Forum menu
You highlighted the wrong bit
Speaking to the Scotland on Sunday, a "senior EU source" said [b]an independent Scotland[/b]'s application to join the EU would be treated as a "special case" as the country was already signed up to core requirements such as gender equality and workers' rights.
Is Scotland currently independent? Its not and it is currently a member of the EU as is it is part if the UK.
If an iS was automatically a member why would anyone be talking about "joining"? It's simple spin and BS to suggest anything otherwise.
As far as I am aware no one has claimed they will automatically be a member and everyone accepts they have to reapply*. however they are currently a member of the EU.
The debate was about Scotland not iS.
* there is debate over which article and whether as an internal member or external - i forget which articles 41 or 42???? there is legitimate debate about this point as to which will prevail
I doubt any of us wish to predict what fudge the EU will choose to do and whether they will or they will not follow their own rules and procedures.
BTW Ben assuming that you are not a News International fully paid up subscriber who spends their Sunday mornings reading the Sunday Times, how did you manage to stumble on this article hidden behind a paywall ?Does Wings Over Scotland send you an email alerting you of the latest line to push ?
It was on Twitter last night.
You can also buy paper papers.
No need to be subscribed to anything.
[url= http://www.sundaypost.com/news-views/scotland/independence-referendum/no-campaign-bungles-costing-taxpayers-thousands-1.481309 ]The UK government wasted tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayers money with a leaflet mistake.[/url]
That was on Twitter too.
I dont work in the North Pole but I know it is cold, it is that level of controversial as statements go. If you must have a constant spat with me at least pick something of substance that may actually not be true.
You want proof that politicians brief off the record? BRILLIANT
You said it is "it is very common for the politicians spokesperson to brief off the record" and I asked how you know this. Realistically you don't know how often politicians spokespersons brief off the record do you? So when you stated that it occurs commonly you were wrong. Stop trying to make yourself out to be an expert on everything and lets stick to facts shall we old bean 🙄
p.s. I do not have a constant spat with you I am merely pointing out whenever you talk nonsense, you do it to everybody else on here 😉
I think you will be alone in thinking that politicians dont brief off the record on a regular basis. Anyway ,as you dont work for the press or in politics , your answer wont stand up to scrutiny 😉
Of all the shit I spout on here that really is amongst the least controversial.
The original article was supposedly from a senior source in the EU speaking about Juncker's views regarding an iScotland . Who is this source, how credible are they, how close are they to Juncker? I usually dismiss second hand information for the gossip that it is although I am not surprised that Ben took it as gospel. What is surprising is the way Blair Jenkins reacted "This is a timely intervention and completely debunks the scaremongering by the No campaign over Scotland’s future as an EU member". It is not a credible intervention and it does not debunk any claims the no campaign have made about iScotland and the EU. Blair Jenkins response is misleading and smacks of desperation.
As for whether politicians brief off the record on a regular basis, it sounds like you have been watching too much House Of Cards.
I have no idea what house of cards is FWIW - tv show I guess but i rarely watch tv unless it is sport. FWIW it amused me that you just spent an entire paragraph talking about what I said happened then finished off by criticising me for saying it happens.
tbh the number of times you say the phrase smacks of desperation smacks of desperation 😉
Both sides look for anything that may support their cause then post it up here and elsewhere. as the No did originally with JUnkers comments till hhis spokesperson said he did not mean them
the report comes after the No Campaign was accused of "distorting remarks" made by Mr Juncker after he said the EU needed to "take a break" from expansion.Pro-UK campaigners seized on the president's remarks, claiming they made it clear that a Yes vote the referendum would also be a vote to leave the EU.
However, [b]a spokeswoman for Mr Juncker's spokeswoman[/b][ WTF!!] later said he was not referring to Scotland in his comments. Deputy first minister Nicola Sturgeon said the No camp had "wilfully twisted" Mr Juncker's words and demanded an apology from the campaign.
I seemed to have missed the post where you were equally annoyed at the desperation in that from the No camp Perhaps, in the interest of balance, you could express your dismay now ?
FWIW I dont disagree over using unamed sources etc, its a shitty way to do things but it undeniably happens in the dark arts of politics.
