[Closed] This Scottish Business

teamhurtmore - Member

NW - did you see my question on "foreign" students? Do you have the inside track?

I wrote an epic response to it earlier then accidentally closed the window without sending it, because that's just how I roll.

Short version- we're pretty sure it'd be similiar to the current situation, with a bit of legal gymnastics- basically switching from the current "government pays your fees" for scottish students to "government makes a block payment to the universities who then give you a scholarship equal to your fees". There's precedent in some mainland universities, the EU won't confirm it's legit til after the referendum though but all the legal advice says yes. There's a plan B which is much the same but with slightly different bullshit.

The upshot is likely to be that we also use the same mechanism to start charging EU applicants- my own opinion is that's coming sooner or later regardless of the result of the vote, the current situation is silly.

Pretty much nobody apart from Tavish Scott, the LibDem MSP, thinks Shetland should become independent from an independent Scotland.

Cheers NW, I agree the current situation is silly and must be annoying for you. Funny that down here, there was an impression that your nearest competitor (if I understand correctly) was discriminating against non-Scottish students two years ago, then flipped last year (due to the higher fees?). My number 2 wants to come to Scotland in 2016 so will be interesting to see how it all pans out. Thanks for the summary.

One odd thing about the white paper and Universities is that they claim an Independent Scotland will remain part of the Research Councils. Personally I can't see the Westminster Treasury letting that happen, as they wouldn't want 'UK' taxpayers subsidizing the Scottish Uni's. Plus Scotland's research priories would then be set by Westminster which is what they are trying to avoid.

It also then raises the problem of Scottish University access to Large Facilities. I'm sure the access would be forthcoming but at a price. There are real major risks to the Scottish Uni sector in an Independent world.

wrecker - Member

his reply was, 'Well they can't - they're part of Scotland.'

He's probably right, inasmuch as the referendum is for Scotland to leave the UK- it'd be perfectly possible for a part of Scotland to pursue a separatist agenda of their own but not to simply opt out of independence without doing so.

Dozens of countries manage to share things like CERN - that's not a big issue really.

bencooper - Member

Pretty much nobody apart from Tavish Scott, the LibDem MSP, thinks Shetland should become independent from an independent Scotland.

Say's who Ben? Have the Islanders been given the opportunity to say? are they getting a seperate vote? They are as far from Edinburgh as Edinburgh is from London.....

Don't get me wrong if the Scottish (or the Welsh, Northern Irish, Shetlanders, Hebridians, Falklanders) want independance then they should be alowed to have it. I think it would be a sad day 🙁

BUT it has to be all or nothing. Seperate currency (call it Sterling if you wish), seperate heathcare, seperate forces, etc etc. A region of the UK can't demand to be independant but still expect to keep the bits that are convienient/will be easier/work better for them.

slowjo - Member
If Alex Salmond achieves independence for Scotland, will there be a film and will he be played by Mel Gibson?

Posted 1 hour ago # Report-Post

Is Timmy Mallet dead?

As an Englishman born and bred, I am fully aware that I will have little or no impact in the vote, even though it will have an impact on me. I had a read of the Q&A section of the white paper and by the end I was amused and confused.

The White paper wants the best of both worlds. It states that a currency union with the rest of the UK is in the UKs best interest. That is nothing to do with Scotland, it is up the UK to decide what is in it's best interest. And in some cases that will not be in best interest of an independent Scotland. The talks afterwards are going to be very challenging and Salmond et al have already set up the UK as the big bad wolf who won't let Scotland have all its toys.

Actually I think the SNP missed a trick here. Independence is NOT about being better off, is is not about currency unions, decommissioning costs of oil platforms (that is in the White Paper). It is about a state of mind, a desire to stand alone and to hell with the consequences. The current approach is academic exercise, a middle class vision. Where is the passion? Where is the belief of 'give us our independence' and we will sort out the details later? That approach with a short passionate campaign may win. The current one will drive people away as they cannot be bothered to plough through all the details and other junk.

Nicola Sturgeon says #WhitePaper is "thoroughly honest" with Scottish people and contains "rational reasonable" answers to many questions

Ok, so skimming it till the stuff on the currency at the moment, but you have to smile at Exec Summary:

Scotland’s referendum on 18 September 2014 is a choice between two futures.

