[Closed] Osbourne says no to currency union.

AS will probably be pleased if someone else is copping some flak after the recent embarrassments with Trident and fishing waters. Add "innocent passage" to "assets" on the list of definitions to learn.

At least Sillers knows the difference when referring to AS as a "liability" today:

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/alex-salmond-become-liability-yes-3533466

I am relived you dont stoop to such things and couch all your comments in the temperate moderate language that the BBC and the CS would be proud to use.

The BBC is much more subtle when it wants to be biased. The Yes campaign "claims" or "insists", the No campaign "states" or "clarifies". News pieces use bracketing - bracket a story that's good for Yes between quotes from the No side. Selectively edit interviews and coverage of FMQs. Stuff like that.

[quote=Northwind ]And what does that actually mean here?

I was assuming it meant she's been a significant part of the campaign team and out and about with them - clearly that's not the case though given how insignificant and unrepresentative she actually is.

You can assume that if you like but then, the ambiguity of the line could make you suspect that she's one of thousands campaigning "alongside" the party leaders, given the tone of the article. If they had some examples her apparent closeness and bighitterness they'd have used them instead of padding the article with mental claims from UKIP about student fees (seriously, how on earth does providing free education in Scotland for Scots "stoke resentment of the english"?). Or misleading claims from Better Together pretending this is a comment "from the SNP"

I'm sure they're frantically looking for pics of her shaking hands with Salmond as we speak...

I am not sure which is the more telling. - Miss Maclaren's comments or the justification.

Like the link thm. Jim sillars is not daft, but has been accused of being a failed politician by nationalist support here. He is however guilty of "playing the man not the ball". 😉 I liked the slippery reply from the Salmond spokesperson.
Also where did we get the arrogance to assume that the renewables sector, based in Scotland, but heavily subsidised by the entire UK, is purely Scotlands renewables. If anything it could be said that renewables industries are a success story of the union, rather than reason to march to independence bragging about how wet and windy Scotland is!

seriously, how on earth does providing free education in Scotland for Scots "stoke resentment of the english"?

Its the politics of envy 😛

FWIW there is an party standing in the EU elections dedicated to stopping this

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27218759
The English Democrats launched their campaign pledging to "look after English interests" and arguing it was unfair to charge English people for prescription charges and tuition fees when these are free for residents elsewhere in the UK. On its party website, it points out the launch took place on site of the 1381 Peasants' Revolt. Candidates: Fielding candidates in every region of England

seriously, how on earth does providing free education in Scotland for Scots "stoke resentment of the english"?

Also where did we get the arrogance to assume that the renewables sector, based in Scotland, but heavily subsidised by the entire UK, is purely Scotlands renewables

This sounds a lot like a rerun of that oil argument where it was suggested the oil should be divided up by population not geography. Are you going to divide the wind and tides up by population too?

@Jambalaya- But that's not what he claimed- he specifically claimed Salmond did this as part of an agenda to stoke resentment in Scotland. Which is just plain gibberish.

The funding criteria are based on residency not nationality, incidentally, so anyone who tells you english kids can't get a free degree in Scotland is either lying to you or clueless. Could be either, with UKIP.

(Oh and without dragging it too far off topic, you might want to mention to your mate that EU funded places are scarce- it might look like an easy route to a free education but in practice it's generally an easy route to not getting into uni. If they're approaching admissions age they will want to speak to the admissions department of their target unis to make sure they're not walking into trouble. No messing)

So why is outright UKIP misinformation being carried by the Telegraph in a feature on scottish independence? Couldn't hazard a guess 😉

The only thing that Student [s]Grant[/s] Greta's outburst tells you is that you shouldn't pay too much attention to nineteen year olds.

Quite a ridiculous comment, would anyone dismiss bigotry expressed by a 19 year old member of the BNP or UKIP as merely youthful indiscretions and therefore of little concern ?

Official SNP policy is that 16 year olds are political mature enough to have a vote in the electoral process as which as equal as that of any adult - which in the UK means anyone 18 years old and over.

I therefore fail to see why the president of Edinburgh University’s SNP branch should have any slack cut because she is "only" 19 years old.

Would rUK tax payers be keen to keep subsidizing renewables projects in a foreign country? I also seem to recall they have tides in rUK as well.

[quote=Northwind ]The funding criteria are based on residency not nationality, incidentally, so anyone who tells you english kids can't get a free degree in Scotland is either lying to you or clueless.

In the same way that English people can vote in the referendum?

Perhaps you can explain how scottish renewables would need subsidised athgray?
Jambalaya the UN seems to think people's are entitled to express their will democratically it's in article 21of the universal declaration of human rights.
And finally
[url=http:// http://m.scotsman.com/news/uk/independence-poll-blocked-by-westminster-1-3409249 ]#publish the poll[/url]

ernie_lynch - Member

Quite a ridiculous comment, would anyone dismiss bigotry expressed by a 19 year old member of the BNP or UKIP as merely youthful indiscretions and therefore of little concern ?

