[Closed] Osbourne says no to currency union.

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,[b] including choosing who we have unions, political or economic, with.[/b]

rUK also has a choice, no major party in rUK is going to go to the polls in 2015 offering up currency Union and the associated loss of rUK sovereignty and the liabilities with the unbalanced financial sector in a post independence Scotland

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

Quick note to say I wish all those involved in the Commonwealth Games directly or indirectly best of luck for what I am sure will be a wonderful occasion for Glasgow and for Scotland.

maybe rUK men will live longer without all of this referendum grief

Salmond carries on straight up the middle with bags of smoke, reiterating that they will demand a currency union or walk away from the debt and that the BOE and Sterling are assets.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-22/salmond-digs-in-over-pound-as-scottish-campaign-pauses-for-games.html

Do you know what, ****it, I'm switching allegiance, I want them to win now, just to see it all fall apart

In other news - heres the latest attempt to convince us

[IMG] [/IMG]

Not for the first time, the DO is incorrect on both counts. Good job neither are important! We all (not just Scotland) deserve better.

Jambalaya +1 lets hope they are good games. I found them puzzling when I was a wee lad - watching my hero at the time David Jenkins (that dates me) running for the oppo!!! I still cheered him on!

a wonderful occasion for Glasgow and for Scotland.

They are a real asset to their country.

@kona and @JY very good. Has anyone done a study of how many of the Scottish athletes are eligible to vote in the referendum ?

No idea but the GB olympic curling team will be ****ed

A bit naughty for the FT but quite funny nonetheless

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/dc5ae97e-11c8-11e4-8279-00144feabdc0.html#axzz37vfDJjPk

maybe rUK men will live longer without all of this referendum grief

The truth is that life expectancy south of the border is already higher. Salmond would do well to sort things like this out instead of spending all day, every day, campaigning for independence.

Salmond would do well to sort things like this out ....

Any suggestion how this might be done ?

Problem with low life expectancy in certain areas of Scotland is far too big for one person to fix. If it was that easy then surely one of his four predecessors (none of whom were SNP) would have sorted it before now?

What about pre 1999? or is it just a modern problem?

Cheap attempt at point scoring from you there.

Actually scottish life expectancy is only 2 years less than the UK average.

There are much greater differences in life expectancy between London boroughs.

I would go along with the cheap point scoring remark.

[quote=ernie_lynch ]There are much greater differences in life expectancy between London boroughs.

So why hasn't Boris sorted that then instead of wasting all his time playing with bikes?

I have just looked at figures for a range of different causes of death and Scotland is worse than England and Wales in all of them that I looked at (didn't check them all though). It is also worse than a lot of European countries. There has been big reductions in deaths for some causes since the 1970s so it is not as if nothing is being done. I just think more could be done and Salmond should be spending his time on this instead of devoting 24/7 to independence.
After all Scottish independence is not just about the SNP, couldn't the various independence groups have joined forces and created a "better apart" organisation to campaign for independence? This would have freed Salmond up to get on with his day job.

Governments everywhere are struggling with increasing life expectancy and the burden it puts on the health service and pension provisions. I would imagine no politician would ever admit it but a lower life expectancy amongst their population is their friend. Perhaps that is part of AS's economic masterplan 😉

I just think more could be done and Salmond should be spending his time on this instead of devoting 24/7 to independence.

Well go on then, list all the things which Salmond should be doing and that he hasn't been doing to increase Scottish life expectancy.

You obviously feel very strongly about this issue as you chose to bring it up, so you must have a few ideas about what isn't been done that should be done.

Unless of course it was just a cheap shot and you're utterly clueless concerning what a Scottish government can do to increase life expectancy ?

BTW :

[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-26681098 ]Scots life expectancy 'highest ever'[/url]

Some quotes from your article

However, life expectancy in Scotland is still lower than elsewhere in the UK.

