ladie judging by her Facebook page

  33. gus1940 says:

    I couldn’t agree more with the comments above re the audience for tonight’s QT from Dundee.

    The hall seems to be packed with the Better Together Fan Club – it must just be another SNP lie that Dundee is YES City.

    Ruthie is being allowed to interrupt continuously and Dimbleby is making no attempt to shut her up. I think she is getting a wee bit carried away with herself and is starting to believe the bollocks the MSM are spouting about her and how wonderful and popular she is.

    As for the rectal sphincter from the Telegraph what else could we have expected – still it could be worse – it might have been that raving nut case Cockers.

    On another tack is it just my imagination or have the number of Scottish items on the 6pm BBC London News increased since the Scottish 6 hit the agenda.

    Meanwhile back at Misreporting Scotland good old PQ are off again on their obsession with Fatal Accident Inquiries.

  34. Ken500 says:

    QT The usual BBC Unionist nonsense. A total embarrassment. Doing themselves no favours.

  35. Sassenach says:

    QT – absolute disgrace (as I forecast earlier!). Panel unbalanced,audience definitely unbalanced, Dimbledum canñot help himself.

    Sickening.

  36. Valerie says:

    That was a God awful QT, Swinney there just to get a kicking.

    I can’t believe the blatant lies just flowing from Rennie and Ruth, absolutely vile arseholes, with no conscience.

  37. Indigo says:

    @arabsforindeoendence

    Yes, she’s obviously changed her name, it was definitely her, feel really quite upset after watching her, and the gall of her demanding an apology from the SNP?! I don’t recall her ever providing an apology for her own disgraceful behaviour.

    That audience was full of ex labour candidates

  38. Arbroath1320 says:

    Well BBCQT was interesting tonight folks … NOT!

    I don’t think I have ever heard a MORE English sounding audience in my life from a Scotland based programme.

    I must say I am not surprised at the behaviour of the FIVE unionists against the TWO indy supporters.

    For those querying the Kathy personage then there quite a few confirming she was indeed the ex Labour Nazi slanderer candidate!

    One final thing to add though is congratulations and welcome to Scotland to the beared gent who has recently moved up to Scotland from the Lake District. He spoke MORE sense than most of the biased unionist audience. Just wish there were MORE like him in the audience.

  39. Lucasaye says:

    Just watched bits of question time a total stitch up I know people who have been in the audience at previous QT the ones who ask the questions are all primed well before the show starts if you are going to ask a too controversial question you won’t be asked corrupt to the core typical bbc.

  40. Marcia says:

    A lot of SNP supporters in Dundee did try to get tickets for QT but none successful. From the comments on Twitter quite a lot of Labour apparatchiks in the North East area in the audience.

  41. carjamtic says:

    QT

    Every time the EBC choose the audience they get control the ‘debate’.

    I well remember the ‘live debates’ from Aberdeen/Edinburgh.

    All those regional Scottish accents FFS.

    #naimairnaimair

    Tick Tock

  42. John from Fife says:

    After reading all the articles on WOS about the £15B black hole why did Swinney not perform better on QT tonight. Don’t they read WOS. The SNP keep missing their chances and yes I agree it seemed a strange audience in the YES City.

  43. Joemcg says:

    Swinney just quoting percentages against a yoon ambush! Looked and sounded very weak. Not good enough John.

  44. Grouse Beater says:

    Ken: What a shower. Unionists liars. The usual BBC nonsense. They voted NO. Vote No you get nothing. Imagine having a Telegraph Tory there.

    None of the panel could resist avoiding a straight answer to a straight question. They were compelled to veer to SNP Bad. But not one had a real alternative to the SNP for protecting Scotland. It is all, stay in the Union and be blessed you get shafted every day. They really hate people exercising free will. It’s Westminster’s way or no way.

    As for junior high Tory Boy from the Telegraph – he mentions his Englishness not in modesty but in superiority – and carries out his duty preparing us for a privatised health service, and they applaud him! He’s the perfect example of why independence from that rabble has to happen.

    Then some English accented woman asks that we apologise to her because she and her liked saved us from a hell and kept us in the arms of Westminster.

    The

    They all argued about a ‘black hole’ without once admitting it might just be under Union rule.

  45. Ian Brotherhood says:

    Sounds like QT was a bit of a hoot!

    Pink Gins in the Green Room!

    Dimblewhatsit is a hero! Give him a knighthood, or something!

    Huzzah!

  46. yesindyref2 says:

    Glad I was too busy to watch the QT.

    Anyway, it’s worth storing all the comments about deficit made by the Unionists. As part of the UK Scotland can’t run up a deficit, the broad shoulders of the UK take care of it, it’s the UK’s deficit.

    But if the Unionists seriously want to take the deficit into account, then they also have to take Scotland’s share of the UK debt into account. There are two ways basically of splitting up the UK debt.

    First is a straight per capita, which takes no account of deficit. Absolutely zero account of it, historical deficit is meaningless. That would be the rUK’s preferred option for splittin up the national debt.

    But the second is to take into account the historical deficits (and surpluses) and resulting debts, and the SNP / SG reckoned to go back 30 years, which would have shown a very different position on the debt we’d get when Independent, even adding on the £15 billion deficit from this year and the whatever it was, £12 billion from last year. That would mean taking perhaps a half at most, probably a lot less of the per capita debt of the UK.

    So if Unionists get to you, don’t get mad just remind them that if they want to talk about “deficit”, then that means they support the SNP position of historical debt, which would see us with an astonishingly good debt to GDP ratio compared to the UK, and the ability to borrow £ tens of billions without getting as bad as the rUK.

    So thank the Unionists for their support for historical debt calculation at point of Independence!

  47. Early Ball says:

    Absolute class from Morag just before the news on Radio 5 telling John Pienaar a few home truths. Worth a listen when available.

  48. Dr Jim says:

    Well I watched it and the BBC this time have gone too far seeding the audience with Kathy Wiles the woman who was sacked for comparing YES supporting kids to the Hitler youth

    Braden Davie a failed Tory Candidate and several others who I know from their various parties as ex Candidates

    This is one for Stu to put together with all the people involved because there was a bunch of them

    Maybe they think the people of Scotland won’t find out who these folk are or have forgotten but this one is down to the BBC spin machine and I’ll put a tenner on it now Toodle oo the Noo isn’t a million miles away from this selection of audience

  49. Grouse Beater says:

    The one sane English voice appeared to me a minister.

    He’d ‘left the Lake District to come to Scotland because he felt Scotland was on a better path, a different, exciting way forward.’ He knew it wasn’t about money.

    I liked that. I liked him.

  50. Conan the Librarian™ says:

    I demand to know why there was no balance in the audience tonight. There should have been at least two failed Tory candidates too.

  51. Arabs for Independence says:

    Kathy Aliberti was bragging on Facebook that she was going to ask a question. If this is Kathy Wiles then that’s a disgrace that such a vile woman is on out tv screens hiding behind a new name. Is it the same person?

  52. NiallD says:

    QT was an utter disgrace. Where did that audience get picked from…the Tory conference is my guess.
    Not a Dundee accent in sight. Not an Indy/ SNP supporter in sight.
    Dimbleby interrupting John Swinney continually and Wee Ruthie shouting over him at every opportunity.
    Torygraph boy spouting shite. Jenny Marra wasting good air and Willie Rennie..good fu**ing grief.
    Patrick Harvie seemed to be the only voice of reasonable opposition.

    I’m hoarse shouting at the TV and the cats are quivering under the sofa( but that may have been wee Willies fault)

    SNP x 2

  53. call me dave says:

    Once more our Morag pops up on radio 5 to tear Ruthie and Rennie a new one and also wonders where BBC got the audience in Dundee.