I'd say it's one person's opinion, and absurd that we're even talking about it, frankly. That's the real point- it's not about making excuses for her, but about saying "Really, so what?" [i]That's[/i] why it's of little concern. Person says thing.

Obviously there are people who want to run with an "SNP hates the english" agenda so I suppose it's reassuring that this is the best they can find.

aracer - Member

In the same way that English people can vote in the referendum?

Not quite the same rules, but yes, very similiar.

@ Ben- that story doesn't seem to reliable, with Mori denying they have an employee by the name... Keeping polling internal isn't really suspicious.

The thing I found interesting, is that the "Cabinet Office Devolution Team" is doing polls on scottish independence. Since when is the Devolution Team part of Better Together? Do they not have a job to do? Kind of makes you wonder if other westminster departments have been retasked to fight this and what affect that's having. The UKBA were certainly spending time on it while around them the department collapsed.

Obviously there are people who want to run with an "SNP hates the english" agenda so I suppose it's reassuring that this is the best they can find.

Is that what they are saying....."this is the best we can find" ?

Northwind » The funding criteria are based on residency not nationality, incidentally, so anyone who tells you english kids can't get a free degree in Scotland is either lying to you or clueless.

In the same way that English people can vote in the referendum?

Well said Ernie. Just imagine if this was the other way round and the capital that the SNP would be trying to make. Blimey, if you explain basic economic facts and definitions (that don't suit the "agenda") you are a bully. The only fun thing is (to repeat) watching the wriggling required to ignore/downplay/justify the comments.

The ironing of rejecting a "kid's comments" while including younger voters in the referendum is the full starch and steam iron version. As crisp as a dress shirt - brilliant.

The trouble is you don't explain "basic economic facts and definitions" you rant...To the point you spend time making up strange nicknames for nat politicians.

@ Ben- that story doesn't seem to reliable, with Mori denying they have an employee by the name... Keeping polling internal isn't really suspicious.

It was Gordimhor - though I believe the person used a false name to protect their job.

Kind of makes you wonder if other westminster departments have been retasked to fight this and what affect that's having.

Well, there's the stuff we know about - the Treasury and MoD producing various reports and wheeling out civil servants and military men to make comments to the media. Overseas embassies being instructed to brief against Scottish independence and trying to get foreign governments to comment.

Oh, and speaking of that Cabinet Office Devolution Team:

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/con-dems-dish-out-30k-3536326

duckman - Member
The trouble is you don't explain "basic economic facts and definitions"

Nice misrepresentation (as per) and easily falsifiable (as per) as lots of links to external sites throughout this thread to help those who simply don't believe/are not prepared to believe what I say. Including pros and cons and, as NW happily points out, to articles that challenge some of my own assumptions (eg, recent NIESR article).

TBF, I do let trolls do their own work though, especially when it comes to central bank accounting. No point in wasting time there....

To the point you spend time making up strange nicknames for nat politicians.

"DO" is meant more as an accurate description rather than a nickname. Nicknames are reserved more for the Westminster "elite" (sic). HTH! 😉

EDIT:

easily falsifiable

Would you link to your reply that explained why currency was not an asset the only answer i got was you may as well ask if a stumpjumper was a marsupial or something like that.

he trouble is you don't explain "basic economic facts and definitions" you rant.

On cue!!! This stalking obsession is quite creepy now......

[P23:9]

Its rather ironic that you replied to me somewhat faster than I replied to DUCKMAN but I am the stalker 😛

I stalk lots of people in a chat based forum then iirc its how they work - they work better if you reply to what I say rather than just insult me though 😉
PS would that be a troll or an ad hom then for they are bad.

How can that be a misrepresentation? I copied EXACTLY what you posted and pointed out EXACTLY what you do.Doesn't matter how often you try to suggest people are falsifying what you say. You rant and as said,have spent 130 pages coming up with strange names and links to North Korea/BNP etc for Nat politicians.

Junkyard - lazarus
I would love to see his marking system for his answers and how he would grade his essays on here

Essays need balance,he wouldn't do too well,certainly wouldn't be going to Embra.

No went to the better version across the Firth!!!

(Misrepresentation again - the falsifiable point relates to your ones (which are easy to falsify).Point proven again, thanks,)

What, Lochgelly technical College?

Third page, my goodness.

This hidden poll, assuming it exists. Seems to have been shortly followed by further 'statements of facts/unsubstantiated fear mongering' (you'll need to choose which you prefer)

Can't help but think Better Together research was actually a hedging of bets trying to determine how to retain the probably/possibly vote no electorate rather than attempt to change the probably/possibly vote yes segment. Intriguing.

