Forum search & shortcuts

Osbourne says no to...
 

[Closed] Osbourne says no to currency union.

Posts: 0
Free Member
 

its all Sir this and Sir that

Have we done this yet?

http://www.tatler.com/news/articles/september-2014/the-future-of-scotland

😯


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 1:31 pm
Posts: 0
Full Member
 

BP and Shell urging for a No vote again too, no surprise there!


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 1:31 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

In principle, the BoE reserves are a shared UK national asset.

They are an asset of the UK, the Scots are leaving the UK.

@ben Scotland is going to need some banks. They will have to be smaller sized as Scotland is small. RBS is far too big so has to stay in the UK. If it where broken up the Scottish part could re-locate back up there. Ditto bits of Lloyds/HBOS. It is credbile that Scottish banks could be experts in financing oil industry for example (in the same way the Scandis are heavily focused on industires like forestry/paper). But big global multi functional banks don't really make sense / cannot be supported.


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 1:37 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Have we done this yet?

@ben, the piece makes perfect sense. Given all the promises being made about spending and a fairer society (see my comments yesterday about what that means) anyone with above average wealth has to be nervous. Further "management" of private land by and for the state. Wealth distribution. Taxes on the rich as they can afford it. etc etc


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 1:43 pm
Posts: 4111
Free Member
 

[i]Just announced: 97% of adults have registered to vote.[/i]

what percentage of the Children?


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 2:00 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

They might move their nominal headquarters to London and therefore pay profits to the Uk government

not how it works.


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 2:03 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

not how it works.

It is really.


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 2:05 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

I thought Gordon Brown spoke well and passionately the other day. He is now saying if the SNP don't stop scaremongering on the NHS he'll stand for election in the Scottish Parliament in 2016. He would be a very powerful candidate and crowd the SNP out of the left politically.

[url= http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/11/gordon-brown-snp-nhs-privatisation-scotland ]link[/url]


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 2:07 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

BTW RBS pays a very significant "deposit/liability tax" to the BoE based upon balance sheet size


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 2:09 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

He is now saying if the SNP don't stop scaremongering on the NHS he'll stand for election in the Scottish Parliament in 2016.

Do you think that is sufficient to scare people?


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 2:09 pm
Posts: 66118
Full Member
 

I'd love to see Gordon Brown in the scottish parliament tbh- independent or not. He's wasted on the back bench but I'd thought he was basically done with it all.

Mind you he'll face awkward questions from Scottish people like "Why is it you thought the time to offer further devolution was 2 weeks before the referendum, not 4 years earlier when you were prime minister"

jambalaya - Member

They are an asset of the UK, the Scots are leaving the UK.

So, the same as every other UK asset then? Am I wrong, I was assuming you thought there was a specific difference for the BoE reserves/assets.


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 2:11 pm
 dazh
Posts: 13392
Full Member
 

He is now saying if the SNP don't stop scaremongering on the NHS he'll stand for election in the Scottish Parliament in 2016.

This has been his masterplan all along. Screw up the no campaign, then stand for election and be el presidente of an independent Scotland.


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 2:12 pm
Posts: 17396
Full Member
 

Northwind - Member
I'd love to see Gordon Brown in the scottish parliament tbh- independent or not. He's wasted on the back bench but I'd thought he was basically done with it all...

Aye, unemployed Westmister MP who betrayed his socialist ideals seeks preselection for Labour seat.

Labour won't be taking their orders from London anymore, I don't like his chances.


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 2:25 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

But once outside they were greeted by pro-independence hecklers. One rode alongside them through the streets in a rickshaw with a sound system playing The Imperial March, made famous by Star Wars.

He kept up with the group as they walked through the city centre  booming into a megaphone "Welcome to our imperial masters! Our imperial masters have arrived!"

http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/politics/referendum-news/stand-off-at-buchanan-street-steps-yes-campaigners-confront-100-westminster.1410437305

I'd just like to make it clear that this wasn't me 😀


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 2:56 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

what percentage of the Children?

I'm assuming 0%.