If we vote Yes, we take the next step on Scotland’s journey. We will move forward with confidence, ready to make the most of the many opportunities that lie ahead.....If we vote No, Scotland stands still.

Honestly? Wow a country stands still....Scotland enjoys a number of unique features but the ability to stand still....incredible!

And in the same summary

If we vote...Decisions about Scotland would remain in the hands of others.

Such as the level of interest rates and monetary policy in the event of maintaining £. A rational and reasonable answer, I guess???? May be it gets better the more you read?

I wonder if the FAQ contains, "getting a better/actual national anthem"?

it'd be perfectly possible for a part of Scotland to pursue a separatist agenda of their own but not to simply opt out of independence without doing so.

They [i]should[/i] be able do whatever they want to!
If it's possible for the scots to leave the UK, it [i]should[/i] be possible for the Shetlanders to leave Scotland. They [i]should[/i] be able rejoin the Scandinavians or the ruk if they want. Self determination, innit?

teamhurtmore - Member

Cheers NW, I agree the current situation is silly and must be annoying for you. Funny that down here, there was an impression that your nearest competitor (if I understand correctly) was discriminating against non-Scottish students two years ago, then flipped last year (due to the higher fees?)

Yeah, without getting too into it the current system means different groups compete for different pools of places with different restrictions on each. I think discrimination probably isn't the right word since it's not done by design, but it's certainly not a level playing field. Frankly undergrad selection is a black art, glad it's not my problem 😉

wrecker - Member

They should be able do whatever they want to!
If it's possible for the scots to leave the UK, it should be possible for the Shetlanders to leave Scotland.

And it is. But the referendum is for Scotland to leave the UK, and Shetland is part of Scotland, if they want to do something else they need to get that on the table, any more than Scotland could leave the UK without prior discussion. Though they don't seem to want to.

Will Sean Connery get a postal vote from LA?

GDP is pretty much the same if you discount oil, it's when you add in oil that Scotland's GDP pulls ahead of the rest of the UK.

Oil is a nice bonus, not an economic necessity.

and

Are you suggesting that having 18% extra some years is a bad thing?

No, but 18% less in most years [b]is[/b], when your case is that Scotland is "better off" removed from the Union. Plus, when you're trying to maintain a pension fund, fund a national health service, free bus passes, free university, free prescriptions, council tax freezes, and whatever other highly prized socialist policies the [s]SNP[/s]Scottish Government have deep pockets for, then up to 20% variation in tax receipts is significant, no?

Sorry for the questions then NW - I thought admissions was part of your job. But thanks for the answers anyway. The "discrimination" was "Southern Talk" - but two years ago the advice from schools was dont bother to apply to EU - its a waste of one of your 5 choices. In fact, that was wrong at least for the next year. In the end, they gave some pretty generous offers to students that I was aware of in England.

Certainly seems a black art for sure! Very hard giving advice.

FWIW, as an ex-pat Sweaty who is currently living in England and who has lived and travelled far overseas for many years, I think independence is a Really. Bad. Idea.

The whole thing strikes me as being as well thought through as post-invasion Iraq and the utopian ideal being sold by unscrupulous independence fans is at best deeply dishonest.

The whole sorry thing makes me despair and means I am glad not to be in "the world's best small country"* at present as it would not help my blood pressure!

*What a crap strapline to meet you at the country's airports.

I think independence is a Really. Bad. Idea.

Why? Which bit of being independent would be not be able to handle?

utopian ideal being sold by unscrupulous independence fans is at best deeply dishonest.

Really? That bad? The white paper does sound over optimistic, but without the UK Gov engaging and giving definite answers what else can they do?

That's what I find bizarre about the whole Independence debate. Already Scotland has it's own:

1) Education system
2) Legal system
3) NHS
4) Banking sector (to a degree)
5) Sports teams

After independence it still doesn't have monetary independence, and without that it isn't really independent. It still will have to act with NATO on sending folk to wars the US/UK agree on. It still has to abide by EU rules.

To be honest the only people I see winning are the politicians and the lawyers at the cost of the everyday person.

The economy of the People's Republic of Scotland is almost entirely driven by government money (i.e. public servants) directly or indirectly (i.e. companies and quangos fulfilling govt contracts). Someone will call me out on the precise figure, but it means about 65% of Scottish GDP is bankrolled from taxes as opposed to commerce. I'm no economist, but that doesn't feel very sustainable to me...