    Too much for the BBC as they shut her down pronto because er… the news Morag! (BBC speak for F Off)

    They are wise to Morag now and obviously slotted her call in at 2 minutes to news time just in case.

    Good old auntie! Well done Morag 🙂

  54. StevieMcB says:

    5live discussing

    BBC Complaints use widley
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/

  55. K1 says:

    They all piled in, Dimbleby too…fucking raging, but trying to remember that this is a sure sign that we are winning the arguments on the ground, else this degree of blatant gerrymandering of the audience and sheer volume of SNP BAD doesn’t compute.

    That was serious propaganda we just got sprayed with. Davidson and Rennie coalition true to form, a real two hander.

    Naebdy was listening to Harvie, he’s all about Harvie.

    That was shocking to witness how far the establishment is prepared to go in its attempts to put Scotland back in their box.

    Let’s wipe them off their little jumped up pedestals created by their press, in May.

    SNP x 2 May 2016
    In EU June 2016
    SNP 2017

  56. Arbroath1320 says:

    Derek Henry says:

    Scotland is not the monopoly issuer of its own currency.

    London could if it wanted to turn off the tap of £’s flowing into Scotland any time it wanted and starve Scotland of the currency it needs to function.Then force austerity measures and neoliberal privatisations any day it chooses.

    Excuse my ignorance here Derek, well I AM the village idiot around these parts don’t you know. 😉

    Firstly you say Scotland is not the monopoly issuer of its own currency but it can still issue its own currency can’t it?

    I’m thinking in terms of the Scottish banks that issue their own bank notes. I know that for every issue of a Scottish bank note an equivalent amount must be placed within the Bank of England.

    Secondly if, as you hypothesise about London turning the tap off, in terms of money supply to Scotland whilst what you suggest would probably most likely happen there is something else that would, in my view, almost certainly happen … independence. I do not think for one second that the First Minister at the time that the money tap was turned off would realistically stand for such an action nor would the people of Scotland.

    Still, as I say, I’m just the village idiot so what the hell do I know? … not a great deal … apparently! 😀

  57. Clapper57 says:

    Re my previous comments , having now read others comments I see I was NOT tuning in at wrong times.

    So this is how the BBC are going to play in the lead up to Scottish elections, give audience tickets to failed candidates for Labour and UKOK non Scots and ANTI SNP Scot(s) at a Scottish QT and anti SNP English pompous Journalist twats.

    BBC fighting with BT all over again.

    NO FECKIN WAY WAS THAT AUDIENCE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE SCOTTISH POPULATION.

    YOU DO NOT GET FECKIN 56 SNP MP’S ELECTED IN THE LAST GE AND THEN HAVE THIS SHOWER OF SHEEITES REPRESENT AN AUDIENCE IN SCOTLAND.

    DO NOT KNOW WHO THEY FECKIN WERE, WHERE THE FECK THEY CAME FROM BUT I DO FECKIN KNOW THAT THEY WERE FOLLOWING A FECKIN ANTI SNP AGENDA.

  58. Ken500 says:

    Harvie calling for fossil free in the NE? Without an alternative. Just import it? Import fracked Gas?

    They are all full of wind. 5 minutes fame. Puff.

    SNP are having a Conference in Glasgow.

  59. Almannysbunnet says:

    Ref tonight’s question time. Before the general election the exact same tactics were used, hand picked audiences, everyone piling into the SNP like a pack of rabid hyenas egged on by the mad Murph. It resulted in 56 SNP being returned to Westminster. You would think they would make the connection but they haven’t learned a damn thing. It just stiffens the resolve of every fair minded person who wants Scotland to be free of these cackling wasters.
    They show zero respect for the Scottish electorate. If it wasn’t for the list vote they would be extinct.
    More determined than ever SNP x 2

  60. Stoker says:

    Loaded audience. Prolonged clapping shots of the same dirty dozen or so. Repeated interruptions and cackling from the tank commander and her 2 sidekicks, Dimblebum and Wee Willie Stinky.

    Hopeless performance from Swinney – great book keeper but not forceful enough in dealing with filthy lying interrupting tractors and far too much time given to a 14-year old snooty schoolboy who apparently works for a shitty English Tory rag.

    Did that QT really come from Dundee? The biggest load of political pish i’ve had the misfortune to witness since the DimJim chronicles. You can shove yer BBC up yer arses!
    Boycott the British Bullshit Corporation!

  61. Ian Brotherhood says:

    Can’t wait to see the wee clips which will duly emerge of the QT shenanigans…

    Sounds like they were making a concerted effort to get John Swinney to go primal – we’ve all seen glimpses of how animated he can become when confronted with gold-standard imbecility.

    Was Jenny Marra doing her wee smirk? That wee smirk? Must’ve taken her ages to perfect that, using three mirrors angled just-so…soo-perb!

    Aw come on, sumbdy gie’s some links tae the best bits!

    🙂

    (And by the way, when’s QT ever going to get around to Ardrossan/Saltcoats/Stevenston? Eh? Saltcoats Town Hall has just been done-up and it looks proper braw. Come on Dimbleby, get yer arse up here! Mither Lodge is jist up the road, they’ll see ye awricht the nicht…)

  62. Mojo16 says:

    Re QT – appalled by the ineffectual and embarrassing bickering -made Holyrood look really useless….. and apart from sterling effort from Patrick Harvie as the only adult in the playground, there was a total absence of factual information.

    Even Dimbleby didn’t bother to clarify that NHS Scotland has a completely different governance set up from England and Wales – and thus is still functioning as a public service, likewise the school system in Scotland which is still in the hands of local authorities unlike down south. So mission accomplished for BBC and Murdoch imperial masters – as the wider UK TV audience continue to drown in misinformation – I still can ‘t believe they spend all that time talking about the queen…

  63. Old Dearie says:

    Cannot believe that I was fooled into thinking QT might be worth watching. What a travesty. How they managed to find a Dundee based audience with that political affiliation is a mystery to me. Composed of Perthshire county folk, Dundee Uni Tory club and labour party members and a sprinkling of snp. Hardly any Scots accents to be heard. David Dimblebore joined in as a panellist too

    . I am really disappointed in John Swinney’s performance. The money man did not shoot down the GERS ducks at all. Nor did he deal with the other fiscal questions well. He looked like he didn’t want to be there and he sounded like it too. Not good enough John with an election looming. I know that it was a difficult ask with such a rigged panel and audience but it has to be better.

  64. Ken500 says:

    Honour among thieves. Obama is accusing Cameron (and France) for the mess in Libya. Getting the boot in before he departs. The ‘special’ Alliance passing the buck. Just unbelievable. They were all in it together.

  65. Faltdubh says:

    Dinnae worry, folks.

    I don´t even bother with QT. Was curious about tonight’s program as I’m from Angus and was planning on tuning in, but was a bit busy and missed it. Have heard fae pals about the accents, the failed candidates, and the loud Yoon audience.

    It didn’t sound like a representation of Dundee. 60% Yes voting Dundee.

    A couple o´ months from now. Those absolute nonentities like Marra, Davidson and wee Wullie will be licking their wounds after an absolute trouncing at the ballot box.

    The media may be a bogey, but the game certainly is nae. And roll on the first Thursday in May.

    Tonight’s programming should be more than enough inspiration for May. Let’s get out there, vote and show these cúnts we are not going away, and we will win the end.

  66. call me dave says:

    Basket case Scotland…says Lynda? Who are these Scots people..are they deluded she asks!

    £15Bn in debt (Psst! she obviously forgets the UK > £1.6Tn debt)

    I switched it off.

    Folks lets get out off the Yoonie madhouse.

