[Closed] Osbourne says no to currency union.

I have built several business in my life and the concept if minimizing wages has never crossed my mind, why would it? Peanuts and monkeys springs to mind. Still back to the actual point, I do look forward to finding a company that is in constant conflict with ordinary people and to see how long it survived (if such a thing has ever existed).

Edit: Gordi, there is another meaning to in-credible (as in hard to believe that such a thing exists!).

Apologies for any drunken errors, but here goes:

Sir David Edward doesn’t agree

So what?
I'm sure a lot of punters don't agree with the President of the European Commission, but their opinions hold no weight.

Not according to this man .

What man? Who the **** is he? You're really stretching now.

Leaving the UK is leaving the EU, with no guarantee of re-entry. I think not and Graham Avery agrees

I consider, along with Sir David Edward, that Article 48 would be applicable

You think that nations not in the EU are in a position to change EU law?
That's laughable.

You love playing games with your trolling don't you THM ?

Its all getting a bit snidey folks eh? I've mostly enjoyed reading through all this, apart from the personal comments..
Someone above commented about the CBI being biased- of course they are. They see the status quo as being best because independence would inevitably hit profits- whether its market uncertainty, currency issues or the prospect of an IS passing more protections for workers all of these can potentially affect profits so obviously they, and others will be happy to piss on the parade.
Business is business though, and no matter what happens profits will still be there to be made.

As much as you love answering the question Ernie.

You say how important this is (answering the question and being precise) so leave aside the reminders about Marxian economics for one moment (and the idea that they do not feature in an economics degree*) feel free to give me an example of the incredible business. Or perhaps, we shall see just who is living under the bridge...

* maybe I just studied it in a really bad place. That would explain why wee eck has such a weak grasp of basic economics too!

Apologies for any drunken errors, but here goes:

Sir David Edward doesn’t agree

So what?
I'm sure a lot of punters don't agree with the President of the European Commission, but their opinions hold no weight.

Not according to this man .

What man? Who the **** is he? You're really stretching now.

Leaving the UK is leaving the EU, with no guarantee of re-entry. I think not and Graham Avery agrees

I consider, along with Sir David Edward, that Article 48 would be applicable

You think that nations not in the EU are in a position to change EU law?
That's laughable.

You are correct here but Jim Currie thinks the member states will not attempt to block Scottish accession as you claim below

So you've found one person that thinks that wouldn't happen, well done!

Again, I apologize for my inebriation, but was that really worth a reply?

You know exactly what is meant by the paradox of overproduction and the crises which the constant need to minimize the wage bill while maximizing profit causes . But predictably you want to be a smartarse about it with your tedious sense of superiority and your patronizing and disingenuous manner.

😐

Business does get a "vote", and a powerful one

I must be an "incredible" business (if such a thing exists) that could survive being in constant conflict with ordinary people. Perhaps it has neither employees nor customers?

I have absolutely no idea how, even if it were true, this straw man would prove that businesses vote.

Can we agree that business has a voice and a powerful one. Can we also agree they dont actually vote and then get back to the real issue?

I don't particularly care what fat cats think about the idea of Scottish independence

Certain 19th artisans crafting things by hand 😉 may not care, but pending the overthrow of capitalism in one country (Scotland), everyone else is going to have to consider how capitalists will react to changes because it's going to impact everyone's life.

The CBI can probably be relied upon to represent the interests of (big) business and that includes playing big business's angles. The population of Scotland might decide that any miseries predicted by the CBI are a price worth paying if they eventuate, but it would be silly to just ignore them entirely.

You don't need to read the "Socialist Worker" to understand that the interests of the super rich and the interests of ordinary people are in constant conflict.

That was a little joke, not an insult. Is readig the socialist worker a bad thing? 😉 And I've never picked up a copy of the Mail in my life but of course you'd know that.

Anyway, yes, I'm sure there are super rich people who don't care about businesses and there are those who make money from businesses failing, but I didn't think we were talking about them. Most business owners, even relativel rich ones, still depend on the success of their businesses, as do their employees.

If Mr F Cat of Big Co Ltd decides to move his business to England after independence, are his staff going to be pleased that another rich tory scumbag has left? Or are they going to wish for their jobs back?

I must be an "incredible" business (if such a thing exists) that could survive being in constant conflict with ordinary people.

Well.. asset strippers, or those traders that make money when shares fall - hedge funds? I don't remember the name.

ernie_lynch - Member
You having a degree in economics and all but you have never heard of the paradox of overproduction.

Followed closely by

ernie_lynch - Member
You know exactly what is meant by the paradox of overproduction

For a simple person like me Ernie, this is all getting a little confusing. Ok, I know the whole paradox of production thing is a simple red herring you inserted to avoid the question and create a bit of trolling (as per) but at least try to keep the argument vaguely consistent if you must persist. Better still avoid it and simply answer the question. Or have you just proved that such companies are indeed, "incredible"?