In a series of grave warnings about the consequence of a Yes vote, the Chancellor also claimed that Scotland could run out of hard cash in the event of independence, the financial-services sector would not survive, and average mortgage payments north of the Border would increase by £5,400 per year.

The banknote thing is particularly odd - Scottish banknotes aren't legal tender anyway, and that's never caused us any problems.

Whilst I've got my suspicious slightly intrigued conspiracy hat on.

Wonder wether this possible poll was conducted as research in a known 'Yes' community? An attempt to 'know the enemy' so to speak.

The banknote point is technically correct as is the balance of payments requirement that the FT alludes to today. Not sure where the other figures come from though.

But point out a technicality and what is the response - the "Three Bs". Right on script, brilliant!

I would post a link to a good article explaining the technicalities of how this works now and could/would work in the future but (1) you have to accept that a currency is not an asset to understand the article and (2) apparently I don't do that kind of thing! So I had better stay on Duckman's script too!

You will run out of [s]contributors [/s] trolls to abuse soon THM

"Liar" - very nice.

The "Duckman script" refers to not explaining things (apparently.) Ben asked about how GOs latest comments worked in practice. It's easy if somewhat dry - but decided not to waste the link in order to stay on script. Perhaps you guys could help him instead? It's an important point especially when Scotland runs a trade deficit with rUK.

Nice misrepresentation again though - sticking to the other script perfectly.

But take some deep breathes, you sound stressed. Is it the polls or the home truths sinking in? It's still a great country even as part of the UK (in fact better that way 😉 )

None of your posts on this page are to do with the topic. They're all just trolling other posters.

Okay, being a slightly geeky person, I'm interested. At the moment, Scottish notes are backed by deposits at the BoE, aren't they?

So either that continues, or the BoE gives the deposits back, and they're held by the banks that issue the notes (or some central bank or whatever).

The idea that an independent Scotland is going to run out of money is preposterous - the real elephant in the room, which Osborne refuses to address, is what happens to the rUK's balance of payments when Scotland leaves.

Ben, yes at the moment there is "in effect" and informal currency union in place between Scotland and the rUK. True, the BOE accepts Scottish assets in return for providing Scottish banks with £ liquidity. Under independence, the issue would become whether Scotland could generate enough £assets (they would not be able to simple print notes) and how they would be valued. Then comes the tricky question of how Scottish assets would be valued in practice.

Osbourne is correct to predict that an unofficial peg is likely to prove unsustainable. Of course, telling the truth leads to the obvious responses - see above and today's newspapers.

(Edit: Ducks, I have given you plenty of opportunity to respond to specific points I have made and am still waiting for the answers. You can hide behind the stressful tirades if you like, they won't get you anywhere though. Vladimir and Estragon would be only too happy to be put out of our misery)

But most countries hold currency assets in other currencies - the UK has dollar assets, etc. So it's just the same as that - the only variation is that it might or might not involve a Scottish central bank.

Still, in the big scheme of things, no big deal.

Not quite Ben IMO, but I will let others explain. I am sure they are gagging to get back on topic!

Okay, there are technical details which I'm sure are of interest to banking geeks.

However, Scottish bank notes are backed by some sort of asset, and that will continue after independence, so it'll be fine. Ironically, the biggest threat to the value of those assets would be if the rUK's economy worsened - Scotland's curency could be dragged down if it invests too much in Sterling assets.

In a new currency yes.

Bigger threat would be rising oil prices. Look what they did to Scottish and rUK I manufacturing exports in the 70s. Scotland already runs a BoT deficit with rUK. The last thing it needs is a strong independent currency (if that ever happens)

bencooper - Member

though I believe the person used a false name to protect their job.

Just out of interest, is that based on anything other than a guess?

The UK as a whole runs a deficit. The important figures are that Scotland generates 9.9% of revenues and receives 9.3% of spending.

Just out of interest, is that based on anything other than a guess?

It was reported that way in several online sources.

Actually IMO the important figure with respect to pegging a Scottish pound (option D I believe) is the one given by the Scottish Gov ie, Scotland runs a trade deficit with rUK of 3-6% which makes the issue of £ assets quite important - as Osbourne pointed out (under oath 😉 ) yesterday.

"Liar" - very nice.

Its an interesting one as whatever way you look at it the two economies are going to be so intertwined one going belly up will clearly affect the other. IMHO the two real issue are
1. what is the best way of mitigating this risk to both sides.
2. How do we deal with the asymmetrical risk as the larger economy can bale out the smaller one but not vice versa.

IMHO neither solution is brilliant and the two economies are heavily linked
Cooperation is best but I have no idea how to best achieve this