If they vote to leave would it really affect us? My boss is a jock living down here and says it should be a no & doesn't know any scotchs who will vote yes.

P.S. Alex Salmond is a smarmy fucker

Can understand the scots being pissed off with the tories, it was always the first place to be hit with the poll tax, smoking ban and ginger folk being allowed to breed with the English.

Former United Kingdom of Scotland.

Former United Kingdom of Scotland.

The Banana Republic Of Scotland.

And why on earth would I google something you write? There are better ways to waste one's time.

 

 

I know, like joining the theatre 'industry'.

The Deep Fried Banana Republic Of Scotland.

Can understand the scots being pissed off with the tories, it was always the first place to be hit with the poll tax, smoking ban and ginger folk being allowed to breed with the English.

 

 

You have New Labour to thank for the smoking ban

I hope they vote no but if I was a jock I'd be voting yes

You have New Labour to thank for the smoking ban

 

 

And Mary Queen of Scots for the interbreeding?

It'll kill Blackpool.

 

Can't see the Jocks applying for visa's en masse for their annual invasion.

I know, like joining the theatre 'industry'.

The creative industries* are the second largest income generator for this country of ours, now what we don't actually make anything. 

 

That's everything from films to computer games to theatre to TV

 

Not as trivial as it's made out this all entertainment fluff.

I'd argue computer games is more engineerign than creative, myself. Creating a war game where people run round and shoot one another ad infinitum isn't that creative IMO.

The creative industries* are the second largest income generator for this country of ours, now what we don't actually make anything. 

 

That's everything from films to computer games to theatre to TV

 

Not as trivial as it's made out this all entertainment fluff.

 

nay cant be right, surely films, and theatre  rely on huge tranches of lottery funding?  I know the support that the opera and the classical music industry in the UK gets from the lottery is often described as the lower class masses funding the pastimes of the rich. As for TV, have you forgotten the license fee we pay for the BBC? 

will the jocks still need to pay a licence fee to the BBC?

 

will BBC go off on Friday if they vote yes?

I fucking hope so. Fuck them.

will the jocks still need to pay a licence fee to the BBC?

 

will BBC go off on Friday if they vote yes?

 

 

18 months to sort out all such matters

they'll balls everything up and it'll be like this within 5 years

 

nay cant be right, surely films, and theatre  rely on huge tranches of lottery funding?  I know the support that the opera and the classical music industry in the UK gets from the lottery is often described as the lower class masses funding the pastimes of the rich. As for TV, have you forgotten the license fee we pay for the BBC? 

Some do, they're the RFOs or funded not for profits in theatre and certain films yes do get ACE and lottery funding - again not commercial.

 

But just think about a compnay like ATG, they own most regional big theatres and in west end, their turnover is huge. Then look at the economic impact. Again fucking huge. As someone put Mama Mia made a fortune in the west end and on tour, then think about the huge numbers of venues, shows all over the UK playing every night. The commercial sector makes a lot of money, and pays that way as well. Its not a bad living at all.

 

I'm talking aboiut TV syndication, not just from the BBC for ITV - most of the channels you watch are purely commercial, then add on all the adverting and media (again also under the creative industries) and it starts to be huge.

 

Of course certain parts of the gaming industry is coding, but look at Rockstar games, they are like films, proper actors, complex story lines, even classifications - this is not the work of an engineer. 

 

Then there is the fashion industry - a huge income generating sector.

 

Its sad that most the population really have no idea how much this country relies on our sector at its seen as fluff, when in the service industries it is very, very important.

 

If you can be arsed, here's some stats from January. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/creative-industries-worth-8million-an-hour-to-uk-economy

not knocking the numbers or the work itself

 

but "creative industries" seems like a rather broad catch all term

 

then when you see it includes:

 

Advertising and marketing

Architecture

Design: Product, Graphic and Fashion Design

IT, software and computer services

 

then it looks too broad to call it an industry of it's own - the IT/Software/Computer services is an industry on it's own for me, servicing many others

 

to have them in the same field as film, theatre and crafts seems a bit misleading to me

The creative industries* are the second largest income generator for this country of ours, now what we don't actually make anything. 

 

That's everything from films to computer games to theatre to TV

 

Not as trivial as it's made out this all entertainment fluff.

 

 

Balderdash. My money would be on gambling (see what I did there?).

 

Others already beat me to to the all encompassing term you decided to use.

How much did 'Dirty Dancing the Musical' generate?

How much did 'Dirty Dancing the Musical' generate?

When I left, just from ticket sales on the UK tour it had made just over 11 million. That's not taking into account the west end runs. 

 

Not really,  what else do you put design into? The Creative Industries is the term for the service industry that produces creative product. This includes IT innovation - its part of a wider 'creative' economy and this is used worldwide.

 

Now, I think you're determining between this terminology and what you'd probably refer to as Arts and Culture - which includes performing arts, film, sound, music publishing etc etc there has just been an economic report published for just this. The real standout was that arts and culture generate more pound per invested than Health, retail and the business and service sectors. We deliver a lot more income for less expenditure and brings in around 12.4 billion for the UK. That's not a tiny figure.

 

I'm not saying the creative industries are all important, but that it's not something to be dismissed as mere frivolity. It a big, money making industry in certain parts of the sector.

Balderdash. My money would be on gambling (see what I did there?).

 

Others already beat me to to the all encompassing term you decided to use.

I don't decide to use it, the government does. I've not just made up an arbitrary term and plonked in a load of desperate sectors, that's how our GDP is measured, if people don't like it. Sorry, but tough, that's the way it is.

When I left, just from ticket sales on the UK tour it had made just over 11 million. That's not taking into account the west end runs. 

 

Not really,  what else do you put design into? The Creative Industries is the term for the service industry that produces creative product. This includes IT innovation - its part of a wider 'creative' economy and this is used worldwide.

 

Now, I think you're determining between this terminology and what you'd probably refer to as Arts and Culture - which includes performing arts, film, sound, music publishing etc etc there has just been an economic report published for just this. The real standout was that arts and culture generate more pound per invested than Health, retail and the business and service sectors. We deliver a lot more income for less expenditure and brings in around 12.4 billion for the UK. That's not a tiny figure.

 

I'm not saying the creative industries are all important, but that it's not something to be dismissed as mere frivolity. It a big, money making industry in certain parts of the sector.

 

 

Clearly important, in a global entertainment market

 

 

Personally, I'm not sure about funding the arts from govt mind

Clearly important, in a global entertainment market

 

 

Personally, I'm not sure about funding the arts from govt mind

The government gives 0.1% of government spending to the Arts and Culture sector. Basically the fluff and pocket change in the treasury. For this it generates around 6 billion. As it says, we make more than we're given. 

 

If you don't fund arts - at a micro level, you'd have no theatre in Bolton, at a macro level house prices tend to slump in an area without the culture/arts and you'd force arts into only making commercial product meaning no ballet, classical music, new writing and a million Dirty fuckin' Dancings and Tonight's The Night musicals and I'm sure you'd agree, to leave art only exposed to the market leaves a country in a much pooer place, even without the economic arguments.

 

That's not to say its all perfect, some of the money - your money - is spent in dreadful ways, I believe. But in a wider context of what the government spends its money on, it's next to naff all.

Clearly important, in a global entertainment market

 

 

Personally, I'm not sure about funding the arts from govt mind

I'd rather it go to the arts than as aid to countries with space programmes such as China and India