EU refuses to comment on remarks made by unnamed sources
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28390740
To be honest, I think anyone trying to read anything in to comments now made either way from any EU officials is howling at the moon, they've now made it pretty clear on numerous occasions that they are not going to comment officially on what will actually happen regards Scotland until after the referendum, if and when they get a formal application, so as not to sway the internal debate any more than has happened already.
FWIW it amused me that you just spent an entire paragraph talking about what I said happened then finished off by criticising me for saying it happens.
No I didn't so don't try and weasel your way out of being proved wrong. You claimed "it is very common for the politicians spokesperson to brief off the record". You don't work in the press and you don't work in politics so you wouldn't know either way. You dissect everybody's comments and do your best to prove them wrong and you have been caught red handed talking complete and utter nonsense using your own tactics. Take it like a man old boy, admit you were wrong and we can move on.
piemonster - MemberYou can also buy paper papers.
No need to be subscribed to anything.
Ben doesn't strike me as someone who pops down to the newsagents on a Sunday morning to pick up his copy of the Sunday Times.
How would he have time to trawl through the internet looking for Separatist friendly propaganda if he wasted time reading the Sunday newspapers ?
don't try and weasel your way out of being proved wrong
Comedy Gold thank you
I did genuinely belly laugh at that one.
You don't work in the press and you don't work in politics so you wouldn't know either way.
Neither do you so if this specious argument were true [ one does not have to work in the press or politics to have an inkling about how they operate] it would negate your point about me being wrong. If you were right you would be wrong. I know this is too complicated for you to get but trust me.
you have been caught red handed talking complete and utter nonsense
Yes you are right politicians and their spokespeople never ever brief off the record, never use unsourced folk to make statements on their behalf, you never read phrase like "sources close to the PM said", ever anywhere and it does not mean their press secretary, everytime they speak it is on the record and attributed to them or their spokesperson and your simple denial of that is indeed me proved completely and utterly wrong on this point.
Jesus man what I said is not even vaguely controversial nor wrong and you are so desperate to get a win [ Its the internet who cares and get a grip] you are beyond clutching at straws.
IIRC one or two of them have written about their time you should consider reading one as it will be a marvellous revelation to you. Out of interest what do you think the term Spin doctor means - sourced purveyor of the truth perhaps?
Take it like a man old boy, admit you were wrong and we can move on.
Like you did with the trams eh 😳
I am done on this issue as sources close to JY said he thought your point is laughable.
Oh that really was funny. thanks.
How would he have time to trawl through the internet looking for Separatist friendly propaganda if he wasted time reading the Sunday newspapers ?
Ben....post propaganda....outrageous
Wonder if the 'unnamed senior EU source' was Graham Avery, who has said very similar things before?
I also wonder if he's 'unnamed' because last time he spouted forth his comments were officially disowned by Barroso, stating that Avery's honorary position did not qualify him to speak in any official capacity on behalf of the commission
59 days.
you never read phrase like "sources close to the PM said"
You do in the Daily Mail and papers of that ilk. Mystery sources can be made up, I believe George Clooney just caught the Mail out lying using an undisclosed source, proving that newspapers use made up sources to make news.
I know this is too complicated for you to get but trust me.
Yet more wisdom that only you in your supreme knowledge could know. 🙄
As I said previously let us stick to facts and not treat second hand gossip as gospel.
Ninfan are you saying an undisclosed source was spouting nonsense? 😆
Ben doesn't strike me as someone who pops down to the newsagents on a Sunday morning to pick up his copy of the Sunday Times.How would he have time to trawl through the internet looking for Separatist friendly propaganda if he wasted time reading the Sunday newspapers ?
Sunday Herald. If they have any copies in Waitrose.
It doesn't exactly take long to look at Twitter occasionally, and copy-and-paste anything here that seems interesting.
I'm disappointed to hear that your commitment to Scottish Freedom doesn't appear to take up much of your time.
You are just 2 months away from possible Freedom, time to pull all the stops out ffs.
If you don't fight for Freedom you give it away without protest. Stand free or kneel chained.