Of course if the paradox of production is true, then the fact that the members of the CBI may chose to "vote" with their feet will be a positive thing for the future of la, la land. I am surprised that dear Nicola didn't point that out yesterday rather than her rather weak reposte. May be like me, she has never heard of clever enough of such important paradoxes, or she knows exactly what they are? Gosh, it's so confusing....

Anyway back to the relevant issues, good to see that Swinney is going to address the oil price issue and update "the facts." It will be fun to see how that is spun.

your tedious sense of superiority and your patronizing and disingenuous manner.

😆

O wad some Pow'r the giftie gie us
To see oursels as ithers see us!

May be like me, she has never heard of clever enough of such important paradoxes, or she knows exactly what they are? Gosh, it's so confusing....

You never have a day off do you ? I suppose you have been arrogant and patronizing all your adult life so there's little chance in you changing now. How sad 🙁

This is what a rather clever man, possibly one even cleverer than you, Nouriel Roubini, once said : [i]"what is individually rational for one firm is destructive in the aggregate".[/i] An obvious paradox there, not that you will agree of course.

And a fuller quote :

[i]"Firms in advanced economies are now cutting jobs, owing to inadequate final demand, which has led to excess capacity, and to uncertainty about future demand. But cutting jobs weakens final demand further, because it reduces labor income and increases inequality. Because a firm’s labor costs are someone else’s labor income and demand,[b]what is individually rational for one firm is destructive in the aggregate.

The result is that free markets don’t generate enough final demand.[/b] In the US, for example, slashing labor costs has sharply reduced the share of labor income in GDP. With credit exhausted, the effects on aggregate demand of decades of redistribution of income and wealth – from labor to capital, from wages to profits, from poor to rich, and from households to corporate firms – have become severe, owing to the lower marginal propensity of firms/capital owners/rich households to spend."
[/i]

A lack of [i]"final demand"[/i] or overproduction as I referred to it, is the consequence of the behaviour of individual firms.

But anyway carry on and give me a patronizing retort......

And you never have a day off from insulting people and "creating" diversionary arguments -pretty much the definition of trolling and stuff that the sticky rules ask folk to avoid. Plus ca change..

Impressive googling there, but Roubinini is really making a Keynesian rather than a Marxian point. Something one does learn with an economics degree. Given how you argue that your understanding of JMK is so superior to mine, I am surprised you didn't spot that.

I will take it now that the answer to the actual question will not be forthcoming. Not surprising, since it doesn't exist. QED.

Meanwhile, back to Scotland....

Can't we just discuss Sir BS of eck instead of all this squabbling between people who I thought were on the same side of the fence?

Can't we just discuss Sir BS of eck instead of all this squabbling between people who I thought were on the same side of the fence?

Yeah, stick with the program - it's meant to be about how us Yes people don't understand economics 😀

Ethical dilemma of the day: Last night I went to have a look at how the repainting of my new shop is getting on, and someone has stuck a great big sticker on the front door. However, it's a "Yes 2014" sticker, and they bothered to get it on straight...

Sleepwalking again Ben? 🙂

Can't we just discuss Sir BS of eck instead of all this squabbling between people who I thought were on the same side of the fence?

teamhurtmore - Member
I have built several business in my life and the concept if minimizing wages has never crossed my mind...

I did much the same. It was my policy to pay more than the other businesses in my town. I'm a firm believer that a prosperous workforce is better for productivity. Delegation of responsibility to quality staff with minimal paperwork pays off better than micromanaging with low paid staff IME.

From today's Herald

AN independent Scotland would have two choices on currency, one of which - using the pound informally and refusing to share any of the burden of the UK national debt - would be a "pretty attractive option", an adviser to Alex Salmond has said.

The comments, made by SNP MSP Joan McAlpine at a public meeting, appear to fly in the face of the Scottish Government's official position that it has a single "Plan A" on the issue of currency - a formal union with the rest of the UK.Ms McAlpine's remarks suggest the SNP may also be considering the Plan B of an informal currency union, known as sterlingisation.

You have to hand it to the real bluffers, they are remarkably persistent!! And its all delivered with a straight face and working apparently since 45% (or so) of voters believe that it is the rUK that is bluffing on the currency. Incredible. Apparently, the Easter Bunny lives in Carnoustie too!

Apparently, the Easter Bunny lives in Carnoustie too!

He gets around a bit - sightings include Kirkcaldy, Milngavie and Leuchars - although rumours suggest these could be hoaxes designed to make English newsreaders look, or should I say sound, silly!!

^ Sue Lawley couldn't even manage Bearsden, never mind Milngavie.

"Baahrsden" to rhyme with Marsden.

A currency union will eventually be agreed between an independent Scotland and the remainder of the UK to ensure fiscal and economic stability on both sides of the border, according to a government minister at the heart of the pro-union campaign.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/28/independent-scotland-may-keep-pound

That could cause a bit of indigestion around here Ben 🙂

[img] [/img] teamhurtmore to the currency union thread, paging Mr teamhurtmore to the currency union thread. Thank you.

