Oh look, here’s some more peculiarly selective offence taken – this time about Stewart Lee:

Even Stewart Lee, considered by many the thinking-person’s comedian, wrote last year in The Guardian that Alex Salmond is a ‘coward’ who ‘reminds me of the mayor of a small provincial town [with] ideas above his station.’ The piece was accompanied by a cartoon Salmond with red, demonic eyes. While Salmond is, of course, open for criticism we should observe Lee’s likening of Scotland to a ‘provincial town’. Shortly after Lee rhapsodies about much he ‘loves Scotland’ he regurgitates every cliché in the book – heroin, Jimmy Krankie, alcoholism, the Scottish diet – in order to prove it. With friends like these, eh?

Is it Cos Wur Scots?

Stewart Lee has delivered this to Scottish audiences plenty of times (and the audience loved it):

….Because that would have made William Wallace, Braveheart, your national hero, a paedophile. A Scottish paedophile. The worst kind of paedophile that there is.

Coming at you… through a bothy… With shortbread on its face. Muttering unintelligible sexual threats in a frankly incomprehensible dialect.

This thread’s recent humour is an nice antidote to AS absurd desperation. It’s actually quite pathetic (in the true sense of the word) at how ill-prepared he is in such a key issue. Flip-flopping from one idea to the next is absurd as it the notion of sterlingisation, he even has Krugman attacking him, so that is quite a diverse group of people who are pointing out the folly on which the BoD and yS plans are currently based. That is quite an achievement to unite such a diverse bunch of opponents to his plans.

It’s true, as pointed out here, that England, I mean the rump UK, I mean continuing Britain, whatever, can’t prevent the Scots from using the pound, just as the United States can’t stop Ecuador from using dollars. But the lesson of the euro crisis, surely, is that sharing a common currency without having a shared federal government is very dangerous.

In fact, Scotland-on-the-pound would be in even worse shape than the euro countries, because the Bank of England would be under no obligation to act as lender of last resort to Scottish banks — that is, it would arguably take even less responsibility for local financial stability than the pre-Draghi ECB. And it would fall very far short of the post-Draghi ECB, which has in effect taken on the role of lender of last resort to eurozone governments, too.

Add to this the lack of fiscal integration. The question isn’t whether Scotland would on average pay more or less in taxes if independent; probably a bit less, depending on how you handle the oil revenues. Instead, the question is what would happen if something goes wrong, if there’s a slump in Scotland’s economy. As part of the United Kingdom, Scotland would receive large de facto aid, just like a U.S. state (or Wales); if it were on its own, it would be on its own, like Portugal.

Now, Scotland would presumably have high labor mobility — assuming it manages somehow to join the EU (although that too would be surprisingly tricky) it would be under the Single European Act, and it sort of shares a common language with England (even if you sometimes wish there were subtitles). But that’s not necessarily a good thing: what we’re seeing in places like Portugal is large-scale emigration of young workers, leaving a diminished population to bear the fiscal burden of caring for the elderly.

Again, I can understand Scots grievances. But if they really want to do this, they had better get real about money.

Paul Krugman, NY Times yesterday

NS finishes with:

Salmond’s hope is that the spectacle of English Tories vetoing a currency union, and of Labour siding with them, will redound to his political benefit (although the most recent polls continue to give the No campaign a comfortable lead). But his policy credibility is being shredded.

THM – of course the other problem remaining with Salmonds default plan B of sterlingisation, is that an absence of a central bank means no ERMII, and therefore no EU membership 😳

Ho hum. This is beginning to sound a lot like that “Is ‘Jocks’ offensive” thread from a while back. If you don’t understand why repeating the same tired stereotypes gets a bit wearing, there’s not much I can do to explain it.

And Stewart Lee has never been funny about anything 😉

Ninfan, the whole thing is ludicrous. As I said before, outside the theoretical, no one including his advisors give this idea any credence, and rightly so. The NS is correct, his credibility is becoming shredded not that IMO he had any in the first place. When I read the BoD when it came out, I couldn’t believe that it was a serious document, it has more holes than a Swiss cheese but is far less satisfying.

Scotland and rUK deserves better!! 😉

Paul Krugman also said that he had no poition on Scottish independence and that he understood Scots frustration at being “tied to David Camerons England” his wording not mine. Odd that didnt make it into your quote THM
😕
This piece also came from the NYT
Kathleen Jamie The Disunited Kingdom

Indeed scotland does deserve better than what the Tory fanboys of THM and Ninfan want 😉

Its not unreasonable points you are making to be fair and no one thinks AS economics is credible not even him. He is doing/saying it for political reasons are indeed rUK.
Economics wont decide the outcome as most folk do not understand why they cannot do this and the simple, yet deceptive, message of English bullying will play out well and easily

Good politics may not be good behaviour

THM – of course the other problem remaining with Salmonds default plan B of sterlingisation, is that an absence of a central bank means no ERMII, and therefore no EU membership

As I understand it ERMII participation is voluntary and is not a requirement of EU membership.

Gordi – sorry, excuse me, I only bolded the bit about “understanding Scotlands frustrations”, but never mind. Plus we do need to elevate this beyond an anti-English, anti-Tory things since it is much more than that!!!

I note also that we are to take Krugmans opinion on EU membership but still no approach to the European Commision for the definitive advice from them

Ho hum. This is beginning to sound a lot like that “Is ‘Jocks’ offensive” thread from a while back. If you don’t understand why repeating the same tired stereotypes gets a bit wearing, there’s not much I can do to explain it.