    When I was younger the word on the street used to be once Scotland elects a majority of SNP MPs independence done deal!

    SNP x 2

  67. Ken500 says:

    Dimbleby sees Scotland from his yacht, the licence fee pays for it. The Royal yacht is tied up at Leith. A tourist ‘attraction’. The Royals and child mental health problems. Sanctioning and starving the vulnerable. Royals cost £400Million a year and are not impartial.

  68. Arbroath1320 says:

    Sorry for O/T here.

    As some folks may know the folks in the Independence camp at Holyrood were in court on Wednesday. The main case will be heard on March 24th the date Alex Salmond had said in lead up to indy ref he hoped would become Scottish independence day.

    There are plans, apparently, to use the Declaration of Arbroath as part of their defence on 24th. Nice of them to let me know in advance … NOT! 😀

    Iain Tough, a supporter of the independence camp who runs The Last Jacobite Facebook page, said if 100 people had entered the court on Wednesday, the union could have been ended.

    I read about this on Twitter yesterday and the folks were sort of up in arms cause only 80 people were permitted into the court. Suggestions have been made that a political statement was being made by only allowing the 80 people into the court room.

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/jamieross/indycamp-to-use-14th-century-document-in-attempt-to-declare#.ioyaRAOwl

    I am certainly no legal expert but I think this could be something to watch in the coming days and especially on March 24th.

    Without going into any deep argument about pro/anti UDI/referendum thingy might this, if it proves to work in favour of the “100” be a right old poke in the eye for Porky? 😀

    Just thinking here, I know I know but I’ve run out of my anti thinking pills tonight! 😀

    If the “100” are successful in their aims on March 24th what will wee Ruthie the Leetle Tankette driver, wee Kezia “ah’ve lost ma way”, wee Willie “who am I again?” do? 😀

    Should the “100” indeed be successful then there can no longer be a “Scottish” Labour/Tory or Lib dem party in Scotland cause as we all know they do not exist at present …. according to Electoral Commission … other than branch offices. Not only that but I think March 24th is pretty damned close to the closing date for candidates in the Scottish Holyrood elections. If the “100” are successful I am not certain Wee Ruthie etc will have the time to organise their parties registration with the Electoral Commission in time to keep all their candidates on the ballot papers.

    Oh happy days! 😀

  69. Dr Jim says:

    Well that’s my complaint in

    Do they really think Scotland is that daft
    For those who don’t know, wait till you see the list of audience names which I’m sure somebody’s going to collate

    Even I spotted 4 of them

  70. Ian Brotherhood says:

    According to Wikipedia, David Dimbleby is 77 years of age.

    If you were walking down the street with your family, friends, and some neighbours, minding your own business, and a 77-yr old dude suddenly dropped his breeks and bared his all at you would you:

    A: Ignore him, and shepherd your nearest and dearest to safety.

    B: Have pity on him and call Social Services to have him humanely dealt-with?

    C: Give him a hearty round of applause and ask him to perform the same act on national television so that everyone else can enjoy the spectacle?

    We are all being mooned by a septuagenarian Bullingdon boy who didn’t quite make the cut for the job he really coveted:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Dimbleby

  71. Derek Henry says:

    The reason Swinney was awful.

    Is he does not understand the accounting fact

    Goverment deficit = everyone elses savings to the penny.

  72. Dr Jim says:

    Patrick Harvie always gets an easy ride coz nobody takes him seriously and he knows it so he can say anything he likes most folk don’t listen except when he does his Scotty from Star Trek routine

    Wur burnin too much oil captain we need more renewable power captain
    Then that’s him done

  73. clan rossy says:

    This is not a free country our voice is not being heard . it is being brutally and totally strangled by the msm and the british media. it is time to stand up for ourselves and free ourselves of this oppressive regime.

  74. Clapper57 says:

    The game is well and truly up.

    Twitter intelligent peeps consensus of opinion is same opinion as ours on the BBC stitch up tonight via BBC Yoon political broadcast together with Yoon audience .

    This will backfire BIG time on Yoon parties at Holyrood.

    I am raging but revenge will be sweet , will wipe the smiles of Davidson, Rennie and Dugdale’s smarmy faces come May elections.

    #StichUp

    #YoonsNeverFeckinLearn

  75. Terry says:

    QT shocking. And we are paying for this guff as a nation. Loved what the Englishman said about moving to Dundee. He nailed the spirit of indyref.

    If the SNP were smart they’d be emailing all the members tomorrow saying “did you watch QT? Well dont get mad – get even. Come and join in canvassing.”

    I heard Morag on five live. Can’t she go on QT next time? Utterly brilliant. Mind you if the bbc keep up the pathetic audience selection I reckon the SNP should boycott it. Or stick to Alex or mairi black who cope well in these stitch up scenarios.

  76. James Barr Gardner says:

    BBCQT looking on the positive side I estimate that is worth at least another 3 or 4 thousand Scots joining the SNP Party.

    Roll on May SNP x 2 let’s show these placemen the door. As for Brexit I think the yoonies will vote for exit, hell mend them.

  77. Bob Mack says:

    The State Propoganda machine lives on in the former of the BBC.An audience seeded with ex Labour candidates and Tory voters. If you were not entirely convinced before about getting rid of this arm of the State,you should be now.

    Seriously,I wish a inge or two had been on that programme.They know more than the panel,including Swinney.

  78. Derek Henry says:

    @abroath

    London decides how many Scottish notes are spent.

    No they won’t turn off the tap but nobody thought the ECB would turn off the tap to Greece but they did.

    They don’t need to turn it off completely to cause destruction. Just slowing it down will do the same job.

    By becoming independent and having our own central bank that issues or own currency means that threat is removed completely.

  79. Stoker says:

    call me dave wrote:
    “£15Bn in debt (Psst! she obviously forgets the UK > £1.6Tn debt). I switched it off.”

    You switched off too early, some young lad did mention the £1.6Tn debt but Dimblebum very quickly moved on to another commenter.

    Also, the majority of that audience was bussed in. One of the audience even let it slip when he made a reference to “the way we do in England” or very similar words.

    Only in 21st Century Scotland can we have a political programme totally dominated by absolute arseholes who have never been elected into the positions they hold. A programme that even had me momentarily doubting how well the SNP have been governing us.

    All i can say is thank feck the vast majority of the Scottish electorate would not have been seen dead anywhere near that heap-o-bbc pish. Time we destroyed that foreign broadcaster.

    Boycott the British Bullshit Corporation!

    SNP x 2

    Goodnight Troops!

  80. Ken500 says:

    The BoE money tap. They have borrowed it from the Chinese and the Saudis. Westminster are worried about that tap being turned off. I,e. Osbourne’s recent warning of doom. They would need to sell off (government) bank shares to pay off the Chinese and the Saudis.

    If Scotland was Independent it could borrow money from anywhere,for the best deal. Or pay down the debt and be in surplus. That is what Westminster is worried about. Scotland not paying off their (the rest of the U.K) debt and doing better in the future. It would show Westminster governance up. There would be no excuses.

    Scotland has been milked dry for over 100 years. Westminster kept it secret under the Official Secrets Act. Thatcher – McCrone . They can’t any more. John Swinney does a really good job. Do not underestimate him. The way he balances the books is extraordinary.

  81. G says:

    QT is a joke. Produced by BBC Scotland, yet rarely makes it up here, and when it does it’s a stitch-up!

    This “you said it was once in a lifetime” line sticks in my craw. Are they really saying that if the Scottish people change their mind then they should be held in the union against their will? Whatever the Tory government/English electorate throws at us? We could have a country where 60% or more of the population wanted independence but aren’t allowed to vote for it. Are they really so utterly moronic that they can’t see how that would be unjust, and a breach of international human rights?