[img] 
[/img]
Yet more wisdom that only you in your supreme knowledge could know
I meant it was beyond your grasp not that it was actually difficult to grasp; imagine you not getting that eh.
I apologise for misunderestimating you
I'm disappointed to hear that your commitment to Scottish Freedom doesn't appear to take up much of your time.
Nah, I just know there's not much point discussing it on here 😉
Much more fun discussing it in person.
Not head much from the Irish tbh. I'd be interested in any other articles worth reading.
This one doesn't say all that much tbh.
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/uk/irish-seem-lost-for-words-on-scottish-independence-1.1869769
It doesn't exactly take long to look at Twitter occasionally, and copy-and-paste anything here that seems interesting.
Twitter is only as good as those you follow.
Google alerts is also handy.
Is Scotland currently independent? Its not and it is currently a member of the EU as is it is part if the UK.
you need to get this through your skull: Scotland is not a member of the EU. The EU has 28 members. Scotland is not one of them.
You might confuse yourself less if you use the terminology "member states". You will then look at the [url= http://europa.eu/about-eu/countries/index_en.htm ]list [/url]of member states of the EU, and see that Scotland isn't on there; and then you will realise that not only is Scotland not a member state of the EU, but it cannot be a member state of the EU because it isn't a state.
Scotland is [i]geographically [/i]within the EU in the same way that Alton Towers is within the EU. But Alton Towers is not an EU member. Neither is Thorpe Park. (Center Parcs is seems continental, though, at least from the reviews on Mumsnet).
[img] 
[/img]
On the Twitter front, a musician I follow has seriously disappointed me this weekend - comparing the relationship between Scotland & England directly to the situation in Gaza 🙁
Its very disappointing to find your musical heroes to be somewhat facile & hard of thinking.
Twitter, literally a self selecting medium.
Pros and cons to it really. But the flaws are very real.
you need to get this through your skull: Scotland is not a member of the EU. The EU has 28 members. Scotland is not one of them.
Scotland is currently a non-independent country part of a union that's a member of the EU, and whose population are EU citizens.
It's a unique situation. Unique situations require unique solutions, and a sensible one will be negotiated.
Twitter, literally a self selecting medium.Pros and cons to it really. But the flaws are very real.
Absolutely - I do follow Better Together as well, but there's always the risk that you get self-referential and everyone just starts quoting each other,
It's a unique situation.
in what sense is it unique?
bencooper - Member"I'm disappointed to hear that your commitment to Scottish Freedom doesn't appear to take up much of your time."
Nah, I just know there's not much point discussing it on here
Yes I had noticed how you can't be bothered discussing Scottish independence "on here". 🙂
.
in what sense is it unique?
That's a very easy one. It's unique because as Alex Salmond points none of the rules which would normally apply need to be applied to Scotland.
EU membership, NATO commitments, currency union, cause difficulties and awkward questions to be asked ? Don't worry Scotland because is special, and anyone who says differently is just been completely "negative".
In fact Scotland is so different that after it becomes "independent" it will be able to cut taxes and increase public spending, presumably after Alex Salmond has waved his magic wand. And again if anyone suggests differently then they are just being negative.
It's a unique situation. Unique situations require unique solutions, and a sensible one will be negotiated.
This will be very interesting to see - Personally I think Scotland should be independent, but I don't think they have a cat in hells chance of joining the eu as Spain will veto it, due to the catelan and basque issues
[quote=ernie_lynch ]In fact Scotland is so different that after it becomes "independent" it will be able to cut taxes and increase public spending, presumably after Alex Salmond has waved his magic wand. And again if anyone suggests differently then they are just being negative.
I just got defriended by TJ for pointing that one out to him 🙁
Oh well, AS and his worthy advisers (Stiglitz, Mirlees etc) now have the final chance to put things straight. The Scottish affairs select committee has just pronounced the idea of a CU as a 'dead parrot.'
They conclude that no present or future government could enter a CU without destroying their political and economic credibility.
“The committee also believes that such clarity is necessary: not only because a joint currency would be against the best interests of both the continuing United Kingdom and a separate Scotland, but also because the people of Scotland deserve to know before the referendum what the true consequence of their vote might be,” the MPs said.