Who is Sue Lawley to discuss Scotland with such poor pronounciation? Disgusting.

a currency union will require a political mandate in 2015, I doubt that will exist, especially for the Lib Dem's 😉

Who is Sue Lawley to discuss Scotland with such poor pronounciation? Disgusting

have you ever heard the London media pronounce Todmorden or Mytholmroyd? Does that mean they can't discuss Yorkshire? 😉

Not at all big_n_daft. Only recently heard Dear Leader pronounce that his fellow smirking nationalist Farage should not be in the NE of Scotland as he does not know what a loon is.

The message apparently being, learn the useful dialect of Doric, or butt out of Scottish politics. Very inclusive don't you think?

bencooper - Member
A currency union will eventually be agreed between an independent Scotland and the remainder of the UK to ensure fiscal and economic stability on both sides of the border, according to a government minister at the heart of the pro-union campaign.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/28/independent-scotland-may-keep-pound

bencooper - Member

A currency union will eventually be agreed between an independent Scotland and the remainder of the UK to ensure fiscal and economic stability on both sides of the border, according to a government minister at the heart of the pro-union campaign.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/28/independent-scotland-may-keep-pound

And this government minister is...?

I'm always very persuaded by anonymous statements by "a minister".

There won't be a currency union, it would be political suicide.
No one south of the border wants it, but it seems those north of the border are simply sticking their fingers in their ears and singing "La la la, it will all be ok".
The simple fact is there is too much risk for the UK to enter into such a deal.
Be careful what you wish for. 💡

Sorry stef, enjoying a dinner too much to be sidetracked by this.

I'm always very persuaded by anonymous statements by "a minister".

The Guardian is most definitely not pro-independence - I double they'd run this if it wasn't a confirmed source. The interesting bit is the bit about Trident - I wonder if this is a deliberate leak, and the position will now change to "you can have a currency union if you keep Trident".

That's not on the table, by the way - Nicola Sturgeon has already said so.

Keep up at the back, currency is yesterday's news.

It's all about unaffordable pensions this weekend.

Front page of the Herald, online version at http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/no-camp-minister-we-would-do-deal-on-currency.23824763n

Don't seem to be finding it on the Scotsman 🙄

piemonster - Member
Keep up at the back, currency is yesterday's news.
It's all about unaffordable pensions this weekend.

Aye, they're banking on it being easier to scare old folk...

I wonder if this is a deliberate leak

Or reopen the debate about just how much we prepared to sacrificr for an independent nuclear deterrent?

It doesn't matter what government ministers say the people in the rest of the UK do not want to be responsible for bailing out foreign countries. We don't care if businesses suffers a bit if we don't go into a currency union we are not prepared to lose some of our own independence to help a potentially foreign country gain more independence. A currency union would have to be put to a referendum and the polls indicate that it just would not happen. You can whine on about not taking your share of the national debt or kicking Trident out on day one because the majority of shared assets are in the control of the UK and would remain that way after independence. From day one you would have no military assets, no lender of last resort and no access to UK embassies around the world. If Scotland does not take any debt we withhold an equivalent amount of assets. The UK can also block Scotland joining the EU and there are no legal documents stating that Scottish citizens have any EU status they all state that UK citizens do though. We are not going to be dictated to by a small foreign country.

It doesn't matter what government ministers say the people in the rest of the UK do not want to be responsible for bailing out foreign countries. We don't care if businesses suffers a bit if we don't go into a currency union we are not prepared to lose some of our own independence to help a potentially foreign country gain more independence. A currency union would have to be put to a referendum and the polls indicate that it just would not happen. You can whine on about not taking your share of the national debt or kicking Trident out on day one because the majority of shared assets are in the control of the UK and would remain that way after independence. From day one you would have no military assets, no lender of last resort and no access to UK embassies around the world. If Scotland does not take any debt we withhold an equivalent amount of assets. The UK can also block Scotland joining the EU and there are no legal documents stating that Scottish citizens have any EU status they all state that UK citizens do though. We are not going to be dictated to by a small foreign country.

Oh dear. You sound a bit mad.

It doesn't matter what government ministers say the people in the rest of the UK do not want to be responsible for bailing out foreign countries

You can whine on about not taking your share of the national debt or kicking Trident out on day one because the majority of shared assets are in the control of the UK and would remain that way after independence. From day one you would have no military assets,

The UK can also block Scotland joining the EU and there are no legal documents stating that Scottish citizens have any EU status they all state that UK citizens do though.

We are not going to be dictated to by a small foreign country.

Both sides have nuclear options over debt or vetoing EU mebership or nukes or currencies etc. It is most unlikely that either side will negotiate as you suggest as it harms both sides

Johhners cybernats continue to argue the case for a currency union while ignoring statements from the three main political parties saying there will be no currency union and polls from the rest of the UK indicating no support for a currency union. Ignoring facts and accusing the people stating the facts of bluffing or being bullies is bit mad as well. Is it not time for plan b?