The white paper does sound over optimistic, but without the UK Gov engaging and giving definite answers what else can they do?

many questions can only be answered with negotiations
One side will say its brilliant one side will say it will be dire and we dont really have all the answers.
Lots of things are unknown.

It somewhat leaves the debate as emotive and sabre rattling from both sides as THM excerpts from the white paper show and no doubt the UK response.

Dunno how this works but if Scotland are to retain the monarchy, does this mean that they will continue to contribute to the queen etc?
Will that make them part of the commonwealth?

teamhurtmore - Member

Sorry for the questions then NW - I thought admissions was part of your job.

I'm a recruiter rather than an admitter, I know our processes reasonably well and how that imoacts applicants but I couldn't comment with any fairness on other institutions- there's a surprising amount of variety. Not even just in places, or funding, but just what we think makes a good student.

Fair to say I find it more interesting than the rest of the thread does though 😳

I wish to contribute to this thread only for the purpose of commending Berm Bandit on his apology. This is not done often enough, and should be recognised.

[quote=wrecker ]Dunno how this works but if Scotland are to retain the monarchy, does this mean that they will continue to contribute to the queen etc?
Will that make them part of the commonwealth?
Yes. Yes.

wrecker - Member
Dunno how this works but if Scotland are to retain the monarchy, does this mean that they will continue to contribute to the queen etc?
Will that make them part of the commonwealth?

Yes. Yes.

[quote=webwonkmtber ]The economy of the People's Republic of Scotland is almost entirely driven by government money (i.e. public servants) directly or indirectly (i.e. companies and quangos fulfilling govt contracts). Someone will call me out on the precise figure, but it means about 65% of Scottish GDP is bankrolled from taxes as opposed to commerce. [b]I'm no economist,[/b]
You got that last bit right. Actually, the amount of GDP spent on public services in Scotland is little different from that in the UK.

the amount of GDP spent on public services

is not the same thing as

companies and quangos fulfilling govt contracts

MoD/BAE/Babcocks/Serco all are major employers in Scotland and do not provide "public services"

I give in - only page 150 I'm afraid - slow work as the "Our finances are great" opening takes some reconciling with what the likes of McCrone say, the monetary policy stuff (unsurprisingly) is glossed over at least the tricky stuff, and then you get to what should be interesting the Sovereign Wealth Fund. Ok, wee eck, how do you set this up while at the same time addressing the current deficit? [..........a pin drops..............]

Still the, "we will send a clear signal that Scotland is one of the most competitive and attractive economies in Europe with tax rates designed to boost economic activity and support the fast-growing industries that already have a comparative advantage here in Scotland.....this government plans to set out a timescale for reducing corporation tax by up to three percentage points below the prevailing UK tax rate." [p140]

Ok so now we have corporation tax as well as interest rates determined by Westminster. This "we want to have more control thing" is getting even murkier especially when three pages later we get, "the tax system should be built around Scottish circumstances..."

Still the idea of tax cuts and competing globally on low tax rates will go down well on here I am sure!!!

I wouldn't call Trident missiles, their delivery system and replacement a "public service" either, so there's a saving to iScotland right away.

Got any figures to back up your 65% assertion?

[quote=teamhurtmore ]the Sovereign Wealth Fund. Ok, wee eck, how do you set this up while at the same time addressing the current deficit? [p140]
Why not have a show of hands on here to ask who has both a mortgage and a savings account? If a Sovereign Wealth Fund is invested wisely it will generate a higher rate of interest than is being paid for in any debt servicing - and we don't merely have to imagine such a thing, we only have to look at how other countries are managing.

I wouldn't call Trident missiles, their delivery system and replacement a "public service" either, so there's a saving to iScotland right away.

There are plenty of MoD employees and contractors who really don't want to make that saving.

Scotroutes - a SWF is an excellent idea agreed and a shame that governments in the past did not follow Shetlands example!! A crime really.

But at least be "honest" (Sturgeon's words, not mine) about how you set it up and its impact on current levels of gov spending.

An independent view:

"If Scotland became independent and the oil revenues were immediately diverted to a special fund, the rest of the budget would be heavily in deficit. That would mean that there would have to be big tax increases or public exoenditure cuts on top of what the coalition has already imposed."

May be this is addressed beyond page 150 but I have had enough!!!

Scotroutes - STW's assigned cybernat?

