[Closed] This Scottish Business

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?

I don't think he's lying, I think it's a fuzzy area - one of those areas that will have to stay a bit fuzzy for a while because one side refuses to negotiate before the referendum.

And I don't care, really. It's not an issue that affects my opinion of independence, whether we have £, €, $ or ¥ symbols on our cash.

In the end so long as there is a no crawling back clause in the deal they can vote for what they want 🙂

Northwind - Member

The pound- the idea of the pound, if you like, rather than an individual banknote- is a valuable thing.

Ya, but with UK having the second largest external debts in the world ... ya ... how long before the bubble burst and when will everyone get drag down like US$. They sneeze everyone gets the flu errhh ... 🙄

Valuable hmmm ... I certainly don't want to put all my eggs in the same basket.

And I don't care, really. It's not an issue that affects my opinion of independence, whether we have £, €, $ or ¥ symbols on our cash.

...unless you're one of those FREEEEEDOMMMMM voters, of course.

The whole independence campaign is from my perspective really frustrating. I grew up in the borders with a real sense the history of the trouble and strife caused by warring between England and Scotland.

The UK is so integrated culturally and socially so will it make much difference? You are all governed by Tesco and Newscorp anyway.

I think there is a real problem of too much power in Westminster and this is a problem that needs to be solved for the whole of the UK. It is just that Scotland can hang it on a load of jingoistic nationalism. This though deflects from the real need for the regions of the UK to be able to make their own policies and mistakes that are suited to their issues. London dominates far too much. Maybe in the long run the whole of the UK would benefit by kicking them out of the union and being forced to make real changes to our economy 🙂

All this talk of comparisons to the Nordic countries is missing the point some what. The Nordic countries basic philosophy that makes them work is [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Jante ]Jante's Law[/url].

The ten rules state:

You're not to think you are anything special.
You're not to think you are as good as us.
You're not to think you are smarter than us.
You're not to convince yourself that you are better than us.
You're not to think you know more than us.
You're not to think you are better than us.
You're not to think you are good at anything.
You're not to laugh at us.
You're not to think anyone cares about you.
You're not to think you can teach us anything.

Which inversely seems to mean that everybody is respected and wants to be respected. From what I can see all forms of work are viewed as a profession and people seem proud of themselves. This is total opposite of what seems to be the culture of the UK.

And is it really SNP policy to cut Corporation tax?

And is it really SNP policy to cut Corporation tax?

Ben and THM can argue all they like about whether the Pound is an asset. All I know is that there's no way I'm going to vote for a political party that puts it into some ill-planned cobbled-together currency union in order to end up in a worse mess than the Euro. And I'd be amazed if I was alone in that.

So I don't think we'll be seeing an independent Scotland using the same currency as the rest of the UK.

The Pollsters must be busy today.

Which inversely seems to mean that everybody is respected and wants to be respected. From what I can see all forms of work are viewed as a profession and people seem proud of themselves. This is total opposite of what seems to be the culture of the UK.

Considering some of the 'they have crap jobs coz they was lazy" bashing that's occurred on STW you may be right.

Not only to cut corp tax but to keep it below RUK corp tax by three percentage points. So who utlimately sets CT an independent Scotland or the RUK? It beggars belief especially when he is openly talking about this in the context of a fixed exchange rate. He is an economist, so knows this (misaligned fiscal policies within a currency union) doesn't work. Therefore there is only one conclusion - deceit and lies.

So two key aspects or macro policy for a state - that ability to set interest rates and tax will be, wait for it, still in the hands of those (insert abusive term of choice) at Westminster.

Never have so many trees been sacrificed for so little!

The leader in The Scotsman sums things up pretty well

But in some areas the answers provided in Scotland’s Future fall some way short of being definitive. Unfortunately for the SNP, these areas include some of the most fundamental aspects of statehood. For the most part, the white paper openly acknowledges when a particular outcome is simply an “aim”. It makes clear it is an advocacy document. But in other areas it is guilty of trying to give the impression that a favoured outcome is a foregone conclusion, when even the slightest degree of scepticism would reveal that it is, at most, a best guess or a high hope. There are too many unsupported assertions in this document, and they let it down.

Indeed Scotland deserves better than Alex Salmond. Independence and Constitutional Change is too important.

more recently he's claimed that by closing Faslane Scotland would forcibly disarm the UK, ffs,

In nuclear terms, yes it will. To create a military base that can handle the subs. missiles and warheads will take a significant length of time. There is also the other problem of somewhere geographical suitable. Coulport where they keep the nasty bits, is basically a hollowed out mountain alongside a deep water berth. I can't think of anyway similar in England. The Clyde wasn't selected because the English don't like the Scots you know.

some ill-planned cobbled-together currency union in order to end up in a worse mess than the Euro.

So you won't vote for independence because the worst-case currency scenario is the status quo?

So you won't vote for independence because the worst-case currency scenario is the status quo?

The status quo is a currency controlled by a single state. What's being proposed is a currency controlled by two separate states, with divergent economies.

Worse - and this is the bit that's frustrating - is that Mr Salmond refuses to even admit the possibility that coming to an agreement over how these two states might manage this shared currency might be difficult. There [b]will[/b] be a currency union, he blithely states.