It’s all about context surely. Whether you consider it to be light-hearted ribbing from well-meaning friends, or mean-spirited bullying by arseholes. The latter seems to be how you’re taking it (sometimes correctly I guess, but sometimes not).

But complaining about Steve Bell being offensive (when you’ve admitted you don’t mind when he’s offensive about people you don’t like) is pretty daft.

And Stewart Lee has never been funny about anything

Lots of Scottish people disagree – are they self-hating Scots? 😉

But complaining about Steve Bell being offensive (when you’ve admitted you don’t mind when he’s offensive about people you don’t like) is pretty daft.

You’re assuming I like Alex Salmond?

that is definitely bullying and not banter
REPORTS POST

Sorry THM but who is posting anti-english comments?
As for anti tory posts guilty as charged. 😆

Nope. Not sure what argument you’re trying to make there.

Whatnobeer – looking further I see that you don’t have to sign up to it immediately, but you have to agree to it as part of the pathway to (mandatory) adoption of the Euro

So its back to ‘negotiating to be the new Sweden’

that is definitely bullying and not banter

of whom, AS?

We’ve had that one already – keep up 😉

It was just a joke

I saw Cameron’s face up there and was reminded of the picolax thread…

It was just a joke

Careful now, some people North of the border don’t like that sort of thing…..

Oh, I got it 😉

Good use of the word “banter” there too.

Anyone else read this?

Appeared last week, Alan Wyllie having a go at Labour party for many things, including backing Osborne.

Wyllie should think about Scotlands past links with Panama before writing such tosh.

This point in particular is worth emphasising:

The proposal for iScotland (Independent Scotland) and the rUK (rest of the UK) to share a currency union does not originate from the Scottish Government.

People seem to think that currency union is Alex Salmond’s pet project – it isn’t.

Wyllie should think about Scotlands past links with Panama before writing such tosh.

Don’t even try and compare this to the Darien scheme.

People seem to think that currency union is Alex Salmond’s pet project – it isn’t.

Well, he started the Fiscal Commission and the white paper indicates an intention to adopt its receommendation of currency union. I don’t think anyone can claim the white paper doesn’t “originate from the Scottish Government”.

The Westminster government does this too – set up an independent commission on something, then implement their recommendations. It’s what you do when you want to get an expert opinion on something.

If the Fiscal Commission had recommended one thing and the white paper had featured a different idea, everyone would be jumping up and down.

crums, 42 pages. Can somebody summarise for me 😆

crums, 42 pages. Can somebody summarise for me

Scotland should have a currency union/shouldnt have a currency union
Scotland can keep the pound/cant keep the pound
Scotland will be in the EU/Wont be in the EU
Scotland will have to use the Euro/wont have to use the Euro
Haggis, Darien scheme, Alex Salmond, Gideon, Cameron, via the BBC and the New York Times. Polical satire. Jocks.

teamhurtmore – Member
Wyllie should think about Scotlands past links with Panama before writing such tosh.

Topical, but poor choice. That would be like saying England should look to it’s colonial past before playing hardball with Scotland over the terms of the divorce.

If the Fiscal Commission had recommended one thing and the white paper had featured a different idea, everyone would be jumping up and down.

It remains the case that a formal currency union is the Scottish Government’s, and hence Alex Salmond’s proposal. To say otherwise is misleading.

It remains the case that a formal currency union is the Scottish Government’s, and hence Alex Salmond’s proposal. To say otherwise is misleading.

It remains the case that a formal currency union was the advice given to the Scottish Government, and hence the Fiscal Commission’s proposal. To say otherwise is misleading and tries to further the idea that AS is pushing own agenda rather than one that’s beneficial for Scotland as well as rUK.

Its clear that AS hasn’t got a clue – err the €, no a currency union, no we just use the £ anyway – so tough to pin it on a guy with no idea and understanding of the issue. The CU was the proposal of the Fiscal Commission as a starting point for negotiation that has subsequently been rejected by HMT and the three main political parties. Like other politicians he merely rabbits repeats what he is told.

AS has got himself in yet another pickle by his usual subtefuge. Of course, he is correct to say that no one can stop anyone using a currency (unless there are certain capital controls) but that does not mean that it is a sensible, viable or even vaguely credible option for Scotland. More pants down from the King of Farce.

THM is very obvious you don’t like AS, sure he’s been out manoeuvred on this issue, but to call him the King of Farce doesn’t give him any credit for pulling off something that looked very unlikely to ever happen a few years ago. Given his education I’m sure he understands very well about the Euro and the £.

I’d argue that a CU is still on the table despite was is being said out of Westminster at the moment. As others have said, the situation would change massively should there be a yes vote.

What a vote on what the majority wants?? 😉 The canniest politician in the UK outmanouvered on his life’s goal by the likes of CMD, GO, DA and Darling. Blimey!

I’m sure that he does understand (and for shared reasons) so one can only conclude that he is being deliberately deceitful. QED.

The farce is the constant change in position to suit the wind direction. Truly pathetic and sad.

Those who say the position on CU will change massively in the event of a yes vote are repeatedly ignoring the UK General Election that will follow in 2015. A mandate to enter such a fiscal union will be required & the electorate are looking increasingly unlikely to hand any party such a mandate. I think people are underestimating the depth of feeling towards the concept..

It remains the case that a formal currency union was the advice given to the Scottish Government, and hence the Fiscal Commission’s proposal.

The Fiscal Commission doesn’t publish white papers so whatever its influence on the proposal, the Scottish Government has to have a formal position and formal currency union is it.