[Closed] Osbourne says no to currency union.

As far as time scales go, I think the biggest hurdle will be whether or not Spain gives the process an easy passage or attempts to frustrate and delay it.

muddydwarf - Member
Will Scotland be able to apply for EU membership whilst still a part of the UK or will the EU demand waiting til after formal Independence?

What did they do with East Germany?

I don't know, which is why I asked.

teamhurtmore - Member
I wish I could eat what I like and never put on weight
I wish a 650b really did make the trails come alive
I wish Father Christmas was real
I wish Nessie would show herself...

So what's so great on a wish list of total nonsense? ...

How about a wishlist like:

I wish we would spend our money on caring for the poor and needy instead of spending it on nuclear weapons.
I wish we would spend our money on providing free education instead of on aircraft carriers with no planes.

You are working on the basis Scots are contemptibly stupid.

What did they do with East Germany?

That would involve one of the most influential EU powers getting something it wants.

This won't be the case when there's a Yes vote.

The two situations are not really that comparable.

Edit: typo

You are working on the basis Scots are contemptibly stupid.

On another forum that I shall not name. The "stupid" word is popping up with insulting regularity.

Considering the arguments they are putting forward, it's remarkable that Iceland is able to exist.

East Germany never joined the EU, East Germany as a state dissolved and merged its territory with FRG, it ceased to be.

Well if people swallow AS's BS epic, the conclusion speaks for itself

I doubt there is anyone would not prefer to spend money on helping people rather than killing them - but that is not the issue.

The issue is what is the best structure for people to address the needs of the Scottish people (and the interest of the rUK but I realise that's not important for you guys) - being part of a very successful union that is fit-for-purpose (evidence by the fact that yS want to keep pretty much all of it bar the need for a bigger throne and mirror) or part of a hotch-potch of poorly thought through constructs that clearly isn't.

Since neither deliver independence to the extent that yS pretend, the answer should be blindingly obvious. So you can make you own conclusions on intelligence etc.

One thing the polls seem to indicate is that at least half have no problem seeing this....as for the rest....you tell me.

In the meantime 2m may well create chaos for 70m - and who is talking about the democratic deficit?

How will iScotland create [b][i][u]CHAOS[/b][/i][/u] for people living in England, Wales and Northern Ireland? There's no big change for them - same laws, same state, same EU membership status, same currency, and possibly an influx of Scottish flight capital.

What did they do with East Germany?

irelanst - Member
I dont think discussing this again will lead to us agreeing and as the EU wont say anything neither of us can prove it one way or the other.
The EU have said something in reply to the The Scottish Government’s proposals for an independent Scotland:

I seem to remember a certain poster getting quite agitated and saying something to the contrary. The word "nonsense" might even have been chucked in there. If only I could remember who that was...

[quote=ninfan said]East Germany never joined the EU, East Germany as a state dissolved and merged its territory with FRG, it ceased to be.

It was a bit more complicated than that as clearly East germany did not comply with EU law at the point of merging and joining

It did show the EU was "flexible" over the "rules"

EJIL.ORG "http://www.ejil.org/pdfs/2/1/2023.pdf"

TBH guessing what the EU did is impossible as

Article 236
The Government of any Member State or the Commission may submit to the Council proposals for the revision of this Treaty.

If the Council, after consulting the Assembly and, where appropriate, the Commission, expresses an opinion in favour of the calling of a conference of representatives of the Governments of Member States, such conference shall be convened by the President of the Council for the purpose of determining in common agreement the amendments to be made to this Treaty.

Such amendments shall enter into force after being ratified by all Member States in accordance with their respective constitutional rules.

Ie they can just all agree to do whatever they like and change the rules - granted they all need to agree
IMHO the reality is that if the EU wishes them join - I think they do in general but we cannot know for sure - then some deal will be done so there is no gap.

Moving all EU nationals from iS and from the EU , sorting out fishing rights in their waters is such a mess that I think everyone, even the Spanish, will want to avoid it
They could also include some notion that it had to be a state with it own laws and parliament first or some such to exclude catalonia demands and not set a precedence?

Its all guessing and supposition whichever way you plump and all views [ given it is the EU] are plausible.

It's interesting that in the last couple of weeks the discussion has shifted.

Regional devolution is becoming more and more relevant as people discuss the failure of tradition neo-liberal politics over the last 20 years to met the needs of people over business and finance.

One good thing to have come from this "debate"

East Germany?

East Germany wasn't a case of a new state joining the EU. The Federal Republic of Germany was a member of the EU (EEC?) before reunification and was still a member after reunification.

This scenario is not much like iS for us to bother generalising - beyond agreeing the EU can be flexible re rules and if they want iS to join they will and if they dont they wont.
We dont know the answer to that one.

then some deal will be done so there is no gap.

at what price?