But Registrar General for Scotland Tim Ellis said: "More generally, while life expectancy at birth in Scotland is higher than it has ever been, life expectancy at birth in Scotland is still the lowest within the UK.

"In Scotland, males and females can expect to live shorter lives (by 2.5 years and 2.1 years respectively) than in England, where male and female life expectancy is the highest in the UK."

Ernie I don't have the answers but I would expect a politician to and to be making it their number one priority. This is not a cheap dig at Salmond and I am genuinely concerned at the inequality in health between Scotland, N Ireland and England and Wales. To add some balance to this I would also like to know what the UK government has been doing about it.

There is something called the "Glasgow Effect" which occurs, funnily enough, in Glasgow (and West Central Scotland in general).

The gap in life expectancy in Scotland vs England and rest of Europe is down to an unexplained higher mortality rate in Glasgow. In some parts of the city males are not expected to see their 60th birthday. Take Glasgow out of the equation and comparisons with Scotland vs Elsewhere is much more even.

The Glasgow Effect was first noticed in the early 1950s when life expectancy elsewhere started to increase, but stagnated in Glasgow.

A number of academic studies have been done since then, as far as I know the exact cause has yet to be explained. Sure, high levels of deprivation, poverty, drug and alcohol abuse and a violent culture all play a part.

The thing is though when compared to other cities in Europe with a similar socioeconomic profile there is still on average a 15% higher mortality rate in Glasgow. Even compared to Manchester and Liverpool which are about as close in profile to Glasgow as you will get in the UK this jumps up to 30%.

There are many people working on this, not just in Scotland, it is also being researched internationally.

teamhurtmore - Member
A bit naughty for the FT but quite funny nonetheless...

Nice gentle dig at our independence movement. Reminds me of the days of Punch magazine full of North Briton jokes...

Talking of days - 55 days to go 🙂

couldn't the various independence groups have joined forces and created a "better apart" organisation to campaign for independence?

I would expect a politician to and to be making it their number one priority

can you highlight an example where a politician has both got the answer to this and made it their number one priority?

I am not saying it[ life expectancy] is not important but it seems a strange reason to attack AS tbh.

*The campaign is an alliance of the governing Scottish National Party, the Scottish Green Party, and the Scottish Socialist Party.[16]
The organisation has collaborated with Labour for Independence, an independent organisation which seeks to provide a voice for pro-independence supporters of the Scottish Labour Party. In 2013, Yes Scotland covered the £245 accommodation bill for LFI's first conference.[17]
Other groups supporting a Yes vote include Women for Independence and Business for Scotland.

Ernie I don't have the answers

So despite not having the answers you expect Alex Salmond to have them.

Well shouldn't you be making finding the answers your number one priority ? 🙂

The case against the nationalists is substantial, it doesn't require cheap shots aimed at Alex Salmond because he hasn't changed Scottish culture into a more healthy one.

And if the case against the nationalists was indeed so weak that cheap shots is the best that can be expected then that would suggest that a reevaluation might be needed - there is no point supporting something if you feel it lacks credibility.

Ernie, you should tell thm that he doesnt need cheap shots 😛

Tell me yourself - nothing cheap, all pertinent and unanswered!

But plenty of shots needed when you have one of the greatest economic and political frauds pulled since the mis-selling of the € zone happening right in front of our eyes. Fortunately, the majority of Scots are too canny to be take in this time.

It's interesting, after talking to lots of people both Yes and No, ive come to a general conclusion: people vote No for selfish reasons, and vote Yes for altruistic ones.

There are exceptions of course, but it seems a pretty common rule of thumb. When you ask a No voter why they're voting the way they are, it's because of worries about their pensions or how their business will be affected. When you ask a Yes voter, it's because they want a society that treats it's poorest citizens better, or one that doesn't wage wars or has nuclear weapons, or a society that's more welcoming to immigrants.

It's interesting, after talking to lots of people both Yes and No, ive come to a general conclusion: people vote No for selfish reasons, and vote Yes for altruistic ones.