Winston_dog - spot on.

[quote=webwonkmtber ]Scotroutes - STW's assigned cybernat?
Sorry if my correcting and/or challenging your unsubstantiated comments is in some way getting up your nose. Feel free to provide evidence to firmly put me in my place.

Feel free to provide evidence to firmly put me in my place.

I thought it had been established that thee is no hard evidence either way to say an "iScotland" would be successful or not? Both political parties are playing games and basically the only info we have is subjective.

IMHO I don't think being a member of the UK has had an overall negative effect on Scotland or the UK. I think that the reality is that the countries are so strongly linked that the process of splitting them up will only weaken both, not to mention the expense and bureaucracy of doing so.

However, I do think you are entitled to your referendum but I hope that the SNP lose.

The SWF thing is a complete red herring, as Scotland like the rest of the UK already spends more than it earns. Worse revenue from the North Sea is getting tighter, as a lot of old fields are struggling to make it worth while still running.

A race to the bottom of corporation taxes is an interesting idea, used by a lot of old Empire colonies to keep themselves running. However, it runs contrary to the opinions the left leaning pro independence people lot.

Do we have any idea what rates Scotland could borrow money at?

winston_dog - Member
Feel free to provide evidence to firmly put me in my place.
I thought it had been established that thee is no hard evidence either way to say an "iScotland" would be successful or not?

However, I do think you are entitled to your referendum but I hope that the SNP lose.

The referendum is not an election.

That I know. But as the stand for an independent Scotland I think if that fails then it could be considered a loss for them.

An actual, informed debate is all well and good, but your average voter doesn't really give a stuff about the details - that's for politicians to sort out and/or get stuff up later.

The bottom line is that if England win the world cup next year (ha!) and/or Braveheart is on telly the night before the election, it will be an overwhelming yes vote.

dragon - Member
Do we have any idea what rates Scotland could borrow money at?

Another minor issue 😉 . So leaving aside the method by which the UK's debt is shared out (sounds better that way doesn't it) how will international investors react if they get to hold the Scottish bit? Yes that's ok, the risk associated with a smaller economy etc is fine....will they (wee) 'eck. They will demand higher rates.

Actually the corporate tax thing really starts to make by blood boil. What is one of the key lessons of the € experiment? You cannot isolate monetary and fiscal policy. Unless you live in Scotland apparently. So if you keep the £ and have a tied monetary policy with the rest of the UK you need to align budgets and tax rates. Corporation tax is probably the most obvious area of this.

But no, Scotland will have corporate tax rates 3 percentage points below the rest of the UK. We really are going to be running out of cake to eat at this rate.

So I get flamed on here for suggesting that key issues are not thought through. Ok, I accept I am wrong. They have been fully thought through. In which case, this is written by people who are either economically illiterate or dishonest. Looking at their educational backgrounds, perhaps you can only come to one conclusion after all.......

When wee eck is on Desert Island Disks perhaps the first choice will be Whitney's "Didn't we almost have it all."

What is one of the key lessons of the € experiment

Is it never trust an economist?

😀 spot on

[quote=teamhurtmore ]dragon - Member
Do we have any idea what rates Scotland could borrow money at?
Another minor issue . So leaving aside the method by which the UK's debt is shared out (sounds better that way doesn't it) how will international investors react if they get to hold the Scottish bit? Yes that's ok, the risk associated with a smaller economy etc is fine....will they (wee) 'eck. They will demand higher rates.
Remind us - what rating does a very small economy (let's say the Isle of Man) have vs a bigger economy - [i]sharing the same currency[/i] - like the UK?

What is one of the key lessons of the € experiment

that the politics of the Euro are more important that the economics ? True for both sides of the debate as it is for this one?
I dont think we can believe either side as its a heady mixture of politics,economic half truths and spin.
The debate wont be won on economics but on where the people see themselves [ or in EU the politicians]

😀

If it does go ahead, I think it will prove an interesting time in terms of economics in general; it is essentially the development of a new nation state albeit from a stable economic base and will be almost an experiment to be observed in real time.

What's the plan if the referendum doesn't get a yes majority (sorry if this has been covered earlier?)