I'm prepared to accept your proposition, should there be a yes vote, then there will be deals to be done with Europe on issues like Schengen and the timeline on ratification of EU membership

HOWEVER

Deals like that require Scotland to bring something to the table, the EU negotiators will expect a quid pro quo in return for any concessions made, and as far as I can see Scotland has not got a lot to bargain with in return for the long list of what it wants. Looking how they keep telling us how much higher than the rest of the UK their GDP is, Scotland will undoubtedly lose any rebate and a great deal of tourism, CAP and industrial regeneration subsidy that they currently receive, and they are likely have to make serious further concessions on fishing waters (I would envisage the Spanish will be eyeing that one up nicely!) - possibly of biggest day to day importance to Scottish voters would be the current VAT exemptions, there would be little chance of retaining these, and thats going to hit people hard.

Its also worth mentioning that Salmonds usual ploy of threatening to take his ball home (fishing etc) when losing the argument is unlikely to play well with EU counterparts, we've seen Cameron come unstuck trying the same, and the EU need him onside a lot more than they need Scotland.

A state, that was not a member, joined a member state and therefore became a member of the EU ie East germany certainly moved from not being in the EU to being in the EU but it was done in a manner so they did not need to apply

IIRC, I think that Germanys position was that East Germany never rightfully existed as a state in itself, it was occupied by force. regardless, this was done before Maastricht, Nice and Lisbon - the rules today have moved on a huge degree.

No idea tbh but it will be as messy as rUK negotiations.

Not sure what will happen at all and not prepared to guess.
You are correct that in both negotiations iS is tiny and will get "bullied" as As will no doubt call it.

Genuine Q what VAT exemptions?

www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/sn02683.pdf
that is 2013 though

[i]HOWEVER...[/i]

And all that follows... Shows why the polls are closing so fast. If the yes campaign has failed to address the complexities of Independence, then the NO campaign is overly punitive. It confirms for all on-lookers (especially in the past to weeks) that the body politic has been overly dominated by a neo liberal business elite that has a disproportionate influence over Westminster, and has failed to address the needs of people over business for the last 20-30 years. NO are losing ground because there is more to the Union than fiscal policy, but that's the only weapon of mass destitution that the no campaign deploys as first and last option.

Anyway 3 days to go and we'll find out.

You are working on the basis Scots are contemptibly stupid.

Well there's plenty of evidence on this thread 😉

Incidentally, why are the needs of business different to the needs of people? I dunno about you but I work for a business, and I quite like it to do well because I get to keep my job, and I get payrises and bonuses.

Genuine Q what VAT exemptions?

AFAIK the UK is the only member state to have negotiated that it can zero rate food, childrens clothes, books.

[url= http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/resources/documents/taxation/vat/how_vat_works/rates/vat_rates_en.pdf ]Here[/url]

[i]Incidentally, why are the needs of business different to the needs of people?[/i]

I'm assuming this is just you being you, and this really doesn't need actual explaining? 🙄

Are you and hora doing shifts?

Mol, they are not. But this reflects the undercurrent here as defined by Jurassic Jim's outburst and the anti-thatcher legacy that so-called forward thinking yS still cannot shake off.

It takes a very narrow perspective to think of business and people conflicting - but again this is a Jurassic legacy that people try to pretend has something to do with neo-classical or neo-liberal orthodoxy.

That is completely divorced from reality. Business only survive if they are able to satisfy the needs (sometimes conflicting) of three parties: staff, customers and suppliers of capital. All three are groups of people. In other words, people engaging with people at each of these levels. It may suit this false agenda by re-using the negative (!) tactic of them and us, but that is bllx. We live in the 21C now. Well some of us at least.

[url=

vandalism by Yes supporters[/url]

[img] ?oh=1273a935014005798a2aec419b35fb1d&oe=54989CED&__gda__=1417993818_c6c3658623a079e1dfc81133d06f954a[/img]

I'm assuming this is just you being you, and this really doesn't need actual explaining?

Well, I suspect I know what you mean - you are talking about fat cats lining their pockets - but you don't seem to understand that the needs of people ARE the needs of business in MOST cases. You cannot set one against the other as if they are different.

If you are talking about inequality in society, or greed in upper management, then say so.

BruceWee - Member
More vandalism by Yes supporters

Bloody separationists. They climb up there every 700 years, regular as clockwork.

[i]Business only survive if they are able to satisfy the needs (sometimes conflicting) of three parties: staff, customers and suppliers of capital[/i]

unless the 'market' has been rigged in your favour, see... Utilities, Private Healthcare, Banking, Military spending, Media.

more vandalism by yes supporters

Where? nothing damaged its attached to the wire mesh on the rock face

Mol, I'm talking about a version of rapacious liberal capitalism that has grown over the last 30 years, where successive govts. have fire sold nearly all public housing, all utilities, most social service/ council services including prisons, to the needs of financial and business elites. Next on the list, fire, police and the NHS.

we have a society that aims to serve the needs of the top 1% over nearly all of the rest of the population, and a growing inequality and underclass of poor and ill-educated consumers.

That's why the YES campaign are gaining ground against a NO campaign who can only seem to think in these terms. There is so much to celebrate in our Union, but the narrow business and fiscal priorities of a tiny elite should not be high amongst them, and that's all the Traditional Westminster parties seems to be able to do.

As far as time scales go, I think the biggest hurdle will be whether or not Spain gives the process an easy passage or attempts to frustrate and delay it.

