Thanks to Dottie again for this one:
From What can Scotland teach Andy Burnham about devolution? Scotland’s economy has outperformed its neighbours in Future Economy Scotland yesterday, the above and:
and:
and my favourite:
and:
Taken together, the evidence is difficult to dismiss. Whether measured by GDP, productivity, earnings, disposable income or the prevalence of low pay, Scotland has generally outperformed the UK since devolution. Across most of these measures, it sits at or near the top of the UK’s league table.
None of this proves that devolution itself caused these stronger outcomes. Scotland’s economy differs from England’s in important ways, and many factors influence economic performance. But it does discredit the claim that devolution has actively undermined performance. If devolving power inevitably weakened growth, Scotland would not consistently appear near the top of the UK’s economic rankings.
‘None of this proves that devolution itself caused these stronger outcomes?’
So, what could it be then. Here’s a thought – ‘SNP manages economy better than other parties do’
No media outlet is ever going to admit to that but making the case for it:
If Scotland had grown slower than other parts would the Scottish Government not have been blamed for that?
Yes, almost certainly. In politics, governing parties are routinely blamed (or credited) for economic outcomes regardless of the extent of their actual control. This is true across the UK, devolved nations, and most democracies. If Scotland had underperformed the UK or peer regions more clearly, the SNP would face heavy criticism from Unionist parties, media outlets, and commentators.
So, Scotland’s relative outperformance in post-2008 productivity and some long-term per head metrics, plus other success and better social indicators (e.g., child poverty), suggests devolved powers have been used competently in areas under control. Progressive policies have not destroyed growth and may have helped in equity/productivity channels. This counters the strongest anti-devolution claims.
Source: https://www.futureeconomy.scot/posts/554-what-can-scotland-teach-andy-burnham-about-devolution
Discover more from The 'Unstoppable' Talking-up Scotland
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
The 'Unstoppable' Talking-up Scotland 
Instead the media such as the BBC and STV make up SNP bad stories as well as the British nationalist propaganda sheets whose front pages are an SNP very very bad fest every damn day. If it wasn’t for those dark ops and their dodgy pals, Scotland would have a huge majority of SNP MP’s, and even more SNP MSP’s.
LikeLike
Majority support SNP and Independence. Minority vote for losers like Farague.
Keep on voting SNP and Independence. Scotland will be better off and more prosperous.
LikeLike
Farague, I like it.
Sore all over
LikeLike
The UK hoax state has been a basket case economy for centuries, heavily indebted even before its dubious ‘creation’. A far better comparison would be between Scotland and similar neighbouring independent states.
Here is such an evaluation from a couple of years back which indicates the true ‘cost of colonialism’ (i.e. ‘the so-called ‘union’) for Scots to be £150+ billion per annum:
LikeLiked by 2 people
I agree Alf
But does the current SNP leadership compare in any meaningful way to the Algerian independence movements which Fanon wrote of, his mind somewhat warped by the psychiatry of the time, 70 plus years ago?
I think not
John
LikeLike
I think you’ve posted this in the wrong thread.
LikeLike
Apologies if wrong thread, John, however discussion seemed to be on GDP and that is the subject I responded on.
Since you mention Fanon, the latter sets out quite clearly what happens to ‘a dominant national party’ that is ‘co-opted by colonialism’, and for which I give a brief outline here:
LikeLike