    I think they are well aware of the implications but are trying to draw the SNP on their position. Or maybe they genuinely believed/hoped it would be once in a lifetime. What a sad, deluded bunch.

    It won’t be long until the polls are averaging 51% and above for Yes, and this line will start to sound even more undemocratic.

  82. Grouse Beater says:

    Okay Grouse Beater, the documentary you’re producing will be transmitted in the UK, so, that’s one third Scottish, two thirds English. Understand?

    Erm, no. I’m confused. It’s set in Scotland, dealing in Scottish international matters, written by a Scot, and presented by a Scot. I don’t mind the UK broadcast but where does the English angle come in?

    Viewing figures, my boy. Who’s going to watch it in Scotland?

  83. Joemcg says:

    Did the last GE actually take place? Are there really 56 out of 59 SNP MPs? Then what was that QT programme about? Fekin DUNDEE as well! DUNDEE SCOTLAND! The BBC are just taking the pish now. Panel and audience members biased as fuck.

  84. Onwards says:

    @Old Dearie

    I think Swinney did ok – when he had a chance to speak. The problem was the constant interruptions from all angles. It must be frustrating as hell having to deal with that, and having to try and stay composed. Together with the planted audience members, idiotic replies and the sniping and accusations that have to go unanswered because of the format.

  85. indigo says:

    I’ve just submitted my complaint too Dr Jim, pasted below:

    Complaint title
    Disgraced politician presented as member of public

    Complaint description
    In 2014 a Labour Party candidate for the 2015 Westminster elections called Kathy Wiles compared my child to the Hitler Youth. Following uproar on social media, and subsequent press and broadcast media coverage, she resigned her candidacy. She appeared tonight posing as an ordinary member of the public under a new name Kathy Aribiati on Question Time. During this programme she was given several opportunities to ask questions of the panel. Given her links to the Labour Party, her previous candidacy and her subsequent disgrace as a candidate and forced resignation I was surprised to see her presented as an ordinary member of the public. From a personal point of view, as the parent of the child she attacked, I was physically shocked and very upset, I still am, that she was given this platform on national TV. Question Time describes itself as “Topical debate in which guests from the worlds of politics and the media answer questions posed by members of the public”. She is a politician, not a member of the public and for her to be presented as such without qualifying her question and statements with her political ties is extremely misleading.

  86. Michael McCabe says:

    I really am looking forward to the day we are free of the Unionist B st rd s Please come Soon.

  87. Iain More says:

    Jings they were churning out the Brit Nat Propaganda porn with a hint of Sado Masochism even in 1776!

    I don’t bother with QT ever, Sado Masochism isn’t my thing!

  88. Ken500 says:

    ECB did not turn off the tap to Greece. Merkel tried to but Greece got the loan it wanted. Greece needed to sort out it’s economy. They were not blameless in the decision that had previously been taken in Greece. The wealthy were not paying their taxes, they were borrowing too much and spending too much on redundant weaponry. Greece has a problem with Turkey. Conflicts.

  89. Arbroath1320 says:

    Thanks Derek.

    I agree we need our own central bank.

    If the Clydedale bank is still up for sale by their Australian owners then I think the Scottish government should buy it … for £1. 😉

    The S.G. owned bank should then be re-named the Scottish National Bank.

    Moves could also be initiated looking into a solely Scottish currency be it coinage like the Ryal or digital currency like the Digital Scotpound.

    http://www.thenational.scot/news/how-a-digital-scotpound-could-be-revolutionary-breakthrough.7486

  90. Ian Brotherhood says:

    Next Glasgow WOS get-together is in Waxy O’Connor’s, Sat March 26th, from 3.00 – closing time. (If you don’t know where or what or why ‘Waxy O’Connor’s’ is, please look it up – simples. Clue 1: it’s a pub! Clue 2: It’s in Glasgow!)

    Not just a ‘social’ – there’s business to be done too – please keep an eye on WOS O/T for unfolding details, but the place and time is confirmed, so if you do intend to join us, please click the link below, declare your interest, how many pals you’re taking, and that’s that:

    http://wingsoverscotland.com/off-topic/#comments

  91. Training Day says:

    Didn’t ye just love the way colonial Dimbleby ended the propagandist diatribe on behalf of the British state by reminding us how disputatious us colonised are?

    Ye’ll be here all night if there wasn’t a strong English chairman to keep you colonised in order.

  92. Derek Henry says:

    @Ken500

    Sorry Ken but you have no idea what you are talking about.

    This what happens when you think we still operate from a gold standard and a fixed exchange rate system. You are part of the problem.

    They have borrowed it from the Chinese and the Saudis is complete and utter tripe !

    All the debts the monopoly issuer of £’s have are paid in £’s. We never borrow in another currency.

    We continually read that nations with current account deficits (CAD) are living beyond their means and are being bailed out by foreign savings. This claim is particularly potent in the current US-China context.

    Hutton makes the same huge mistake here because he is trying to manage a floating exchange rate with a fixed exchange rate rules.

    This sort of claim never makes any sense. The simple fact is…

    A trade deficit can only occur if the foreign sector desires to accumulate financial (or other) assets denominated in the currency of issue of the country with the trade deficit.

    This desire leads the foreign country (whichever it is) to deprive their own citizens of the use of their own resources (goods and services) and net ship them to the country that has the trade defcit, which, in turn, enjoys a net benefit (imports greater than exports).

    A trade defcit means that real benefits (imports) exceed real costs (exports) for the nation in question.

    This is why the trade deficit signifies the willingness of the citizens to ‘finance’ the local currency saving desires of the foreign sector.

    Mainstream logic (foreigners finance our trade defcit) is nothing but complete and utter nonsesne.

    Subsequently, a trade defcicit will persist (expand and contract) as long as the foreign sector desires to accumulate local currency-denominated assets. In our case £’s

    If they lost that desire entirely, then the trade defict gets squeezed down to zero. This might be painful to a nation that has grown accustomed to enjoying the excess of imports over exports. It might also happen relatively quickly. But at least we should understand why it is happening.

    In a fixed exchange rate system, where the central bank has to manage its foreign currency reserves to maintain the agreed parity with other currencies, the balance of payments is a constraining influence on real GDP growth.

    That is one of the reasons why the Bretton Woods system broke down. External deficit nations were forced to suppress domestic demand via higher interest rates or fiscal austerity to both reduce imports and/or attract capital inflow to alleviate their balance of payments problems.

    The upshot was that these nations were prone to extended periods of mass unemployment, which was politically unsustainable.

    A nation in this situation could not run persistent external deficits and peg its currency because it would soon run out of the foreign currency reserves and/or gold stocks that were necessary under the system to defend its parity.

    However what Hutton and the fiscal conservatives can’t grasp is, in a flexible exchange rate system, no such constraint exists. Instead, movements in the exchange rate respond to balance of payments states.

    A currency-issuing government can always use that capacity to ensure that all real productive resources in the nation that are for sale in the currency of issue – including all idle labour – are fully employed. Without exception.

    The central bank has no necessary role to play in defending the currency and therefore has no particular need to amass foreign currency reserves as it did under the fixed exchange rate system.

    http://www.3spoken.co.uk/

    http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=32931

  93. call me dave says:

    Iain More:

    I don’t bother with QT ever, Sado Masochism isn’t my thing!
    —————————————————————
    Very wise: As the Beatles sung ‘I should have known better’ 🙂

    Before I forget Cameron came up to Scotland last week and said our SNHS was a shambles. Ruthie did not disagree!

    Here’s two current articles from the BBC no less from darn Sarf!
    There may be work to do in Scotland but thank you SG:

    https://archive.is/G0QD4

    https://archive.is/a5wm4

  94. Derek Henry says:

    @ ken500

    Here’s how it works in reality.