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 2:58 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

@Northwind, yes basically. Everything is left behind. Clearly when it comes to the actual land, buildings and equipment (hospital and school) I would expect Scotland to retain what is currently there. Why would you offer Scotland more devolution unless there was a reason to do so. You have the referendum as the SNP got a majority. I am sure Cameron regrets that now, with hindsight Scotland should have been offered a few more powers and nothing else.

@ben, I like that story as I imagine it must have been quite funny. What is less amusing is that is the basis on which many people will vote Yes.

Latest poll is 48 No, 42 Yes, 10 undecided.


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 3:02 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Aye, unemployed Westmister MP who betrayed his socialist ideals seeks preselection for Labour seat.

Labour won't be taking their orders from London anymore, I don't like his chances.


@epic as has been posted elsewhere a truly socialist party would never have been elected to government. Not then and not now.


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 3:03 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

What is less amusing is that is the basis on which many people will vote Yes.

No less valid than deciding how to vote based on narrow, short-term economic reasons. People have many different reasons for deciding how they'll vote, and it's patronising to assume that your (or my) reasons are better than theirs.


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 3:08 pm
Posts: 5559
Free Member
 

[quote=bencooper said]what percentage of the Children?
I'm assuming 0%.

16-18 years olds can vote so what % of them?


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 3:16 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

16-18 years olds can vote so what % of them?

I saw something like 78%, not sure. I think if you get to decide the future of your country you're not a child.


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 3:20 pm
Posts: 5559
Free Member
 

you cannot of met many voters 😉


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 3:22 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

No less valid than deciding how to vote based on narrow, short-term economic reasons.

@ben the reasons many of us have been raising are neither narrow nor short term. We are worried about the economic impact on the UK and the negative impact on Scotland will be far greater but many people don't seem to care. Its Yes at any price.


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 3:29 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Oh my God that Tatler piece is awesome.


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 3:30 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

the reasons many of us have been raising are neither narrow nor short term.

Worrying only about the economic impact is narrow, and talking about which individual businesses might or might not leave or what interest rates will do in the next few months or years is short term.

We're thinking of 10, 50, 100 years down the line here.


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 3:32 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

@ben, I like that story as I imagine it must have been quite funny.

[url=

e's video[/url]

😀


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 3:35 pm
Posts: 4111
Free Member
 

16-18 years olds can vote so what % of them?
[i]
I saw something like 78%, not sure. I think if you get to decide the future of your country you're not a child.[/i]

Not quite how the law tends to see it.


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 3:36 pm
Posts: 5559
Free Member
 

I agree with ben there

Is that tatler piece comedy or not?


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 3:37 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Not quite how the law tends to see it.

You can get married at 16, so the law seems to think 16-year-olds are adults.


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 3:38 pm
Posts: 0
Full Member
 

Oh my God that Tatler piece is awesome.

I enjoy observing them in their natural habitat at the House of Bruar


We're thinking of 10, 50, 100 years down the line here.

So you're basically agreeing there could be economic problems for the rest of our lifetimes and our children's lifetimes!


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 3:40 pm
Posts: 7766
Full Member
 

As the what on the scrotum?


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 3:42 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

So you're basically agreeing there could be economic problems for the rest of our lifetimes and our children's lifetimes!

No. Economics isn't a science, it's more a philosophy. We might have a few difficult years, most new countries do, but we've got the basis of being a very successful country. So it's not that the economics don't matter, it's that we should look beyond them.


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 3:42 pm
Posts: 5559
Free Member
 

ben already answered


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 3:43 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

But if we must talk about economics:

An independent Scotland would be a big success, according to the head of the country's largest asset manager.

Martin Gilbert, chief executive of Aberdeen Asset Management, said Scotland could prosper regardless of the outcome of the referendum next week.

Gilbert said the Scottish government's preferred option of a formal currency union between an independent Scotland and the rest of the UK would be "highly likely", despite it being repeatedly ruled out by the three main pro-union parties.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/sep/11/aberdeen-asset-management-boss-backs-independent-scotland


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 3:49 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

but many people don't seem to care. Its Yes at any price

Tells you something about how a lot of people feel about the government in Westminster.