Quite. They must have been reading this thread.
Not surprisingly, a spokesman for AS dismissed their findings! Common Alex, time to earn you money and show us plan D!
But Ian Davidson, the Labour chair of the committee, said there would definitely be no union: “No ifs, no buts, no fudges, no deals”. That had been firmly stated by the leadership of the UK’s three main political parties. “There is no shadow of doubt. All were unequivocal,” he said. “The Scottish government tries to give the impression that a currency union is still a possibility. It is not. This parrot is dead.”
They really have been reading this thread....
[b]In such a situation, a separate Scotland's interest rates and key aspects of its public finances, tax and spending choices would be decided by a Government and in a Parliament where Scotland was no longer represented.[/b]
Be careful what you wish/vote for!!!!
More snake oil anyone?
EDIT:
MY BOLDIn such a situation, a separate [b]Scotland's interest rates[/b] and key aspects of its public finances, tax and spending choices [b]would be decided by a Government and in a Parliament[/b] where Scotland was no longer represented.
I am not an economists but could you remind the class exactly how the Uk interest rates are set?
I was labouring under the misconception that it was set by the Bank of england who were completely independent of government and had been since 1998. is this really not the case? If you could forgive the troll and answer the question I would be delighted to read your clarification as it appears you have quoted an inaccuracy that you would consider a lie were AS to do it.
It would seem you do indeed have some snake oil to peddle.
Go on insult your way out of that one THM whilst not explaining the role of MPC to the class. Thi is exactly what you moan at AS for doing and you are informed enough to know exactly how interest rates are set and you know it is not by parliament
I believe you would call the committee report politically motivated were it not for the fact that you agree with with those no voters from west minister saying what they think about the referenduum.
I would also have thought the report was Ultra vires given their remit but lets ignore that bit.
you need to get this through your skull: Scotland is not a member of the EU*. The EU has 28 members. Scotland is not one of them.
That is true scotland is not a member state the UK is. However Scotland is a member of the UK.
If scotland was not in the EU [ by virtue of being in the UK] then people born in scotland are not EU citizens and when you went there you would not be in the EU. That is clearly not the case because it is in the EU.
Using your argument if the EU signed a treaty[ on behalf of all the members] your argument would be that the UK is not part of it as the EU signed it and the UK is not named on the list. Its not a great argument.
I think Ben is correct in that it is unique in the sense a current part of the EU will stop being a member and need to reapply /apply for membership. So far all they have had is new countries, not currently part of the EU, apply [ and East Germany via unification.
I also think it is correct that the Spanish are likely to be the main obstacle but I bet the EU can find a fudge through that somehow if they will it.
I am not an economists but could you remind the class exactly how the Uk interest rates are set?
I was labouring under the misconception that it was set by the Bank of England who were completely independent of government and had been since 1998. is this really not the case?
A political decision made by the UK parliament, The 1998 Bank of England Act, Scotland would have no say in in the appointment of members of the MPC, in the target inflation rate, or whether the constitution, function or role of the MPC changed in the future.
Essentially, its entirely a creation of the UK parliament, and therefore remains entirely under UK government control.
[quote=Junkyard ]I was labouring under the misconception that it was set by the Bank of england who were completely independent of government and had been since 1998.
Well kind of. The decisions they make are completely independent, the target they are required to meet is set by government.
Though I suppose in the context of an "independent" Scotland being in a currency union with the rUK, it is quite independent.
This would be a very different discussion if John Major had joined the Euro all those years ago, rather than making such a fuss.
@Junkyard
Interest rates are set by the MPC/BoE according to the criteria set by Government eg UK ecomonic activity, inflation target etc
Finances, tax and spending are set by the Government
So whilst you might argue Interest Rates are nto set directly by the Government everything else is.
JY an independent Scotland will have the euro, sooner (possibly immediately upon joining) or later.
Don't feed, it's more fun just to watch - freedom of speech and all that.
WOOOSH.
I also think it is correct that the Spanish are likely to be the main obstacle but I bet the EU can find a fudge through that somehow if they will it.
You bet, they'll want the VAT Scotland generates! Scotland will indeed be a special case in that regard.