On the business leaders point the fact is they have done the contingency planning, they have done the calculations and they know independence is bad news for their businesses in terms of higher costs which will inevitably be passed onto consumers with the biggest impact on the smaller Scottish population

have fire sold nearly all public housing, all utilities, most social service/ council services including prisons, to the needs of financial and business elites.

Do you really think things will change in an iScotland?

The trains will still be expensive.
There will be no significant increase in social housing.
The utilities will remain in private hands.

You will not get the socialist utopia you are dreaming of.

So we have hardly developed since the 70s, is that correct?

have fire sold nearly all public housing, all utilities, most social service/ council services including prisons,

I'm going to let you in on a secret

the reason that they keep selling things is because they're spending more than they can take in in tax, this isn't new, its been going on for decades.

we're not talking about a couple of pence either way on income tax here, we're talking about a 15% across the board increase in taxation to match government spending with income.

Scotland, UK, every country has four choices:

Tax more
Spend Less
Borrow (and pay interest)
Sell assets

Which one would you prefer?

[i]they have done the calculations and they know independence is bad news for their businesses in terms of higher costs which will inevitably be passed onto consumers[/i]

but wait...Surely (as the masters of business always tell us) is that the markets are self correcting. So for every business that dares increase it's prices, that will open a gap in the market to allow other cheaper options to move in and occupy the space. Isn't that how it works?

Unless of course, what business actually want is a continuation of the market that they're happy with, and could do without the competition thanks very much

[i]Do you really think things will change in an iScotland?[/i]

Dunno, they could you know, vote on it?

ninfan, agree. and AS and YES have done a piss poor job of explaining how they are simultaneously going to raise money for all the public spending, whilst at the same time being "light touch" for business.

So for every business that dares increase it's prices, that will open a gap in the market to allow other cheaper options to move in and occupy the space. Isn't that how it works?

Yes, but surely those companies will have to account for the same (higher) costs of doing business too.

A larger company generally has economy of scale - ie. higher purchasing power and an ability to spread costs across the business unit, thats why your local corner shop normally costs more than Tesco..

its a bit like countries really 😉

What ninfan says above ^^

tough call ninfan but on balance i went for
Tax more

and a bigger state
You 😉

AS goes for

Tax less
Spend more
Piss investors off
Ignore deficit and debt dynamics

The new orthodoxy and a first in the world of global economics and politics. Bets on will in work........

But it's ok because we [s]fell[/s] voted for it.

[i]Tax more, and a bigger state,[/i]

fine more than happy with that being your choice

Now, how abut an experiment - this month, when your wages come in, take 15% of your gross wage and put it in a glass jar - then try and live on whats left for the rest of the month, and see what date you end up smashing the jar 😀

You wouldn't start a business up without knowing all your numbers and that companies will supply you let alone a starting a country.

Mol, I'm talking about a version of rapacious liberal capitalism that has grown over the last 30 years,

Well fair enough, but be specific! Anti-business rhetoric makes no sense, it clouds the issues.

As for your analysis of economics, well you lot in general look like adolescents alongside those on this thread who actually study this stuff and do it for a living. You make it out to be a simple case of evil overlords whose aim is to make poor people poorer.

Personally I think this is total bollocks. What business leaders want to do is compete, and in order to do this they have to slash outgoings and increase profits to satisfy shareholders. It's not evil, it's amorality. The role of government is to protect the workers. However on doing this it risks global competitiveness c.f. France.

We do have a lot of problems, but much is being achieved. Things are quite possibly better than they were in the 70s. They could be better still of course, and for this I really do blame Thatcher.

Now, how abut an experiment - this month, when your wages come in, take 15% of your gross wage and put it in a glass jar - then try and live on whats left for the rest of the month, and see what date you end up smashing the jar

What business leaders want to do is compete, and in order to do this they have to slash outgoings and increase profits to satisfy shareholders. It's not evil, it's amorality. The role of government is to protect the workers

Incidentally, why are the needs of business different to the needs of people?

Its obvious that what they want is low costs - say wages , no sick pay, zero hour contracts, able to sack folk etc and what people want is protection form that. Remember when business decided and we had dark satanic mills where children a syoung as 4 worked for 10-20 % of the adult wage for up to 12 hours a day, Workers organising in unions and voting in parties to legislate what was what changed this state of affairs. They do not want the same things though they may not be mortal enemies.

Companies want to make profit people want nice lives, health , free time and a future for their children generally.

Molly if economists some respect as they failed to guide the economy well and we ended up with a crash due to following their advice and judgement. It also possible to get conflicting advice from them

Remember when business decided and we had dark satanic mills where children a syoung as 4 worked for 10-20 % of the adult wage for up to 12 hours a day, Workers organising in unions and voting in parties to legislate what was what changed this state of affairs.

Thats an oversimplification - what about Saltaire, Port sunlight, Bourneville, Cresswell etc?

Plus the Factories and mines acts predated organised labour by a good stretch!

Not sure what your point is Junkyard.

Thats an oversimplification - what about Saltaire, Port sunlight, Bourneville, Cresswell etc?

Plus the Factories and mines acts predated organised labour by a good stretch

Molly you explained yourself why business and workers need different things so why did you ask?