    And yes the ECB turned off the supply of Euros to the Greeks.

    Let’s suppose that the U.K. wanted to buy £1 billion worth of gas from Russia and Russia wanted to sell £1 billion worth of gas to the U.K. – how does Russia get paid?

    Russia has a reserve account at the Bank Of England ( BOE) a reserve account is nothing more than a fancy name for a current account. It’s the BOE so they call it a reserve account instead of a current account. To pay Russia, the BOE adds £1 billion to Russia’s current account at the BOE. It does this by changing the numbers in Russia’s current account up by £1 billion.

    The numbers don’t come from anywhere other than a computer keyboard. Russia then has some choices. It can do nothing and keep the £1 billion in its current account at the BOE, or it can buy U.K. Treasury bonds or buy any goods and services sold in £’s. That’s it.

    A U.K. Treasury Bond is nothing more than a fancy name for a savings account at the
    BOE. The buyer gives the BOE money, and gets it back later with interest. That’s what a savings account is – you give a bank money and you get it back later with interest.

    So let’s say Russia buys a one-year Treasury bond. All that happens is that the BOE subtracts £1 billion from Russia’s current account at the BOE, and adds £1 billion to Russia’s savings account at the BOE. And all that happens a year later when Russia’s one-year Treasury bond comes due is that the BOE removes this money from Russia’s savings account at the BOE
    (including interest) and adds it to Russia’s current account at the BOE. Then Carney waits for them to say what, if anything, they might want to do next. They are back to square one.

    If Russia wants anything else – cars, boats, real estate, other currencies – it has to buy them at market prices from a willing seller who wants £ deposits in return. And if Russia does buy something, the BOE will subtract that amount from Russia’s current account and add that amount to the current account of whomever Russia bought it all from.

    It is just numbers on a screen going back and foward between 2 reserve accounts. These are currency stocks and not currency flows and do not effect goverment spending. As soon as the treasury bond has matured then the £1billion debt has been paid. As soon as the £1billion is moved from the savings account to the current account with interest the debt is cleared.

    The Russian’s look for the best return. So what happens if Russia refuses to buy our Treasury bonds at current low-interest rates paid to them. Then they will buy real estate from a willing seller who wants £ deposits in return. And if Russia does buy something, the BOE will subtract that amount from Russia’s current account and add that amount to the current account of whomever Russia bought it all from. This is a currency flow into the real economy and pushes prices up.

    What happens if Russia says, “We don’t want to keep a current account at the BOE anymore. Pay us in gold or some other means of exchange!” They simply do not have this
    option under our current “fiat currency” system it is against the rules as they would
    have known when they sold the gas to the U.K. If they want something other than £’s, they have to buy it from a willing seller, just like the rest of us do when we spend our pounds.

    Summary:

    With a fiat currency when the UK imports goods it is a win win win for HM Treasury. They get £1billion worth of gas and in return Russia gets numbers on a computer screen in a reserve account at the BOE. That can only be spent on treasury bonds or goods and services and financial assets that are sold in £’s. The only downside is if they do buy financial assets like real estate then it pushes prices up for everyone else.

    General MacArthur had proclaimed after World War II that since Japan had lost the war, they would be required to send the U.S. 2 million cars a year and get nothing in return, the result would have been a major international uproar about U.S. exploitation of conquered enemies. They would have been accused of fostering a repeat of the aftermath of World War I, wherein the allies demanded reparations from Germany which were presumably so high and exploitive that they caused World War II.

    Well, MacArthur did not order that, yet for over 60 years, Japan has, in fact, been sending the US about 2 million cars per year, and the US have been sending them little or nothing in return. And, surprisingly, the Japanese think that this means they are winning the “trade war,” and the Republicans in the US think it means that they are losing it.

    The reality is the US have the cars, and they have the bank statement from the Fed showing which account the new Japanese dollars are in. The Japanese can’t cash them in as we no longer work from a gold standard it’s against the rules. The Japs can either buy more goods and services in dollars or buy interest bearing financial assets and that’s it.

    Same with China – They think that they are winning because they keep our stores full of their products and get nothing in return, apart from that bank statement from the BOE showing which account the new Chinese pounds are in. And fiscal Conservatives agree and think we are losing. It is madness on a grand scale.

    We are benefiting IMMENSELY from the trade deficit. The rest of the world has been sending us hundreds of billions of pounds worth of real goods and services in excess of what we send to them. They get to produce and export, and we get to import and consume. Is this an unsustainable imbalance that we need to fix? Why would we want to end it?

    As long as they want to send us goods and services without demanding any goods and services in return, why should we not be able to take them? There is no reason, apart from a complete misunderstanding of our monetary system by our leaders that has turned a massive real benefit into a nightmare of domestic unemployment.

    The reality is We are not dependent on China to buy our debt or in any way fund our spending. What’s really going on is our domestic currency creation is funding foreign savings. As shown when I bought the Asian car.

    The bank loan – has funded the Chinese desire to hold a £’S. deposit at the bank which we also call savings. Where’s the “foreign capital?” There isn’t any!

    The entire notion that the U.K. is somehow dependent on foreign capital is absurd.
    Instead, it’s the foreigners who are dependent on our domestic credit creation process to fund their desire to save £U.K. financial assets.

    It’s all a case of domestic credit funding foreign savings. We are not dependent on foreign savings for funding anything. Again, it’s our spreadsheet and if they want to save our £’s, they have to play in our sandbox.

  95. Ken500 says:

    Westminster are still trying to get Chinese and French money to build a nuclear station at Hinkley beside the sea. A total overpriced disaster. To get Chinese money to build HS2 – another total overpriced disaster. They are scared the money will dry up as China could be in monetary trouble – over extended lending. The Chinese are losing their money on their Stock market. Their revenues are falling, growth is stalling. They have a National (gov backed) central bank.

    It is easy for a government to set up a central bank. Scotland could easily do it. If it was Independent. Scotland has always been in credit. It has always lived within it’s means. Westminster has always taken the sutplus and spent it in London S/E or on illegal wars and banking fraud. Housing fraud in London and the Midlands. The banks would not have crashed in Scotland. Scotland has borrowed half as much pro rata than the rest of the U.K. It was living within it’s means.

  96. Liz g says:

    I thought John Swinney did very well insisting the Sovereignty of the Scottish People was paramount, although they pretty much shut him down after that,it was important to get it said.
    And he did so more than once,with no challange.
    Infact they seemed to not want to go there but to move on as if he hadn’t said it.
    They didn’t even try to slip in that Lizzie of the impartial mooth was sovereign when she was being discussed.

  97. Derek Henry says:

    @Abroath

    No problem.

    Some things to consider.

    When you pay taxes, you write a cheque (or by some other means make a transfer) to HMRC. Most from their pay slips.

    That’s as far as 97% of the population get. They have no idea what happens next.

    The reality is the next few steps have been taken out of education all together. The spotlight is never shone on the next steps which shows how your taxes end up in the reserves at the Bank Of England. No school or University text book explains this process.

    In fact most people do not even know what bank reserves are and what assets and liabilities are on the Bank Of England simple double entry book keeping spreadsheet. Why would they.

    Wouldn’t you have thought people would have went away to find out. Considering a large part of their wages are destroyed through taxes ? Nope, they just believed what they were told at 16.

    UK tokens are pounds, issued by the govt itself. All the £’s we all get are given to us by the government. It’s logically impossible that they would need your £’s when we all got our £’s from them in the first place.

    It is a tax driven currency which means the power of the state imposes a tax liability payable in its own currency which is sufficient to create a demand for the currency and give it value. Note that if one pays taxes or buys government bonds with actual cash, the government shreds it, clearly indicating operationally government has no use for revenue per se.