I don't agree with your point on interest rates though; the committee's terms of reference are set by the Treasury. The Term can be changed at any time if the Treasury don't like the rate as set by the Committee.
You bet, they'll want the VAT Scotland generates! Scotland will indeed be a special case in that regard.
@blurty - genuine question as I don't understand your point. Scottish VAT stays in an independent Scotland. Also how much VAT does a 5m person country produce anyway, not much on an EU wide basis. The argument for keeping Scotland in the EU by the other countries would be based on the size of their budget contribution. Spain is positioned against as they are concerned about creating a precident for Basque or Catalan regions to become independent knowing they could join the EU easily/at all.
Essentially, its entirely a creation of the UK parliament, and therefore remains entirely under UK government control.
Your point is that it is independent but they could absolve it .
I dont disagree but interest rates are currently not set by the parliament which was the claim.
the target they are required to meet is set by government.
Source please that they set an interest rate target please. I know they set an inflation one of 2 % [ with a letter punishment]Even if true it would be a guideline/order rule and the parliament still do not set the interest rate as per the quote.
Don't feed, it's more fun just to watch - freedom of speech and all that.WOOOSH.
Everytime you call me a name it is just an admission you have no facts to counter what I said. That must really irritate 😛
Do government set interest rates in the UK - its not a hard question
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetarypolicy/Pages/overview.aspx
Interest rates are set by the Bank’s Monetary Policy Committee. The MPC sets an interest rate it judges will enable the inflation target to be met. The Bank's Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) is made up of nine members – the Governor, the two Deputy Governors for Monetary Policy and Financial Stability, the Bank's Chief Economist, the Executive Director for Markets and four independent members appointed directly by the Chancellor. The appointment of independent members is designed to ensure that the MPC benefits from thinking and expertise in addition to that gained inside the Bank of England.Members serve fixed terms after which they may be replaced or re-appointed.
Each member of the MPC has expertise in the field of economics and monetary policy. Members do not represent individual groups or areas. They are independent. Each member of the Committee has a vote to set interest rates at the level they believe is consistent with meeting the inflation target. The MPC's decision is made on the basis of one-person, one vote. It is not based on a consensus of opinion. It reflects the votes of each individual member of the Committee.
A representative from the Treasury also sits with the Committee at its meetings. The Treasury representative can discuss policy issues but is not allowed to vote. The purpose is to ensure that the MPC is fully briefed on fiscal policy developments and other aspects of the Government's economic policies, and that the Chancellor is kept fully informed about monetary policy.
It is just not true to claim parliament sets interest rates and no amount of you name calling me will make the claim [ which is not even yours] correct. Snake oil served with insults a truth do not make
So whilst you might argue Interest Rates are nto set directly by the Government everything else is.
Its not me arguing it is the case parliament does not set interest rates this is just the truth; it is set by the Bank of England.
I was not as foolisha s claim the others were not set by the govt.
The broad point of the article would remain true but that point re interest rates is incorrect, untrue and it is strange a sommitee would publish this [ like an admission of lack of understanding/hype/spin] and an economist then cite it ...it is almost as if they are scoring political points whatever the truth is now who does that remind you of 😀
It is just not true to claim parliament sets interest rates
Point of order, he didn't claim that parliament sets interest rates, as you now claim he did.
he said that they were [b]decided[/b] by - which, given they hold the reigns of the process, is still true.
"If scotland was not in the EU [ by virtue of being in the UK] then people born in scotland are not EU citizens and when you went there you would not be in the EU. That is clearly not the case because it is in the EU."
You are being uncharacteristically stupid and/or deliberately obtuse.
Don't feed ninfan. Anyone can go to the BOE website to see the answer. Back under the bridge now.
Nice diversion from the fact that Westminster has stated its position clearly again - will AS and his advisors finally answer the basic question......
will AS and his advisors finally answer the basic question......
Maybe, probably just after they release their legal advice on EU membership 😉
@ Jambalaya
I think the UK makes a net contribution of about 15billion Euro to the EU. Assuming iScotland would generate about 10% of that (Given Scottish social deprivation, Vs an 'Accession State' deal on Rebates) then I think that would put Scotland in the top third of contributors.