Yes you're right, that is interesting. And you intend voting Yes so that makes you one of the good guys, which also interesting.

Thank you for sharing your obviously totally objective opinions.

My pleasure 😉

There are exceptions, as I said - usually they turn out to be people who have some hope that, somehow, the a Labour Party will a. turn socialist again, and b. grow some balls.

There are exceptions, as I said

You mean there's some Yes supporters who are selfish ?

This is turning out to be more interesting than I first imagined.

nothing cheap, all pertinent and unanswered!

Aye calling him the DO and referring to the the 3 B over and over again is not cheap and it is academic levels of insight 😕

Are you going to call me a troll again and then say that is not cheap or playing the man? 😀

You mean there's some Yes supporters who are selfish ?

Probably. I can't think of anyone I've met who's voting Yes for selfish reasons. One person who's voting Yes because he thinks an independent Scotland would clamp down on immigration, that maybe counts as a selfish reason. He's also likely to be disappointed, but I'm not going to enlighten him 😉

I can't think of anyone I've met who's voting Yes for selfish reasons.

Maybe there aren't any selfish Yes supporters, have you thought of that ?

gets brew offers biscuits

Cmon Ben think about what you are saying here

When you ask a Yes voter, it's because they want a society that treats it's poorest citizens better, or one that doesn't wage wars or has nuclear weapons, or a society that's more welcoming to immigrants.

you say that your yes voter acquaintances want a society that doesn't wage wars, but is the Yes campaign proposing to withdraw from NATO, dissolve the military, end subsidies to arms companies, pursue a foreign policy of neutrality? no...it's saying that there shouldn't be any nuclear weapons in Scotland apart from the ones possessed by foreign militaries that Scotland isn't told about!

in other words - the same old airy fairy bollocks.

Cmon Ben think about what you are saying here

I'm just offering observations on the reasons people give for voting the way they do.

in other words - the same old airy fairy bollocks.

Yup, though that could apply equally to both sides - the clumsy lovebombing attempts are equally airy fairy.

the same old airy fairy bollocks

For a while now I've been struggling to think of the most appropriate description of the separatist argument, I think you might have hit the nail on the head there.

I'm just offering observations on the reasons people give for voting the way they do.

I think every person who votes tory is a self serving **** and I am not biased on this issue 😉

Nope, I'd say you're spot on there 😀

[quote=bencooper ]It's interesting, after talking to lots of people both Yes and No, ive come to a general conclusion: people vote No for [s]selfish[/s] real practical reasons, and vote Yes for [s]altruistic[/s] airy fairy ones.

[quote=bencooper ]One person who's voting Yes because he thinks an independent Scotland would clamp down on immigration, that maybe counts as a selfish reason. He's also likely to be disappointed, but I'm not going to enlighten him

You say "also". Is that as well as all the other Yes voters hoping for stuff?

I was gonna avoid posting on this thread, but did Konabunny just basically say that Scottish Independence won't achieve any of the things that bencooper said were its perceived benefits basically because it won't bring about world peace?

The differences between policies in Holyrood and Westminster all tend towards Scotland being a less selfish, more altruistic society, and should independence occur, Scotland will not have any nukes. Just because it's the first step in a long journey doesn't make it a pointless change!

did Konabunny just basically say that Scottish Independence won't achieve any of the things that bencooper said were its perceived benefits basically because it won't bring about world peace?

What Konabunny said was self-explanatory.

He said if you want a society that doesn't wage wars then the obvious steps to take is to withdraw from NATO, dissolve the military, end subsidies to arms companies, and pursue a foreign policy of neutrality. He points that because these are not the stated aims of Yes Scotland it makes the claim just meaningless hairy fairy bollocks.

I dont think you need to do all of those you just need to avoid invading countries/starting wars.

NATO is a more tricky proposition to be fair given the US considered 9/11 to be an attack on them.