    By state currency we mean to indicate there is a government that taxes and has a monopoly of issue. A flexible exchange rate is commonly referred to as a ‘fiat’ currency, in other words a state-issued currency convertible only into itself (Keynes, 1930), as opposed to a fixed exchange rate policy such as a gold standard or other convertibility to any other commodity or currency (no currency boards, pegged currencies, or monetary unions) fixed by the state of issue.

    Given that a government of issue is not revenue constrained, taxation and bond sales obviously must have other purposes. As we have already seen, taxation (and the declaration of what suffices to settle the tax obligation) serves to create a demand for the government’s (otherwise worthless) currency.

    It can be viewed in three stages:

    1. The government imposes a tax liability payable in its currency of issue.

    2. Faced with this need of the state currency, tax payers offer goods and services including Labour for sale in exchange for the state currency in order to meet their tax liabilities or go to jail.

    3. The government issues its currency by spending in exchange for the goods and services it needs. In order to run a society.

    We will all be willing to sell sufficient goods and services to the government to obtain the funds needed to pay our tax liabilities and satisfy any desire to net save in that currency. In fact the only way we can all save, spend and invest is after the government has gave us the currency we need to do so.

    Note that, from inception, and as a point of logic, in order to actually collect taxes, the government, as the monopoly issuer of the state currency, must, logically, spend (or lend) first. Note that it would be logically impossible for the government to collect more than it spends (or run a budget surplus), unless it had already previously spent more than it collected (past budget deficits). Thus the normal budgetary stance to be expected under these institutional arrangements is a budget deficit.

    The government budget deficit is also “normal” in the sense that it is the mirror image of the non-Government ( everyone elses) surplus. This is not ideological or political it is the basic macroeconomic Bank Of England accounting identity.

    Government deficit = non-Government surplus where non-Government surplus includes both the domestic (or resident) private sector and the foreign (non-resident) sector, which includes foreign firms, households, and governments. It is therefore equivalent to the well known identity:

    Government budget deficit = domestic private sector surplus + foreign sector surplus

    Where the foreign sector surplus is another way of expressing the trade deficit. The government budget deficit permits both the domestic private sector and the foreign sector to ‘net save’ in the government’s currency. Only a domestic government budget deficit permits the domestic private sector and foreign sector to meet their combined desire to save in that currency.

    It can’t be any other way.

    Summary : Under a state money system with flexible exchange rates, the monetary system is tax-driven. The government, as issuer of the currency, is not revenue-constrained. Taxes do not finance spending, but taxation serves to create a notional demand for state money. Spending logically precedes tax collection, and total spending will normally exceed tax revenues. The government budget, from inception, will therefore normally be in deficit, which is the only way the rest of us can ‘net save’ state money.

  98. Ken500 says:

    Gordon Brown went to the Chinese to borrow at the banking crash. The Saudi have lent to the UK Gov paid bribes etc. Countries and banks interlend and borrow. Libor ( the world borrowing rate) is set in London. They is why London bankers could manipulate it. Banking is interdependent worldwide. So are stock markets. With restrictions on who can buy the shares. Governments sell gov bonds at a set rate to get in money. Other financial Institutions buy up the bonds to make a profit from other other countries at a fixed interest rate./term. Funds.

    UK/US are world bankers. Banking world wide can be unstable. People/countries put their money into US/UK banks because the money will be there when they come back, guaranteed by the governments.

  99. call me dave says:

    Just back to say that AE link (shown below) but posted above has changed since I saw it this morning:
    All the graphs have been removed for the preceding three months showing the 4 UK countries statistics.

    Scotland’s were the best by a good margin…wish I had posted it then, but now …all gone! Someone must have nobbled it 🙁

    https://archive.is/G0QD4

  100. Derek Henry says:

    @ Ken 500

    I’ve described the reality Ken.

    What does living within ones means mean ? There is no gold standard any more Ken ????

    Budget deficits = everyone elses savings to the penny.

    Budget surpluses = take away everyones savings to the penny.

    This is not a household budget. You can’t seem to recognise the huge difference between a currency user and a monopoly currency issuer.

    Answer these 2 simple questions Ken

    a) Why on earth would the monopoly issuer of £’s need your £’s before they can issue new £’s

    b) Why on earth would the monopoly issuer of £’s need to borrow £’s from anywhere before they can give out more £’s

    I’m the monopoly issuer of £’s.

    I’ve just given every adult in Scotland £100.

    I don’t need anyones £’s they are worthless to me as they are not backed by gold. If I need anymore £’s I will just create them from thin air on my keyboard.

    When I Spend all I do is credit accounts and get the goods and services I Need in return to run this beautiful wee country.

    If anyone gives me £’s I’ll burn them. I’ve decided to burn them to control inflation.

    I’ve decided to tax every person £150. By doing so I’m now running the right wing household budget surplus dream.

    Every person in Scotland recieved £100 and now have to pay £150 in taxes.This means nobody can now spend, save and invest. Infact they will have to borrow and get into debt to meet their tax liabilities. Looks like private debt is going to go through the roof.

    I’ve changed my mind I’ve decided to tax £100 instead.

    Yipee, I’m now running a balanced household budget.

    Oh dear, nobody in Scotland can still spend, save or invest. At least they are not going into debt.

    I’ve changed my mind again. I’ve now decided to tax £20.

    Jings. I’m now running a nightmare budget deficit it even sounds bad.

    However, the people of Scotland are now dancing in the streets. Each has £80 they can use to spend, save and invest however they choose.

    I’m fine their taxes are worthless to me. I’ve burned every £ I Recieved. Exactly like the Bank Of England does in the reserves every night.

    Oh how I Wish I ran a deficit of £15, 000, 000, 000.

    What I Learned when I was running this beautiful wee country was my deficit spending had to be large enough so that the people of Scotland could

    a) Pay their taxes in £’s

    b) Buy what goods and services their families need in £’s

    c) Save and invest in £’s

    The accounting fact goes like this.

    The government deficit = the private sectors savings to the penny.

    Financial savings by every individual and entity that is not part of the UK government. That includes households, businesses, residents and nonresidents, as well as foreign corporations and foreign central banks — all of which are casually called “the private sector. was increased by £80.

    Not an ounce of gold insight.

    If I ran Scotland it would be a great wee country. I would set up our own central bank that issued our own currency and burned it’s taxes exactly like the Bank Of England in the reserves every night.

    No doubt the fixed exchange rate zoomers would have something to say about that. But I would use a floating exchange rate that they have no idea how to as their text books are 50 years out of date.

    Ignore the propaganda and framing an independent Scotland would be a fantastic place to live. As long as those in charge knew how the simple double entry book keeping operates at a central bank.

  101. call me dave says:

    Geez! Found it but not archiving it in case I lose it again.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-35772221

  102. Ken500 says:

    Gold reserves and precious metals or commodities. Many countries keep there wealth in gold or other commodities. People in Asia, India, Middle Esst do not put their money in banks (to unsafe). They buy gold or precious metals bracelets etc. They deal in gold. Gold market/shops are everywhere.That is why gold prices keep on rising.

  103. Derek Henry says:

    @ken500

    The chinese and saudis have £billions sitting in their reserve accounts at the BOE.

    They got there by selling us stuff. I’ve explained it clearly above.

    It is not in Yuan it is in £’s

    All Gordon Brown did was ask the chinese to move their £’s they had in their current accounts( reserve accounts) held at the BOE to their saving accounts ( goverment bond) held at the BOE.

    This is what is called borrowing it is a smoke and mirror con trick

    Job done reserves are currency stocks not flows.