I still haven't seen an answer from anyone here, or in the media about why the powers being promised are only appearing now, and not before. It's almost like they don't want to admit that they really didn't want to devolve more power.


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 3:53 pm
Posts: 91169
Free Member
 

Tells you something about how a lot of people feel about the government in Westminster

Or it tells you something about the intelligence of a lot of people 🙂


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 3:54 pm
Posts: 17396
Full Member
 

whatnobeer - Member
...I still haven't seen an answer from anyone here, or in the media about why the powers being promised are only appearing now, and not before. It's almost like they don't want to admit that they really didn't want to devolve more power.

Or maybe it's a case of we fooled them like this before, let's see if they're stupid enough to fall for it again...


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 3:58 pm
Posts: 1320
Full Member
 

try this for size....

[url= http://smiffy73.wordpress.com/ ]a rational 'no' voter[/url]


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 4:04 pm
Posts: 621
Free Member
 

bencooper - Member

But if we must talk about economics:

An independent Scotland would be a big success, according to the head of the country's largest asset manager.

Martin Gilbert, chief executive of Aberdeen Asset Management, said Scotland could prosper regardless of the outcome of the referendum next week.

Gilbert said the Scottish government's preferred option of a formal currency union between an independent Scotland and the rest of the UK would be "highly likely", despite it being repeatedly ruled out by the three main pro-union parties.

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/sep/11/aberdeen-asset-management-boss-backs-independent-scotland

You missed the next paragraph which marks him out as a simpleton:

Scotland could also benefit by refusing to take on its share of the UK national debt if denied a currency union, he added.


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 4:05 pm
Posts: 14484
Free Member
 

Whatever your views on the referendum.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/sep/11/referendum-registered-voters-scotland-four-million-97-per-cent

Is fantastic engagement.


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 4:08 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

@retro - indeed pretty stunning from a finance industry person to make such a statement given the potential downside of Scotland trying to do that. As I have said if Scotland don't agree to take their fair share of the debt there is going to be no independence. We'll have our own referendum on that thanks very much.


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 4:10 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

@piemonster, yes agreed. Hopefully all legit 😉


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 4:10 pm
Posts: 0
Full Member
 

No. Economics isn't a science, it's more a philosophy. We might have a few difficult years, most new countries do, but we've got the basis of being a very successful country. So it's not that the economics don't matter, it's that we should look beyond them.

With an answer like that you could be a politician 😉

This 'few difficult' years will be an interesting one if independence actually happens, I wonder if everyone will then be so light hearted about the reality of five or ten years of recession, or as you say, 50, 100... Vote Yes, the rest of your life might be severely affected, but people you'll never get to meet in many decades time might once again enjoy the pre-independence quality of life!

Sadly, the numbers that make my salary, bank account and everything else to do with money, work in a more scientific style. 1+1=2 etc.

Think I've swung back to No again today!


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 4:14 pm
Posts: 0
Free Member
 

Vote Yes, the rest of your life might be severely affected, but people you'll never get to meet in many decades time might once again enjoy the pre-independence quality of life!

It is interesting that Yes is ahead in every age bracket apart from the over-65s. People who are going to be around to see the long-term results are much more pro-independence than people who are not.

Sadly, the numbers that make my salary, bank account and everything else to do with money, work in a more scientific style. 1+1=2 etc.

That's accounting, not economics. Economics is not scientific.


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 4:18 pm
Posts: 91169
Free Member
 

The Noers on this thread seem to be raising a lot of important questions that no-one can answer. The Yessers seem to be ignoring them and focusing on hope.

The two things aren't necessarily incompatible, of course. Yes we all want change (on both sides of the border), but given the risks, perhaps this particular change isn't ideal.

The ideal situation would be a No vote, then a proper effort for the changes we all (Scot and Brit) actually do want.


 
Posted : 11/09/2014 4:20 pm
Page 243 / 283