On 18/05/2013 12:01, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Nightjar wrote:
Scotland is still being subsidised to the tune of more than £3,000 per
person. Even if Salmond got his claim to geographical oil revenues,
which he won't, it would be more than £2,000 a head. In addition much of
the 'UK' spending is in things like unemployment and healthcare, which,
as I pointed out, Scotland has a disproportionate need for. Huge's
statement is correct.

You can make up any figures you like. To get an accurate picture you'd
also have to take into account all state controlled spending and see just
where it goes. Just as an example, the recent spending on the Olympics.
How much of that went directly to Scotland? Employed Scottish workers or
companies?

117 Scottish companies won 158 contracts for the Olympics, the two
largest being worth £57 million in total. Around £3 million was
contributed to cultural events in Scotland in connection with the Olympics.

And things like the proposed HS2. Again, billions being spent.
Paid for by all in the country, but of no benefit to the Scots - or Welsh
or Irish.

If the plans are followed through completely, Scotland will get HS2,
just not in the first stage.

In other words, there's a great deal more to it than simple taxation and
direct government spending.

Indeed, but however you work it out, the net result is still that
Scotland receives more than it gives, which would be a problem for a
truly independent Scotland.

Colin Bignell