People have never had so much information at their fingertips. I worked out that if an independent Scotland spent as much money on defence as Germany we would save around £1.5 billion a year.

   http://www.yesscotland.net/answers/what-will-happen-benefits-and-social-security-independent-scotland

From what I read about pensions any guarantee is that people ALREADY retired will have their pensions covered, but this is not a blank cheque, this guarantee does not cover those yet to retire, and apparently will cause havoc with private pensions due to current EU rules about cross border pensions.

As it says, long term spending will be determined by elected governments. An SNP led yes campaign can't put other political parties manifestos into stone.

The reason I threw in the military spending is to show that virtually everything in this regard would be up for grabs. Germany, the Swiss, Scandanavians all spend much less than us on defence (by a % of gdp and per head) as an example. A country of 5 million can't be a world policeman. I like that. Some don't. The point is that (whatever shape the political landscape takes by 2016) parties will put forward their proposals how an independent Scotland should be run. Comaparable defence spending to virtually all similar nations would allow parties to pledge higher benefits spending, a lowering of a certain tax, or whatever their ideologies and vision dictates that £1.5bn should be spent on.

The result will be that if people democratically elect a government which pledges benefits in line with or above what the rUK spends then that is what the people of Scotland will get..... if politicians fulfil their manifesto pledges of course!

It's actually worse that that stewart, the demographics are such that Scotland will more age "top heavy" than the rest of the UK which is why, given state pension is not from a fund but funded by current tax payers, they are looking at doubling immigration to Scotland to 24,000 a year to get the working age people to cover the shortfall.

Not sure if this is in any "yes" adverts, leaflets or friendly doorstop chats though...

Just Checking
Just Checking 31 Aug 14 15:40 Joined: 25 Jun 06 | Topic/replies: 14,933 | Blogger: Just Checking's blog
From what I read about pensions any guarantee is that people ALREADY retired will have their pensions covered, but this is not a blank cheque



tewarty b 31 Aug 14 15:50 Joined: 02 Aug 02 | Topic/replies: 7,522 | Blogger: stewarty b's blog
Pensions? Regarding State Pension, DWP have replied IN WRITING to many enquirers, confirming that the SP will continue to be paid as normal to recipients in Scotland in the event of Scotland becoming independent. This is unarguable, and anyone who claims otherwise is quite simply lying.

stewarty, JC and I appear to be in agreement here. What don't you understand?

Alias, how independent would Scotland REALLY be if we vote yes?

Would you prefer Brussels to rule us?

They'd be a damn sight worse than Westminster, I can assure you!

They'd be a damn sight worse than Westminster, I can assure you!

According to your BT campaign, we won't be in the EU anyway! What's your problem?

*ruled by Europe

I'll give it a miss Alias but you enjoy yourself at it.

I'll be nowhere near it. In fact I'll be surprised if the polis don't get it stopped.

Meanwhile, you being such a fair minded person, when are you going to condemn the threats to Alex Salmond, akabula? A bit worse than a single egg being thrown methinks.

SNP leader Alex Salmond has urged people to steer clear of unionist rallies after Better Together accused the Yes campaign of turning "sinister".


Labour MP Jim Murphy was pelted with eggs and said he has been threatened with violence during his 100 Towns in 100 Days tour.

Today, Mr Murphy accepted that Mr Salmond has not personally orchestrated the attacks, but the SNP leader has spoken out to urge Yes supporters to ignore the unionists in future.

"I condemn any egg throwing or any intimidation from any side," Mr Salmond told Sky News' Murnaghan show.

"Somebody was convicted, of course, of online threats against me. Somebody thought his car should be a political weapon. There was a woman, a Yes campaigner, assaulted on the streets of Glasgow.

"I don't hold press conferences accusing Mr Murphy of orchestrating these events, because I know that would be ridiculous to do so.