I think the EU will indeed fudge together a deal to keep iScottish contributions rolling in!
I take your point about the Basques and Catalans (and I'm sure lots of other would-be separatist regions), but I'm sure the Spanish could be persuaded to participate in the fudge.
MM intersting scribble ninfan tbh its a pin dance I dont really want to have [ you might have a bit of a point to be fair ] however parliament does not decide the committee does. It is just not trie to claim otherwise hence THM insults me rather than smack me down with counter facts.
Its also a bit disingenuous to claim they create an independent committee but still hold the reigns could you explain the mechanism to me then eh 😉
Parliament does not set the rate despite your scribbles.
i think you are meant to call me a troll when I say something you disagree with that is factually correct. As Scotland is in the UK and as the UK is in the EU scotland is [ currently]in the EU. Use the example of the EU signing a treaty then and explain how we [ the UK]are not in it because only the EU is mentioned. I still think it is a weak argument though of course the signing named member state is the UK which is made up of scotland [ and others]. It is in the EU whilst it remains in the UK union.You are being uncharacteristically stupid and/or deliberately obtuse.
Anyone can go to the BOE website to see the answer. Back under the bridge now.
I looked and guess what
The 1998 Bank of England Act made the Bank independent to set interest rates.
Surprising eh 😉
I know facts are nothign compared to insults but hey I only have facts with which to prove my case so I hope you can forgive me.
No amount of insulting me will turn that statement into a truth. The B of E set interest rates independently and it is not set by the parliament as that quote claimed. If it were true you would have used some facts rather than childish insults to "support" the point.
Expressing your inability to defend this [ its not even you who said it ]by calling me names is an interesting tactic for educated debate 🙄
Every time I read troll we both know what it means
@JY please read my post, the UK Government sets everything TMH said it does. Interest rates are not set directly but via the fact that the Government sets the rules by which the BoE plays. In any case all of this would be set with reference to the UK economy with no reference to an independent Scotland which was the point being made by the Scottish Office
Troll = Ronseal. No need to make it any more obvious. It's just getting silly now.
Thank you jambalaya - or as the BOE website says, it's has "operational" independence with responsibilities "clearly defined by parliament" and "accountable to the HoC Treasury Ctte,"
Not surprisingly the gov got their own analysis right. But yS supporters need to spin and distract. Plus ca change.....
[quote=Junkyard ]Its also a bit disingenuous to claim they create an independent committee but still hold the reigns
Is is more or less disingenuous than forming an independent country where the economic reigns are held elsewhere?
I meant it was beyond your grasp not that it was actually difficult to grasp; imagine you not getting that eh.
Resorting to personal insults 😥 I must really have upset you when I proved you wrong again.
Its not personal you do not get it is just the truth as you are still here thinking you proved me wrong FWIW you do not prove someone wrong by simply asserting it over and over again and you are still alone in thinking that politicians dont spin or brief off the record.
It is not even close to controversial to claim this.
[s]About equal I would say aracer [/s]
It is BS and lies when AS does it but credible and rational when a no voter claims this.
Interest rates are not set directly but via the fact that the Government sets the rules by which the BoE plays
Excellent so we agree that parliament does not decide interest rates as was originally claimed and we agree the B of E does it. .
Its quite simple does parliament decide the interest rate or does the B of E committee? its not trolling to say it is not parliament who decide the rate it is just true.
the BOE website says, it's has "operational" independence with responsibilities "clearly defined by parliament" and "accountable to the HoC Treasury Ctte,"
It may well say that THM but it has not said parliament decide interest rates and what it says specifically on interest rates is what they said when i quoted them
you cannot deny this. Have you got a quote of then saying parliament decided interest rates? No you have not hence the insults Furthermore THM if you must quote could you actually cite the page please and give a full quote rather than the odd bit slotted together? It can be easy to mislead doing this and take something out of context to suggest it means or says something it does not.Interest rates are set by the Bank’s Monetary Policy Committee[ibid]
Basically produce a quote form them that says something other than they set interest rates independently or that proves parliament decide them.
I await some more insults as my reward for you being unable to do this and not able to deal with it.
