[Closed] Osbourne says no to currency union.

ben, you will find it if you click on your own link from page 37

Ah, yes - odd it didn't come up when I searched WoS.

bencooper » When the mainstream media isn't being impartial doesn't agree with you, you have to look to other far more biased sources as well. which do

Well yes - everyone rads the media that agrees with their own opinions 😉

There's another effect to consider when reading the mainstream media about, well, anything - the [url= http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/65213-briefly-stated-the-gell-mann-amnesia-effect-is-as-follows-you ]Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect[/url]

There's another effect to consider when reading the mainstream media about, well, anything - the Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect

Which would be worth taking into account when reading reports which contain simple factual inaccuracies wouldn’t it? Such as “the factual inaccuracies are things like a couple of programmes broadcast a day later than noted in the data, stuff like that.” Wouldn’t considering the Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect make you question whether any of the conclusions of the report were accurate if they couldn’t get the simple facts right?

No, because I understand the difference between a small measurement error in one datum of a data set, and a major error in the conclusion of a paper.

I think that's a pretty good example of confirmation bias!

Och, ah'll let Lady Alba sort it oot...

Cracking video that, and a mate of mine is in it/help make it. Good stuff.

Devo max is back on the cards

Backing the position of Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson, Mr Cameron added: "Giving the Scottish Parliament greater responsibility for raising more of the money it spends - that's what Ruth believes, and I believe it too."

The prime minister said: "Here's the re-cap. Vote 'Yes' - that is total separation.

"Vote 'No' - that can mean further devolution, more power to the Scottish people and their parliament, but with the crucial insurance policy that comes with being part of the UK."

Can mean so no actual commitment...Politician being a politician shocker

Aye, I'd trust him as far as I could throw him.

Now it has come from the PM, perhaps Scottish government can sit down with UK government to discuss preconditions of devo max to allow it to work.

I can think of some politicians I could not throw as far as CMD. Dear leader is a bit more portly.

They have had plenty time to think of Devo Max.

If they introduce it before the referendum, then we may actually believe them.

Now, let's all go out and watch the pigs fly by.... 🙂

There's a big difference between between more devolution can be discussed and devo max

Beware Tories and their promises:

[img] [/img]

@ben - was that a broken promise, you have devolution ?

And I thought Thatcher was dead. Silly me.

@ben - was that a broken promise, you have devolution ?

Thatcher made that pledge in 1979. We got devolution in 1997, courtesy of a Labour government.

So yes, I'd say that was a broken promise.

And I thought Thatcher was dead. Silly me.

Thatcher is dead. Thatcherism is alive and healthier than ever.

When will CMD grow up,to be a statesman and negotiator? Naive to play this card so early. AS on the rocks and credibility declining every time he opens his mouth. Far better to let him condemn himself daily (irrespective of any poll movement) for now. Poor tactics, poor tactics.

Giving the Scottish Parliament greater responsibility for raising more of the money it spends

Translation: we're going to keep taking all the oil money, we're going to give less of it back by getting rid of Barnett, so the Scottish Parliament will control a greater percentage.

Cameron is a PR man. He's very, very good at saying the opposite of what people thinks he's saying.

Meanwhile, Theresa May says she's going to demand passport checks at the border. Yeah, right 😉

He's very, very good at saying the opposite of what people thinks he's saying

I'm not sure, I understood "Giving the Scottish Parliament greater responsibility for raising more of the money it spends" to mean Scotland should offset a bit more of it's deficit by controlling its spending, that's pretty much what he's said isn't it?

Whereas,"we're going to keep taking all the oil money, we're going to give less of it back by getting rid of Barnett" means Scotland will raise exactly the same amount but rely on the Westminster to control, rather than subsidies it's spending. As someone who's responsible for the whole of the UK, not just Scotland, that seems fair enough doesn't it?

I disagree there THM. The devo max option should be played early and used to maximum effect for the remaining campaign as long as it is sincere and meaningful. This is ground the Yes camp cannot touch and will make them appear negative and bitter. This would be a positive move and I feel in tune with the large majority of Scots.

Let sites like WoS scare monger about what they think the gutter press is saying to convince Scots to vote No.
Let them also bring back the evil ghost of Thatcher to scare the young 16 and 17 year olds to vote the correct way.

If there was a credible and guaranteed Devo Max offer on the table, I'd quite likely vote No.

But there isn't even an offer, and if there was I wouldn't trust it without primary legislation in place to enforce it.

When will CMD grow up,to be a statesman and negotiator?

I might be reading more into it that I should but I thought it was quite a pithy comment, I took it to mean what I said up there ^ and the later parts to mean vote yes and you’re on your own, vote no and you will have the safety net of the rest of the UK should it all go a bit Greek; you will have more devolved responsibilities but can no longer rely on the rest of the UK to support your policies.

can no longer rely on the rest of the UK to support your policies

The rest of the UK does not "support" Scotland - Scotland pays more into the union than we get back.

The rest of the UK does not "support" Scotland - Scotland pays more into the union than we get back.

According to? GERS says different, HMRC say different.

They do? Figures from HMRC:

http://www.ifs.org.uk/publications/6881

And GERS says the tax take is £800 per person higher in Scotland.

If there was a credible and guaranteed Devo Max offer on the table, I'd quite likely vote No.

THM even when having a go at Dave you save the killer thrust for AS 😀
You really do hate him dont you> I shall stop mentioning it now FWIW.

Basically he is doing what AS is, promising something he wont deliver on to secure votes. I doubt anyone, on either side believes him , or AS, all that much tbh when they speak.