"So let me be absolutely clear to people watching, if Mr Murphy comes balling and shouting in a street corner near you any time soon keep doing your shopping, keep doing what you were doing.

stewarty, are you deliberately trying to change the subject after discovering that you falsely accused me of lying yesterday over pensions? Here's ANOTHER two links for you, and there are plenty of others to back them up. Maybe you think DWP are liars too of course.

http://newsnetscotland.com/index.php/scottish-economy/8083-whitehall-department-confirms-state-pension-safe-after-independence

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/uk-mp-state-pensions-would-be-paid-after-yes-vote-1-3400799


Incidentally, in wrongly accusing me of lying, by inference you also accuse Just Checking. I'll accept your apology if and when it is provided.

Still no comment on the NHS story in the Sunday Herald from you or any other Nopes btw.

As for Just Checking, he pointed out the real truth....


From what I read about pensions any guarantee is that people ALREADY retired will have their pensions covered, but this is not a blank cheque, this guarantee does not cover those yet to retire, and apparently will cause havoc with private pensions due to current EU rules about cross border pensions.

I told the truth about pensions (the initial subject), as did JC, but you in your warped thought process have decided to maintain that I'm a liar, in spite of copious evidence to the contrary. Then you expect me to engage with you in different subjects, without the decency of apology from you. I'm beginning to think you might be the egg throwing agent provocateur, such is your duplicity.

I told the truth about pensions (the initial subject), as did JC


That's poppyc0ck. Read my 13:20 post again.

I didn't ever claim anything different. It's exactly the same thing as JC posted.


By the way, you haven't apologised for this either:

You have a hatred of England imo Remember that offering?

A pathetic, worthless jibe from someone who has no real argument or strategy except to obfuscate and blankly accuse others of lying, when anyone who reads this thread can patently see that your accusation is consummate rubbish. For JC to be in agreement with me is remarkable in itself, but I'll give him credit for at least being truthful. You stewarty, have left yourself with nowhere to go, except of course your Orange parade on 17th. Say Hello to Mr Falange won't you?

Sarcasm.



There will be no more smiley faces from you come the 18th. (NAP) (FIVE STARS)

Oh, we'd be skint!


http://www.businessforscotland.co.uk/independent-scotland-could-be-aaa-rated-standard-poors/

It's a MOVEMENT


I'm sure you've visited a few dance halls in your time Alias. Remember the 'twist?'


That was also a movement. Sadly not available anymore.

In the long term, issues such as pension levels will be determined by a democratically elected government.

The questions are -

whether or not you would prefer these decisions to be taken in Scotland or at Westminster with Scotland remaining in the UK;

and

could an independent Scotland afford to pay the same or (even higher) pension as rUK?

I am aware of the issues about demographics but all things considered I see no reason why we couldn't afford it and I'd rather the power was here to take the decisions.

A written in stone guarantee on pension levels is impossible. What you are asking for is the yes campaign to write manifestos for all current and potential political parties into the next 50 years and then make them stick to it. Voting no because you don't have some sort of guarantee on pensions makes no sense, as nobody could say what British pensions will look like in 20 or 40 years either.

I mentioned defence spending the other day and it is reported today that proposed spending in an independent Scotland would be £2.5bn which per head and as a % of GDP is higher than most European countries including Germany.

A former NATO commander and Ruth Davidson have blasted the proposals in the White Paper; both clearly unaware that elections will take place with defence plans put forward by each party being one of the things for people to consider when casting their vote.... exactly the same as happens now within the UK.

Come 2016 Davidson can explain why she feels we need to spend UK levels of 2.3%, 2.4% of GDP on defence aka attack, rather than an amount comparable to other European nations that have a) not been invaded lately, and co-incidentally b) don't feel the need to get as involved in wars. She can explain what will be sacrificed to pay for it, or what taxes will rise. People will then vote accordingly.

Independence is a movement Stewart. A movement that devolution was to kill stone dead and we can see how that turned out. A no vote will not kill it either.

@John we are being asked to believe that everything will be better in an independent Scotland with no real figures to back it up.
Every single question that has been asked on here or directly to Salmond either on tv or in the press is met with the same answer.
Taxes lower, spending on the nhs higher and etc etc. No matter what some things must suffer, it can't all be good news.
My thoughts are that in reality nobody knows for sure what will happen and we are being asked to take a massive gamble.
A massive gamble on not just our own futures but that of subsequent generations. Too big a risk for me.

BETTER TOGETHER