    When it came to paying them back what did they do ?

    They moved it back again into their current account from their saving account.

    Debt paid.

  104. Stoker says:

    Can’t sleep, QT playing on my mind big time.

    @ call me dave
    Managed to get it archived with the graphs, after a few attempts.
    http://archive.is/aaZB9

  105. Derek Henry says:

    @ ken500

    Please read these Ken.

    We left the gold standard and fixed exchange rates decades ago.

    http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?s=deficit+spending

    Deficit spending 101 – Part 1

    Deficit spending 101 – Part 2

    Deficit spending 101 – Part 3

    Then we can debate it further.

    I’ll be delighted to answer any questions you have.

    I’m going to the meet at waxys pub.

    As i’m trying to get a programme made on channel 4. I want to talk about it.

  106. Derek Henry says:

    @ ken 500

    Once you can answer these 2 questions then you are nearly there to getting it.

    Answer these 2 simple questions Ken

    a) Why on earth would the monopoly issuer of £’s need your £’s before they can issue new £’s

    b) Why on earth would the monopoly issuer of £’s need to borrow £’s from anywhere before they can give out more £’s

    Have a go at them.

  107. Ken500 says:

    China is in surplus. It was buying up lots of gold reserves. In it’s public bank. The stock market has been falling. The Chinese have been losing their savings speculating on the stock market. Germany is in surplus. It’s reserves contributions are in the ECB central bank. That is why Germany is so concerned about lending in the Eurozone. It contributes the highest amount pro rata. It has the most to lose.

    Many countries do not deal in currency they deal in gold, because their banks are unstable. They barter in commodities. £ or Euros or dollars are just a form of exchange for convenience.Scotland would do well because it has large resources (pro rata). Inspiring people and invests in education and health. Scottish invention shaped the modern world. The first country in the world to have (church) tertiary education, ‘The ‘Declaration at Arbroath’. The Scottish Enlightenment.

  108. Ken500 says:

    I don’t know what you are talking about.

    Have you never been abroad and seen their gold/commodity markets? They don’t issue money or buy and sell money. They restrict the buying and selling of their currencies/ commodities. A majority of counties. They manage.

  109. Ken500 says:

    The ECB didn’t turn off euros to the Greeks. Merkel wanted too but the Greeks got the long term loan they wanted/needed. The Greek PM doesn’t want migrants.

  110. Derek Henry says:

    China is not in surplus !!!

    It’s trade balance maybe but it is a pegged currency Ken huge difference.

    Deficit spending in China has been running over 20% per year when you include state lending to state owned enterprises, local governments, and other entities where repayment isn’t a factor, making that lending, for all practical purposes, pretty much the same as deficit spending.

    The only time the US deficit spending got that high, with pretty much the same growth rates, was during World War II. And while considered high, China’s inflation seems to have peaked at about 6%, a far cry form hyper inflation.

    Japan has been running huge budget deficits for 20 years with a debt to GDP ratio over 200% to try and inflate.

    The reason China and Russia and India are buying gold reserves is for one reason and one reason only.

    To get the $’s they hold out of the reserve accounts held at the FED.

    They have finally woken up to the fact that having $trillions in the FED only helps the yanks fund their military spending and fiscal deficits.

    I’ve explained why exports are a cost and imports are a benefit above. It’s also why they are all selling their oil and gas in roubles and yuan now instead of $.

    Real life is very simple. These nutters confuse it by trying to manage a floating exchange rates with fixed exchange rate rules.

    We can define three trade balance outcomes:

    The trade balance is in deficit if the local currency value of its exports is less than the local currency value of its import spending.

    The trade balance is in surplus if the local currency value of its exports is greater than the local currency value of its import spending.

    The trade balance is in balance if the local currency value of its exports is equal to the local currency value of its import spending.

    Take UK, as an example. A trade deficit for the UK means that increasing quantities of UK POUNDS are being accumulated by non-UK residents. In return, the non-UK residents have supplied goods and services (imports) to UK residents.

    Clearly, the foreigners have allowed the UK to run a trade deficit because they preferred to accumulate financial assets denominated in UK POUNDS. The alternative would have been to spend the UK POUNDS they acquired through their exports to buy UK goods and services (that is, to buy UK imports).

    Had the foreigners used their export income, which is denominated in £’s to purchase other goods and services from the UK, then there would have been a trade balance.

    A trade deficit thus means that the foreigners are increasing their nominal savings (which in this case manifests as UK denominated financial assets).

    Which is why the winners of nearly every war fought, get the losers to send them stuff.

  111. Derek Henry says:

    @ Ken500

    Could Greece sue the ECB?

    Greece and the Art of Liquidity

    http://www.3spoken.co.uk/search/label/greek

  112. Derek Henry says:

    Answer these 2 simple questions Ken

    a) Why on earth would the monopoly issuer of £’s need your £’s before they can issue new £’s

    b) Why on earth would the monopoly issuer of £’s need to borrow £’s from anywhere before they can give out more £’s

    Have a go at them.

    Why you avoiding them ?

  113. K1 says:

    Was just about to post that archived link call me dave, so thanks Stoker….

    Pretty ruffled still by QT masel….Just unbefuckinglievable. That was insanity….really have no time for anyone thinking this is in any way shape or form on John Swinney.

    They totally ambushed him, a set up from start to finish, and if that prick dimbleby thinks we didn’t see him and his phoney fucking ‘i’m jist a wee impartial presenter’ shtick flashing red white and blue throughout the entire charade then he’s an even bigger prick and a totally deluded wanker into the bargain.

    Ah need tae sleep now, hard to do as I’m doubly raged: out and en.

  114. Ken500 says:

    Many countries in Africa are poorer because the West used up their resources and people.Colonised. It is only when people have control of their own countries that can be stopped. International Law.

    War culls people. Medical science culls people. The Pill/free Contraception. It wasn’t Thatcher who changed Britain. It was the Pill/free contraception, that culled the population. It costs £250,000 to bring up a child. It was spent on other things. Making people have more stuff. Shopping and football (sport). The Opium of the people. Top leisure pursuits.

    Chinese pay for better (private) Healthcare/ Education. There is limited University provision. Not enough to go around. They go all over the world for higher education.

  115. Derek Henry says:

    Read this Ken

    http://www.3spoken.co.uk/2016/02/the-limits-of-understanding-of-mmt.html

    And these from Stephanie Kelton – Bernie sanders economic advisor.

    What happens when governments tighten their belts in a closed economy.

    http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2011/05/what-happens-when-government-tightens-2.html

    What happens when governments tighten their belts in an open economy.

    http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2011/06/what-happens-when-government-tightens.html

    Then you’ll get it.

    I’m away to my bed I’ve work in the morning.

  116. Ken500 says:

    Why would Greece sue the ECB they wanted more money. A long term loan. They got it.

    Why do the wealthy Greeks not pay their taxes? Why did they take their money out of Greece to other countries making their own economy worse?

    Why was the Greece gov buying too much redundant weaponry (from Germany) because of Turkey when they are in NATO?

    Not answering your question because I don’t understand them.

  117. Az says:

    Wow that is hilarious and educational similtaneously!! Thank you kindly Rev Stu! A real keeper.

  118. The Brutish Empah is the biggest Charity Foundation the world has never seen.

  119. Proud Cybernat says:

    Good wee historical reminder there, Rev. Does this mean that the US economy is now a basket case?

  120. louis.b.argyll says:

    The ‘markets’ have failed the planet.

    There is a messy cover-up underway to blame the workers.

    We need to come up with something new.

  121. louis.b.argyll says:

    We.’allow’ ‘our’ governments to ‘administer’ our wealth.

    The whole global system has turned that shared wealth into debt.