What's the citizenship criteria? From a non-eu citizens perspective. 🙂

[quote=vinnyeh ]What's the plan if the referendum doesn't get a yes majority (sorry if this has been covered earlier?) That'll be it off the cards for a while. Impossible to predict for how long though. I don't think Alex Salmond would ever lead the call again but any party presenting a referendum as part of their Scottish Election manifesto should/would expect a re-run. TBH, I'm not convinced that it'll happen in 2014. However, I [i]am[/i] convinced it will happen at some time in the future. I'd expect another 20 or so years before another - and successful - attempt.

What's the citizenship criteria? From a non-eu citizens perspective.

Good question Scotroutes to which I am sure you know the answer!!! 😉 Which one shall we ask S&P or Moody's since we will get a different answer 😉 Have Moody's acted on their downgrade of IoM yet? The second reason for placing IoM on review is interesting in the context of this thread, don't you think?

Here you go - http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/rating

Lots of small economies doing OK on the ratings front there. I've not heard the "[i]Scotland won't have AAA rating[/i]" scare since, oh, I guess not since the UK lost it 😆

A non-EU citizen residing in Scotland?

Yes. If there's eligibility to vote on the issue, then wouldn't there be an expectation of citizenship after secession?

Legal migrants can apply for naturalisation (subject to normal checks etc)

A citizen of [i]any[/i] country who has been resident for 10 years and has an ongoing connection with Scotland may also apply for naturalisation.

I think this is pretty much standard stuff?

Well we shall see Scotroutes (or hopefully not!) But it is an intersting point and I accept it might not be as clear cut as I may have suggested 😉 Nevertheless I know where I would place my bets as a bond holder!

Perhaps RBS capital markets will be able to place and price Scotland's new debt inside the rest of the UK. Hmmm, It would be intersting to be in the underwriting discussions for sure!

Scotroutes - there is a difference between the credit profile of the IoM and that of Scotland. I'm not sure the IoM has a very large public sector funding requirement, and the small population is largely wealthy due to the fact it is an attractive tax haven. Not really comparable. Also is the IoM even a sovereign state, or does it actually benefit from an implicit or explicit guarantee from the UK?

Fundamentally a credit risk rating is not determined based on the size of the country, large or small you can have a crap one. Scotland would be unlikely to have a better one than at present due to the increase in concentration risk and reliance on oil, and the profile of the economy. Someone earlier asserted that Scotland wasn't reliant on the public sector because it had lots of BAE/Babcock jobs. I hate to break the news but BAE is basically a government entity, and as we've seen with the recent carrier contract it is unlikely that expenditure would continue post independence.

For Scotland, they cannot benefit from currency union with the rest of the UK without giving up their economic independence. If they took the Euro they would be subject to the same disaster afflicting most European countries who aren't Germany. An independent currency would be expensive and interesting.

People's Republic of Scotland: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/4217793/Scotlands-dependence-on-state-increasing.html

Scots economy hampered by public sector reliance: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/8763562/IPPR-Bloated-Scottish-public-sector-will-hamper-recovery.html

EY Item Club with very unhappy reading: http://www.ey.com/UK/en/Issues/Business-environment/Financial-markets-and-economy/ITEM-Club-Scotland

Of course those in favour of Eck's fairytale will rubbish those accounts. Fair enough.

I just doubt very much that Scotland has the enterprise or the open-ness to enterprise to compete globally. Scotland is an undifferentiated proposition in a competitive global market, with few reasons to commend it more highly than any other wannabe country. Remember, the population of Scotland is less than the accepted rounding error on the population of Beijing. And yet we demand attention just because we are Scottish and we did stuff years ago and we're not English - I'm sorry, but that is not enough to build a nation upon IMHO.

webwonkmtber - Member

People's Republic of Scotland: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/scotland/4217793/Scotlands-dependence-on-state-increasing.html

Er, did you read it?

"Including a geographical share of the North Sea, official Scottish government figures in 2008 show that the ratio of public-sector expenditure to GDP is 41.3 per cent of Scottish GDP compared to 41.5 per cent for the UK as a whole."

It's a classic economic scare story, they filled the top end of the article with comparisons with Cuba and Iraq and hid the comparison with the UK down at the bottom in the hope we wouldn't notice. Oh and a bit of Barnett misinformation while we're at it.

I am glad the 'divorce' will as easily dealt with as it is here. Sounds quite straight forward.
From a social connection point of view, after being told recently by a Scottish taxi driver to eff off back to England, George Galloway asked if he did not feel socially closer to a taxi driver in say Doncaster than someone like the Duke of Buccleuch? Apparently not.