NATO is a more tricky proposition

It completely undermines it. A foreign policy of neutrality as Ireland has would be the obvious alternative to joining NATO. If the aim isn't to wage wars then why apply to join NATO ?

And no, don't give the fairy bollocks suggesting that small countries who aren't in NATO risk being attacked.

did Konabunny just basically say that Scottish Independence won't achieve any of the things that bencooper said were its perceived benefits basically because it won't bring about world peace?

cheers,

Danny B

Ben, in MTB Scotland's July edition there is also a survey that shows that yes voters really believe that 650bs make the trail come alive, whereas no voters are discerning enough to see through the BS. Quite appropriate really.

(But there was also a serious survey that showed a clear distinction along income lines)

Oh look, trying to portray No voters as bad people. That's never happened before.

I'm surprised there hasn't been a nice little picture of a No voter stealing candy from a small child. Doesn't actually need to be a no voter, just so long as someone on twitter says it is.

You can swap 'No voter' for 'Yes voter' if you like.

I'm sure somewhere, someone has done the same for the opposite camp.

The really disappointing thing about all this is just how piss poor and populist the politics is despite the importance. One of my main hopes of this referendum is a reinvigoration of the electorate to participate in the democratic process.

But the underlying quality of politicians is so piss poor that I don't see it lasting beyond a couple if elections regardless of the result. It's just the same ****er cheap shot, point scoring, self serving toss that we've been having for years.

****ers, by and large.

I seem to be settling into middle aged grumpiness quite well. 😀

I'm going for middle-aged saying-random-stuff-to-wind-people-up 😉

Hope the DO did not spend too much time looking at the economic announcements today - NS Oil and financial services ouch!

Probably too busy working out what he's going to do with his 10% share of the red arrows...

Obviously paint them blue and white 😀

And relocate them to Freedom City airbase

Obviously paint [s]them[/s] It blue and white

FTFY

It could be sponsored by a recruitment agency

I'm going for middle-aged saying-random-stuff-to-wind-people-up

the [s]Strathclyde[/s] Freedom Defence is to preëmptively

FTFY!!

bencooper - Member

I'm going for middle-aged saying-random-stuff-to-wind-people-up

You must be disappointed, or are you under the impression that you have successfully wound people up? 🙂

wanmankylung - Member
Fortunately, the CEO of my pension provider will decamp S of the border if required.
What a strange thing to say. Given that very few businesses have indicated that they will move to rUK in the event of a yes vote (probably because it would involve much more expense than it would justify) the only sensible way for the CEO and his team to move south would be if they were no longer working for your pension provider.

Strange when strange things come true isn't it....

http://www.scotsman.com/scottish-independence/standard-life-may-be-scouting-post-independence-london-hq/

And you're pleased about this? I thought you were a man who thought a lot about economics.... That makes no economic sense at all. If I was you I'd be considering moving my pension to a place that is run by someone more savvy.

Security and returns are the most important parameters personally. I would be more worried if I worked at Standard Life and wanted to still live in lovely Edinburgh. As you will/should be aware the CEO has other v important things to consider (regulation, money etc) and no surprise at all that relocation considerations are high on the agenda. I would be dismayed if he wasn't making sensible plans. But you are not the only one to poo-poo such ideas, the DO did the same when Nish commented on this back in February. But the truth, they are planning for this exact eventuality.

100 Cheapside is quite a nice office though.

Still not such a stage thing to say after all, was it? 😉

Still no comment or statement from Standard Life saying where they will be based if Yes win. Not in The Scotsman or in the original article in The Huffington Post nor from the company itself. Are you Standard Life's new press officer Thm?

No - refer to my first comment on this

Two of the UK’s most experienced and formidable bankers have joined the independence debate to accuse Alex Salmond of [b]deceiving[/b] Scots over currency union following a “yes” vote.

Interesting choice of verb - wonder why/where they got it from!!!