FNF, it's a well established tactic - illustrated yet again. Brave to show how little one knows on a public forum, but hey how, that is everyone's prerogative. More worryingly, there are folk who actually live in Scotland and who are voting who don't get how this works either. Still they have been warned.....
I can only find one word suitable as a response to Thm's post above....Pish
At the very least with a yes vote we can [b]choose[/b] to give away influence or the power to make decisions.
Are you still refusing to actually engage THM?
Well done JY. THM can't argue with the facts so he's sorting to his usual tactics of playing the man.
On the contrary, I simply ignore trolls but happy to engage with anyone else. As an economist, I also know how monetary policy works including the difference between operational independence over a tool of policy and actual independence (as do the other posters above who work in this field) Subtle differences I know (and clearly beyond some) but critical ones. But as others also point out, the troll is saying I said something that I didn't (ie, something about [b]setting[/b] IRs) for the obvious reason - he is hungry - but since that is neither my point, nor the point made by the Ctte, I simply choose to ignore this as well.
To come back to the quote, the conclusion is valid. If folk want to ignore that when the vote, then so be it, they have been warned. It's like eating/drinking too much, sometimes your need to be actually sick to learn the lessons. This would be some hangover......
WNB, indeed you can choose to give away all significant power to a foreign country if you so desire, but excuse me if I still think that this was not the point of this whole vanity project. Oh, and as the Ctte suggest don't moan (again) when rates are "set" within a context that is inappropriate for Scottish needs - that will have been your choice after all. You have been warned.....
Yes, WNB, listen to what the grown-ups are telling you 😉
I'm not an economist. So perhaps I miss certain subtleties of the issues. But basic facts - Scotland is productive enough and rich enough to manage fine and be successful on our own. Anyone doubt that? No-one does, not even anyone on the No side.
Worrying about currency and the like is like obsessing over the bathroom tiles when you buy a new house. Important, sure, but not a deal breaker.
Indeed Ben, so why not propose that instead of the current mess. Re the currency/bathroom analogy I would simply remind you of the simple point made by one of the leading economists of the modern era (JM Keynes) - he who controls the currency, controls the country. History has shown that time and time again, it is the biggest deal breaker of all, perhaps?
But to avoid the confusion (!?!) that the comments made yesterday the Ctte's summary is a little clearer in its choice of words
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmselect/cmscotaf/499/49903.htm
The result remains the same.
A separate Scotland entering into a currency union with the continuing UK would mean the Scottish Government handing over control of its monetary policy, including interest rates, and much of its economic policy to a country in which it had no representation.Similarly, it is difficult to see any benefit to the United Kingdom of accepting the risk of default by Scottish banks and neither side is likely to accept sharing control of their tax and spending policies with what would, by then, be a foreign government.
You heard it here first! Ironically perhaps, I have a "lunch and learn" session at work today on how monetary and fiscal policy work. Hopefully, there will be no one wanting to have a sad, tangential argument [b]with himself [/b]in the audience!
Indeed Ben, so why not propose that instead of the current mess
Because, and we've gone over this many times, the currency union wasn't made up by Alex Salmond when he was sitting on the lav, it was what an independent group of experts including a couple of a novel prize winners agreed was the best option, after a lot of of analysis.
No country has complete control of the levers of its economy, but at the moment we have none - with independence we can choose things like this, including choosing who we have unions, political or economic, with.
Not true, you have control over several levers of power (and more is being promised). Slightly odd that the S Gov choose not to use all of them (tartan tax anyone?), given how important this obviously is, but this always has been a topsy-turvey debate. Your intended outcome will result in less not more. But hey, that's your choice.
I think they won Nobel prizes rather than a book to read!! 😉 Mirlees in particular writes impressive stuff on taxation
Oh and as you know, the bright guys came up with several options as even the DO admits....
He told the BBC programme: "The fiscal commission working group set out not just a plan B as you put it but B, C, D, E and F, a range of viable currency options for an independent Scotland
YS just happen to have chosen the one that rUk will not accept for good reason.
Ha, yes, autocorrect strikes again 😉
It is a bugger that - especially on an Apple device (I already edited my autocorrect above!!)