As a counter point could we have a referendum in England to see if we could give Scotland back to the Scottish?

Isn't the arrogance amazing from the SNP. Nato yes but nuclear weapons no which goes against the fundamental defence cornerstone of a nuclear deterrent of "preserving peace and preventing war". A bit like their perspective on Sterling. They seem to think these are one sided conversations rather than considering the other side might not see the point.

What will happen with Scotlands share of the UK trillions national debt?

I cant See England keeping their share.

Salmon wants independence based on upbeat soundbites. 'We'll make us more prosperous'.

Why cant you do that now?

Someone earlier asserted that Scotland wasn't reliant on the public sector because it had lots of BAE/Babcock jobs.

I think you misread my post. BAE/Babcock/Serco all basically the same pigs feeding out of the UK MoD trough. When these high value jobs go the effect will be significant.

slowmart - Member

Isn't the arrogance amazing from the SNP. Nato yes but nuclear weapons no which goes against the fundamental defence cornerstone of a nuclear deterrent of "preserving peace and preventing war".

Have we not covered this earlier in the thread? May have been one of the others, this subject is the whack-a-mole of No campaign scare fantasies.

There's no requirement for a NATO nation to be nuclear. Germany are actively disarming and will be fully disarmed by 2015, Greece fully disarmed in 2001, other members have refused nuclear involvement. Spain. No new NATO member has become a nuclear host since the 60s- there are only 8 nuclear hosts left in NATO from the original 10, out of 28 members, soon to be 7.

In fact, since 1996 NATO specifically [i]bans [/i]new, non-nuclear members from hosting other members' nuclear weapons due to its nonproliferation commitment. (and also bans all NATO powers from stationing nuclear weapons in Scotland, whether or not we join)

So not only does NATO not require us to host nuclear weapons- they wouldn't let us even if we wanted to.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/aug/14/nato-blow-snp-nuclear-strategy

I haven't got an argument with the points raised but Scotland already hosts nuclear weapons and the distinction is stark and prevailing given the NATO reasoning.

There's 2 different messages mixed into one there. Yes, new NATO members can't have unresolved territorial disputes with other members. That's just not a problem, there's no territorial dispute relating to independence, it's a mutually accepted process.

The requirement mentioned that states must have a stable defence history- actually not in article 10 as suggested, incidentally- is a trickier one. Without actual detail, who knows, it's all very nudge nudge wink wink.

It makes sense to look at precedent here though. Croatia began the process to join NATO just 5 years after ending a civil war, and most of the recent intake went directly from the Warsaw Pact to NATO, so apparently you don't need to be all [i]that[/i] stable. Certainly Scotland's defence objectives aren't going to be dramatically different from the UK's, aside from the commitment to nuclear nonproliferation which is aligned with NATO's commitment.

The article then moves on to No campaign mouthpiece, Lord Robertson. Now I was a fan of Lord Robertson, he achieved great things and proved to be a genuine statesman. But more recently he's claimed that by closing Faslane Scotland would forcibly disarm the UK, ffs, so you can decide how much credibility his comments have now- no matter how many times you remind people that you were secretary general, pish is pish. It's a shame. I wonder if he believes any of it.

In the final analysis, you can ask yourself whether a non-nuclear Scotland is of more use to NATO in than out, and whether we're more or less desirable than Albania.

I think you would get an interesting response if you tried to sell that idea to the youth of Spain, Italy, Portugal etc...

I thought Scotland was going to be nuclear free? Or is this policies still being formed?
- don't ask, don't tell for visitiors
- a bit more haziness around the future of The Trident fleet.

[url= http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/nov/26/alex-salmond-snp-stance-nato-nuclear-weapons ]http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/nov/26/alex-salmond-snp-stance-nato-nuclear-weapons[/url]

have they been hauled up for fanciful O&G and renewables revenue claims yet? or have they learnt their lesson about all that.

Haven't read the thread so maybe covered...but having seen the damage they've done to policing in Scotland in just six months my mind is well and truly made up. The irony being that despite the argument that decentralisation would allow Scotland to do what's best for Scotland and not be ruled from afar, they've amalgamated 8 police forces into one, put a tyrannical narcissist in charge, and done nothing stop him forcing an irrelevant and inappropriate Strathclyde policing model on the rest of the country (despite his repeated promises that he would let local area commanders police their divisions as they deemed fit). A total **** up, which is why I will not vote for independence so the SNP can **** everything else up.