Sir Martin Jacomb, the former chairman of Prudential, and Sir Andrew Large, the former deputy governor of the Bank of England, claim in an article published in The Times today that the first minister [b]is not being honest[/b] over what they say is [b]the most important issue[/b] in the independence debate.

Add two more to the list......honestly (excuse the irony) it gets more embarrassing by the day. Perhaps the DO will release plan D during the debate with darling. In the meantime.....

Ah, the debate with Darling, Eck thought we had forgotten that one...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10999560/Alex-Salmond-rejects-two-BBC-debates-with-Alistair-Darling.html

Frit!

and in other news - seems the Catalans are getting twitchy at the prospect of a Scottish Yes vote -

http://en.ria.ru/world/20140729/191445552/Wannabe-Sovereignties-Closely-Watching-Scottish-Independence%20-%20Political%20Adviser%20at%20UK%20Parliament.html?fid=15399&isc=1&did=custom.4515&ctp=article

I'm sure that will play well with the Spanish government when it comes to Scotlands EU plans (ps. we're still waiting to see that independent legal advice Alex!)

Slightly non-consensus view of the debate and the heebie jeebies also in the Torygraoh

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/SNP/10998120/Alex-Salmond-should-beware-of-the-heebie-jeebies.html

Surely the DO can't screw that one up, it's only darling!

This from today's herald
"Standard Life not seeking London headquarters move
Published on 30 July 2014

Greig Cameron
STANDARD Life has denied reports that it is looking to purchase a flagship headquarters in London.

The insurer was said to be in talks over a deal for the 100 Cheapside building in the heart of London's financial district as it was planning to use the site as a base if the Scottish people voted for independence in the referendum.

While Standard Life would not be drawn on whether it is looking to buy the property as part of its investment activities it strongly refuted suggestions it was looking for a replacement for its existing Edinburgh headquarters.."
Perhaps Thm should reconsider.
"Strange when strange things come true isn't it....."

Or he has better sources!l it's pretty obvious what they need and will do - they are if nothing else prudent and canny.

Ah yes The Huffington Post 🙂

The what? The Scotsman merely confirmed my sources.

The Scotsman in turn got it's article from The Huffington Post. 🙂

😀

Or he has better sources!l it's pretty obvious what they need and will do - they are if nothing else prudent and canny.

never mind that here is the quote

A Standard Life spokesman said: "We cannot comment on individual deals as we manage a large portfolio of properties on behalf of our clients, but [b]we can confirm that we are not looking for a London-based HQ.[/b]"

But you are not the only one to poo-poo such ideas, the DO did the same when Nish commented on this back in February. But the truth, they are planning for this exact eventuality.

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/osbourne-says-no-to-currency-union/page/194#post-6193553

this is why you say I troll. You either have to accept you were wrong or call me names or ignore me

I wonder which you choose this time.

Plenty of pension funds operating in the UK are owned and/or operated by non-UK companies.

Very true KB, no one is arguing any differently. In addition to SL, I am a client of exactly those sort of firms.

SL and others are clear in why they are making contingency plans - that is the obvious bit. The legal structure and what you call the building is the finessing. The upshot is the same. The horses mouth is better than the press BTW. Like the DO's name, you heard it here first.

(Ignore)

Really... the horses mouth. Are you Dr Dolittle? Any evidence to counter Standard Life's statement. " but we can confirm that we are not looking for a London-based HQ."?

(Ignore)

The horses mouth is better than the press BTW.

Dont you be trolling him now with facts that counter his stated view.

Gordi, yes and yes! It helps when you talk directly to these people (I mentioned lunch a month or so ago) rather than relying on secondary material especially the press. So spot on,

Yours Dr D.

(Ignore)

I think you ignored the question.

KB, it's better to cross the bridge and engage directly with those involved (and understand currencies, central banks, monetary policy, legal structures and impact in regulation and supervision etc) that engage with those underneath who don't. Simple really.