Any way work now, have a good day.
basic facts - Scotland is productive enough and rich enough to manage fine and be successful on our own. Anyone doubt that? No-one does, not even anyone on the No side.
Like Ireland was?
[i]"we have everything it takes for a Celtic Lion economy to take off in Scotland."[/i]
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7042726.stm
Ireland's actually doing okay now, isn't it?
http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0703/628161-gdp/
But
http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/03/13/uk-ireland-economy-idUKBREA2C0T520140313
And how much of any recovery is bounce back after a thorough arse kicking?
http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2013/07/daily-chart-13?zid=295&ah=0bca374e65f2354d553956ea65f756e0
we have everything it takes for a Celtic Lion economy to take off in Scotland."
Aye, you're right, AS was the only one not to spot that a massive financial crisis was about to happen and it was only small celtic countries affected.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing, eh?
Worrying about currency and the like is like obsessing over the bathroom tiles when you buy a new house. Important, sure, but not a deal breaker.
It's an order of magnitude more important than that. Economic and financial management is one of the most important roles of the modern state.
However, I admire your fundamentalist libertarian principles that say you should strip the state of as much power and responsibility as possible. I just think it's weird that you want [i]another [/i]state to step in and do the same job.
😀 😀
Yeah, I'm a contradiction.
That, and I trust the Europeans a lot more than I trust the Tories...
Ireland's actually doing okay now, isn't it?
Sadly not, severe negative equity problems and an economy that contracted by around 25% since 2007. Recovery/ confidence is extremely fragile
(Interestingly, the UK 'bailed out' Ireland at the height of the crisis, just like Osborne has said the UK wouldn't do for iScotland in future. As a major trading partner it wasn't in the UK's interests to see Ireland's economy disappear completely down the shitter)
According to the BBC, if Scotland leaves then people in the rest of the UK will live longer:
But if Scotland left the effect would only be a small statistical shift, with men gaining a potential extra 0.4 years (4.8 months) and women 0.3 years (3.6 months).
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28192293
😀
Anyone want to explain basic statistics to them?
Ummmmm.........
"Anyone want to explain basic statistics to them?"
what do you think they have wrong?
It's a really weird article. The stats all seem to be correct, but they're talked about as if they would have a tangible effect, as if Scotland leaving would physically make men live a bit longer and make the rUK a bit more crowded.
Brave to show how little one knows on a public forum,
Are you claiming the Bank of england quote I referenced from them is wrong? I notice you were not brave enough to produce an actual quote from them [ nor reference your previous quote] nor provide any tangible fact that countered what they said. Thankfully you were "brave" and "charming" enough to insult me again as if this would counter a fact from the B of E.
Unfortunately for you your name calling is slightly less weighty or reasoned than the law and the actual view of the B of E.
I simply ignore trolls but happy to engage with anyone else
No one could accuse you of saying anything to me now could they THM and I am sure we can all agree it s true you are ignoring me 🙄
How could that statement be considered as true?
the troll is saying I said something that I didn't
it was a NOT even a quote from you it was from the Committee so you never said anything - another example of your accuracy here eh.
I simply choose to ignore this as well.
It is pretty clear that you have not ignored it nor me. Why would you say this ? All you are doing here is playing the man over and over and over again whilst somehow , without irony, claiming you are ignoring me. Amusing if somewhat at odds with the facts.
PS i missed the quote from the B of E saying they dont set interest rates independently I assume this was because you were ignoring me in all those posts 😉
what do you think they have wrong?
They say that men will be gaining 0.4 years and women 0.3, if Scotland becomes independent. Of course people in the rest of the won't suddenly live longer.
The stats all seem to be correct, but they're talked about as if they would have a tangible effect
Exactly. Very bad use of statistics.
Ben this is like nats saying Scotland will be one of the richest nations in the world based on GDP per capita. After independence you won't wake up with more money in the bank. Your money might be worth less or more depending on currency exchange rates though. If you ever decide what currency you are going to use 😉
Ben this is like nats saying Scotland will be one of the richest nations in the world based on GDP per capita.
Sshhhh make sure you don't mention GNI, just stick to GDP. Some xenophobic sensitivities about ownership of productive capacity around.