I also think it was rather weak to come to scotland, refuse to debate with AS saying it is up to scotland and then doing this ...good politics I guess but not admirable.

oh come on, that's the revenue part of the equation, how about the spending? You know, the £12,300 per person that Scotland spends vs the UK spend 0f £11000.

And GERS says the tax take is £800 per person higher in Scotland.

@jambalaya - exactly, which is why Cameron can't be trusted when he hints at more devolution now.

Really, I think the current situation isn't fair for everyone else in the UK either - the ideal solution is Devo Max for Scotland, for Wales, for NI, for the North, for the South West, etc. A purely federal system with a reformed voting system that actually works.

But there's no prospect of that happening, and I can completely understand that for people in other parts of the UK Devo Max looks like those annoying Scots getting special treatment again. So the ideal solution is we get out.

oh come on, that's the revenue part of the equation, how about the spending? You know, the £12,300 per person that Scotland spends.

England spends quite a bit per head too, you know. Scotland just spends more on health and less on policing, stuff like that.

And yes, it depends on how the oil revenues are divided up - with oil in the equation, Scottish tax take is higher, without oil the tax take is a bit lower than in England.

Junkyard - lazarus

You really do hate him dont you> I shall stop mentioning it now FWIW.

Start the clock

Oh just for you I shall mention it just once between now and the vote ...will you spot it ?

those annoying Scots getting special treatment again

England spends quite a bit per head too, you know. Scotland just spends more on health and less on policing, stuff like that.

And yes, it depends on how the oil revenues are divided up - with oil in the equation, Scottish tax take is higher, without oil the tax take is a bit lower than in England.

No, my claim doesn't depend on anything. The facts are, Revenue: Scotland 10k (geographical share of oil) Spending: Scotland 12.3K. Whichever way you spin it, Scotland takes out more than it puts into the Union. Which is completely opposite to what you claim.

But for the whole UK, expenditure exceeds revenue - that's why the UK has a £1.2tn national debt.

So the UK as a whole takes out more than it puts in.

I know that, but the UK as a whole runs less of a deficit than Scotland. And you claimed that “Scotland pays more into the union than we get back” which demonstrably isn’t true, see if you don’t make sure your facts are accurate you can draw the wrong conclusion 😉

I know that, but the UK as a whole runs less of a deficit than Scotland.

Only when you don't count oil revenues.

But anyhow, all this is academic - no-one seriously argues that Scotland will struggle financially with independence. It's a side issue - a few percentage points here and there don't matter compared to the bigger issue of who governs us.

Only when you don't count oil revenues.

No, my figures included oil.

no-one seriously argues that Scotland will struggle financially with independence

No I think you're right, I don't think anyone would argue that it will be a struggle (in the context that pretty much everyone is struggling).

It's a side issue - a few percentage points here and there don't matter compared to the bigger issue of who government

If there is a Yes vote, I genuinely hope that is the case.

Hmm. Will go look at figures.

I suppose the way I look at it is that independence isn't the best solution, it's the least worst solution. We're going to have big problems for a while, but at least with independence we have some control over how they're handled.

Athgray Could you remind me what the UK govt position on prenegotiation is?

I suppose the way I look at it is that independence isn't the best solution, it's the least worst solution. We're going to have big problems for a while, but at least with independence we have some control over how they're handled.

My own position is that I’m not technically able to vote; we have a croft in the Hebrides but currently my work has brought us to Holland. But I am feet firmly planted in the unionist camp (as if you needed any clarification). My wife is a ‘wee Scottish lassie’, her father is an SNP member who consulted on THMs favourite bedtime reading, the white paper. And although I’m Yorkshire born and bred, and love England dearly, I also love Scotland and would hate to see them separated.

I know a number of MSP’s through my FIL and have spent quite a few days on river banks and in boats with them (they get access to some awesome fishing) and in the most part they appear to be passionate and honest in their support for their country which I can understand and respect, I just hope they can ‘politician’ better than they can fish, but judging by the empty places in my fly boxes this winter they know a thing or two about saving money!

I spent some time in Scotland over Christmas and the referendum was discussed at great length wherever we went out (admittedly it was mainly SNP biased functions, so they were keen to discuss it with the “English Boy”), and some of the tired old arguments were wheeled out time and time again, all I really hope is that people vote with their eyes open with a view to the long game not just as a reaction to the current government.

Absolute worst case scenario, if the Yes vote comes, can the English still have some boats on Watten, I'd personally swap all the oil in the world for that!

[quote=bencooper ]Hmm. Will go look at figures.
I suppose the way I look at it is that independence isn't the best solution, it's the least worst solution. We're going to have big problems for a while, but at least with independence we have some control over how they're handled.

That is at least one of the most honest appraisals I've seen.

the ideal solution is Devo Max for Scotland, for Wales, for NI, for the North, for the South West, etc.

Gordimhor, I suppose the UK governments position on prenegotiating terms of independence would be a categorical no. Off course nobody is stupid enough to think they will or should.

A clear vision should be put forward as an alternative, that I firmly believe is what the majority of people want. Then invite the SNP government to discuss terms knowing they will not.

We all know that if meaningful devo max is on the table it would blow independence out of the water.

Also using a Thatcher broken promise from a different era as an indicator of all future Tory policy does not work. Politician in broken promise shocker. You were promised a currency union by dear leader. Wait until that promise is broken.

Don't agree with CMD but I would trust him a lot more than AS, who I feel to be one of the most loathsome politicians around.

Nationalists can console themselves in the knowledge that if unionism is not working, they can do this all again.If the majority vote for independence, the rest of us had better keep our feelings hidden and show some faux support for the cause.

I have already mentioned dear leaders clutch on power whilst other parties flounder. Even this will diminsh in 10 to 15 years. For the future after that who knows, however we may wish to take a cursory glance towards the Ukraine.