That's better...

Salmond at his "best" on Newsnight, So the latest wheeze is the pound is an asset. No it's not, it's a currency. Assets and liabilities are denominated in currencies. But the currency is neither in itself. So he is caught with his pants down yet again and tries subterfuge and basic lies once more. What will be next one?

Kona these currency traders and rating agencies cleary have mystical power then? I met the CEO of one of the rating agencies in the summer, he was impressive but not that impressive. Either that or he was a very, very humble man given such extraordinary powers.

Discuss

Nothing to discuss. Freedooommmm!

They deserve independence for being brutally suppressed after so many centuries.

They can live their lives however they wish. Work, beg, slaves ... whatever suit their taste.

One thing they can do is perhaps bring back capital punishment. 😈

p/s: I will migrate to SalmonLand then from there move south to sack the southern cities ...

vinnyeh - Member

I thought Scotland was going to be nuclear free? Or is this policies still being formed?
- don't ask, don't tell for visitiors
- a bit more haziness around the future of The Trident fleet.

Don't believe everything you read- that's not a change of policy at all. Here he is, saying the exact same thing a year ago: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-20020843.

Hey, it's almost like the media isn't completely neutral. But that would be crazy!

teamhurtmore - Member

Salmond at his "best" on Newsnight, So the latest wheeze is the pound is an asset. No it's not, it's a currency. Assets and liabilities are denominated in currencies. But the currency is neither in itself.

Eh. With respect, that's just not the case- true in terms of financial jargon but that's not the only meaning. Dictionary definition, asset, "a useful or valuable thing"- so yes, of course the pound is an asset

Well we will disagrees politely NW, if we want to be pernickety, in the old days of currency history the pound was actually a liability (the oppositely an asset) and a weird liability at that because it Is a promise to pay nothing but itself. Either way Salmond and Strugeon are taking BS again and they know it.

But if we want to be precise, I am sure the RUK will be happy to oblige Salmond and let him have even more of our liabilities

This is very sinister politics and they know people will be confused by the terms, But it is a lie. Pure and simple. They could both have a tour of the BoE museum if they need to understand currency and balance sheets better.

Sturgeon starts the day on R4 with a lie on the day she promises an honest debate. Scots and Scotland deserve better.

Okay, Scotland will be happy to share the liability that is Sterling - is that better?

No it's not Ben because that function of money disappeared a long time ago. Sturgeon and Salmond should simply stop lying. He studied Econs at St Andrews and was an economist. He knows exactly what he is doing.

Why hang on to Scotland if they want to go their own way?

Other matters like currency, the Queen etc are secondary really as they need to start from "new" again. Hardship is not an issue.

It is always better if they are in charge of their own destiny.

If it is not now it will be in future so makes no difference really ... unless the UK govt start forcing people to relocate to Scotland with incentives.

Okay, so it's neither an asset or a liability. In which case it is worth nothing, so why the fuss about Scotland using it?

There is one reason that hasn't been covered.

The UK is a pretend democracy with an unelected upper house.

Scotland will be a democratic country.

Very drole Ben. There is an answer but it's too late for the economics of currency unions now!! Sleep well.

(he is still lying and I am sure you can see that)

bencooper - Member

Okay, so it's neither an asset or a liability. In which case it is worth nothing, so why the fuss about Scotland using it?

In fact it would be better for Scotland to slowly ditch pound and perhaps start their own Scottish Pounds. UK Sterling pound is a liability ... so is EURO.

Ach, I don't even know what to say to that THM. You're choosing one possible interpretation of the words then wringing their neck to get the maximum possible outrage out of them, when the truth is there's a perfectly legitimate alternative interpretation which you're completely ignoring. In someone else I'd honestly suspect trolling.

The pound- the idea of the pound, if you like, rather than an individual banknote- is a valuable thing. Almost a textbook intangible asset in fact, if you want to stick to the financial definitions. Recognition, goodwill. Though I have to say again that the financial definition is not the only one, I don't want to get entirely sucked into debating your chosen definition when the main point is that there's another.

If the pound isn't an asset, do you fancy changing to the British Quatloon tomorrow? Or do you think that might be a bit harder to use worldwide, even if the financial value is identical?