    Despite huge technological advances, our productivity is creamed off before we see any benefit.

  122. ScottieDog says:

    We are never got got win an arm wrestle with the UK about the deficit. That’s because we are having the wrong argument.
    Swinney is a mainstream politician with very little wriggle room.

    The SNP should change the point of contact and alter the fight. It’s looking like labour are yet again flipping their stance on deficits with John McDonnell giving in to the mainstream media with his ‘responsible’ fiscal policy.

    As Derek Henry has posted we HAVE to stop thinking about using the pound and getting into a tug of war over deficits. We need to start educating the population as to why deficits are necessary and normal.
    The USA has run continual deficits since the end of WW2 save for bill clinton’s surplus which led to the rio ate debt bubble and subsequent sub prime crisis in 2008.

    Have already posted this on here but people really need to watch this…

    youtu.be/qBpm5sVmGYc

  123. ian says:

    As history clearly shows one thing England does’nt do well is run other countrys affairs.

  124. ScottieDog says:

    @Ken500
    I would never stick up for the actions of precious corrupt green govts, however the Greek people now have to be governed by a regime they can’t elect or change – the troika.

    The troika buy into the neo-liberal economic myths which is destroying Greece.

    It’s a simple understanding that is required in macroeconomics – Spending IS income.
    You take money out of pockets, you have no economic demand, you have no economy. Unemployment happens and it spirals downward.

  125. ScottieDog says:

    Argghh damn autocorrect!
    Corrupt “Greek” not “Green”

  126. Indylass says:

    Re QT don’t get mad get Even. Campaign, leaflet or whatever to encourage more people on board and let’s show them in May.

  127. Jack Murphy says:

    indigo said at 12:55 am:-
    “I’ve just submitted my complaint too Dr Jim, pasted below:
    Complaint title
    Disgraced politician presented as member of public.

    Complaint description
    In 2014 a Labour Party candidate for the 2015 Westminster elections called Kathy Wiles compared my child to the Hitler Youth…………………………………………………….”

    I recognised her in the ‘member of the public audience’ straight away—here’s a Scotsman Archived Link with an old photo of her:-

    http://archive.is/GjUY9

  128. Derick fae Yell says:

    “It is alarming and nauseating to see Mr Gandhi, a seditious Middle Temple lawyer, now posing as a fakir of a type well known in the east, striding half naked up the steps of the viceregal palace, while he is still organising and conducting a campaign of civil disobedience, to parlay on equal terms with the representative of the Emperor-King.”

    Winston Churchhill – Commenting on Gandhi’s meeting with the Viceroy of India, 1931

  129. Peter Macbeastie says:

    I haven’t watched QT in years now, not since before the referendum.

    But I hear all about it, because some of my friends are apparently masochists and still watch it just to see if it still pisses them off as much as it used to.

    On the strength of what I’ve seen since last night I’d suggest it’s still at the same level of unionist biased propagandist as it always has been because the level of anger spilling out of my Facebook and Twitter feeds is approaching ‘get the pitchforks and storm Pacific Quay’ state. One of my indy friends has already suggested, to many, many ‘yeah, good idea’ responses, of restarting the BBC Bias protests. They haven’t changed their approach; why should we let them do this without challenge?

    The BBC, it is evident, still thinks it can simply deny it is anything other than impartial and dismiss all complaints as unfair. I’m not bothering complaining about the broadcast as I have done so before and there’s no doubt in my mind that ‘we have reviewed the footage and found no evidence of the bias you describe.’

    Because that’s pretty much the stock response.

  130. Anagach says:

    It would not surprise me if they found one for India saying how much poorer it would be without all its resources being taken by the British Empire.

  131. george says:

    http://www.nls.uk/learning-zone/politics-and-society/american-political-history/loyalists

    was given this link earlier. some more info on the american loyalists’ (most of whom fled north to canada) and their beliefs. interesting to note how poorly they were treated by britain afterwards.

  132. Scott Borthwick says:

    I suspect that, if Common Sense had been required reading in Scottish schools, we would have been an independent republic long ago.

    It still should be.

  133. @Ken500

    I data mined World Bank, IMF and Eurostat data for GDP PPP pc (2014), which as you know, is the most readily available figure which is reasonably close to per capita purchasing power parity potential (‘potential’ because differing socio-economic domestic policies can greatly vary tax rate, tax progressiveness and distribution of revenue within a country).

    Also dug out Current National Balance Sheet data in percentage of GDP terms (Deficit or Surplus in more common parlance).

    This was done for as many European countries as possible. I found data for 40 countries 4, Kosovo, Luxembourg, Malta and Switzerland did not have GDP PPP data for 2014. Two others I discounted because IMV they are at best borderline European Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan geographically and geopolitically.

    I also had a quick look for Balance of Trade figures, found data for 2011 but several countries ‘missing’ from that data set. However, by luck the top ten GDP PPP pc and bottom ten did have results. That’ll need to do for now may look for more recent and complete data later if I have time.

    Here is the output generated, a simple scatter plot of GDP PPP pc v Current Balance Sheet as a % of GDP.

    https://www.dropbox.com/s/mq6kxivkczi7had/gdp%20v%20deficit%20Europe.jpg?dl=0

    Notes:

    The UK’s GDP PPP pc is not high enough to get into the top Ten.
    It is in the Middle 20.

    I calculated the average GDP PPP pc and corresponding national balance sheet averages for the Top Ten, Middle 20 and Bottom Ten presented in a small table so folk can see the average figures at three points.

    Despite expecting a lot of noise on the Scatter Plot, because Governments are typically at different points of correction on the deficit-surplus cycle, there is still a significant and discernable trend, namely Countries with increasingly negative deficits have lower GDP PPP pc than those with increasingly positive surpluses.

    All of the Top Ten for GDP PPP pc have surpluses rather than deficits except for one marginally in deficit (Finland). If I had been able to include Switzerland then all of the top ten would be in surplus.

    For the lowest 10 GDP PPP pc European sovereign states all of them were in deficit.

    Despite the Balance of Trade data being incomplete ans a little dated, the Top Ten and Bottom Ten were available so I am able to say that all of the Top Ten for GDP PPP pc had a positive trade balance whereas all of the Bottom Ten had a negative trade balance in 2011. May dig out more recent and complete BoT data later when I have more time.

    Hope it is clear that negative borrowing and trade numbers are not a good thing, at least in terms of standard of living.

  134. Couple of PS’s UK balance of trade deficit is miles more than anyone else’s in Europe at nearly -£200 BILLION.

    The UK GDP PPP pc is buoyed up by its large, if precarious financial services sector but manufacturing, once the UK’s GDP mainstay, and one which would have been a somewhat safer sector, is now just about the worst in Europe, certainly in terms of investment as can be seen from the following two charts I posted some weeks ago:

    http://i51.photobucket.com/albums/f390/chicmac/WeDontBashMetal.jpg

  135. Sorry that should have been $200 billion UK trade deficit.
    OECD data 2014, -199.3 billion dollars.

  136. bugsbunny says:

    I remember reading somewhere that a third of American males over 16 and under 45 joined in Rebellion against the Crown, a third fought for the Crown and a third sat on their hands waiting to see the outcome. I wonder if there was universal male suffrage in those days, along with a secret ballot, would they have voted for freedom, or would they have voted for the “security” of Mother Englands teat?

    Stephen.

  137. Daisy says:

    Please give my blog a read 🙂

    SNP Spring Conference: The Call of Hope
    “Hope – the recipe to a political movement.” https://daisycollinsblog.wordpress.com/2016/03/13/snp-spring-conference-the-call-of-hope



Comment - new users please read this page first for commenting rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use the live preview box. Include paragraph breaks or I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.




↑ Top