Oh, and I suspect I won't get a vote on independence, but whatever happens I will definitely get to vote on how sterling is managed 🙂

EDIT: unless of course you're suggesting that one option is for Scotland to continue using Sterling, but for the RUK to control it? But that's totally insane. Scotland: just get your own currency already!

What's being proposed is a currency controlled by two separate states, with divergent economies.

Forgive my ignorance, but I thought that the currency would be controlled by one state, but used by two?
I didn't think that an independent Scotland would have any influence on the pound, and that was part of the problem? (for Scotland)

unless of course you're suggesting that one option is for Scotland to continue using Sterling, but for the RUK to control it? But that's totally insane. Scotland: just get your own currency already!

Mr Salmond refuses to even admit the possibility that coming to an agreement over how these two states might manage this shared currency might be difficult. There will be a currency union, he blithely states.

Maybe he's just recklessly assuming that the Westminster government will prefer to come to a sensible agreement, rather than watch Scotland leave without taking any of the national debt.

Maybe he's just recklessly assuming that the Westminster government will prefer to come to a sensible agreement, rather than watch Scotland leave without taking any of the national debt.

There's no guarantee that such an agreement would ever be made.

You forget that we've already done the whole currency union gig with EMU. George Soros bet that we wouldn't stick it out, and he was proved right, and made pot loads of money in the process (which we lost).

Every speculator under the sun would be betting against this currency union and only the most foolhardy of politicians would think they would have any chance against that.

Ben, please dont be fooled by the idle threat of walking away without any national debt. That is simply more subterfuge. Its the sweetened way of saying that as a brand new nation state our first move in global financial markets will be to default on our debt obligations. Salmond may say some silly things but even he is not that stupid. It sounds good though doesn't it. Hey you lot, we are not taking any of your nasty debt (did you watch how he did this twice in Newsnight) unless you give me more sweeties.

I hadn't thought that the Scots were the kind of people who walked away from their responsibilities

We're not - but the No campaign has a habit of assuming that UK assets* are English assets, so Scotland has no right to a share of them. If we don't get to share the UK's assets, we won't share its responsibilities either.

* for the pedants, I use this in the loose sense of anything which has value or benefit

Tsk, tsk THM - now you are just getting incoherent. How can something be "brand new" and yet have pre-existing properties?

Ben, you will find that the methods for allocating both assets and liabilities in the case of a yes vote are well understood and both sides know the merits of each one. There will be inevitable negotiation on that. That is completely different from proposing a default. It's a typical Salmond bully technique which like all bullying bluster is easily pricked *

* For the pedants, "prick" is only being used as a verb here.

yet have pre-existing properties?

It's not a nation state now is it? Besides your just being pedantic.

If we don't get to share the UK's assets

Cripes, I'm sounding anti-independence; I'm not at all. But things must be fair, and the UK has no obligation to make it easy for him.

The Euro area has a currency union, which basically means Germany telling the rest of us what to do - they're bigger and have more money. What happens when (inevitably) rUK starts throwing its weight around and decides on a policy that doesn't favour the Scots? It's a foreign country, why would rUK care what damage it does?

We're not - but the No campaign has a habit of assuming that UK assets* are English assets

So does the Yes campaign, doesn't it? How much English money went in to developing those oil fields that they think they are entitled to? What about the refineries?

Edit, ha, ha Scotroutes!! I am fooled by all those car and bike adverts displaying their brand new models or talk of a brand new start for Scotland.

But actually [i]Scotland's Future[/i] was itself a brand new document yestrrady despite the contents displaying many per-existing properties of both fact and fiction. So I rest my case!!!!

Ireland was in a currency union for a long time with the rest of the UK and its economy did not develop very much until it broke with it as part of preparation for the EURO as I understand it.

If Scotland had its own currency then would it not be a petro one? Maybe they will decide not to spend any of the oil money locally like the Norwegians. 🙂

oldnpastit - Member

The status quo is a currency controlled by a single state. What's being proposed is a currency controlled by two separate states, with divergent economies.

Worse - and this is the bit that's frustrating - is that Mr Salmond refuses to even admit the possibility that coming to an agreement over how these two states might manage this shared currency might be difficult. There will be a currency union, he blithely states.

The important part is "diverging economies"- since our economies are incredibly unlikely to become significantly different in the short or even middle term. Even if governments take dramatically different approaches, economies have momentum like supertankers and obviously the 2 economies will have enormous connections still drawing them together. What's good for the UK in currency terms will almost certainly be good for Scotland for the duration, and vice versa.

And of course there is room for future change- a currency union or even a non-union use of sterling makes a lot of sense in the short term while establishing the independent state, but is likely to make less sense on all fronts as time passes, and that's something we can return to. No need or desire to change everything on day one, and no need to feel stuck with everything we don't change. If in 2025 a new currency or the euro or the malaysian ringit or the bitcoin makes more sense, that's something we can return to- and it'll be easier to do so then.

Have to say this doesn't come across clearly in the Yes message- perhaps because they think it's bleedin' obvious but it'd be good if they'd state it anyway I reckon.

So will being independent make that much difference anyway? As I said before big corporations control our lives as much as governments, much of our legislation comes from Europe and as a people, apart from London and the South East, the rest of the UK is quite similar.

Is it not just a lot of extra cost for a jingoistic vanity project?

Is it not just a lot of extra cost for a jingoistic vanity project?

Absolutely.