Osbourne says no to currency union.

Obviously there are people who want to run with an “SNP hates the english” agenda so I suppose it’s reassuring that this is the best they can find.

Is that what they are saying…..”this is the best we can find” ?

Northwind » The funding criteria are based on residency not nationality, incidentally, so anyone who tells you english kids can’t get a free degree in Scotland is either lying to you or clueless.

In the same way that English people can vote in the referendum?

They sure can. There are tons of English people getting free education in Scotland and voting in the referendum.

Well said Ernie. Just imagine if this was the other way round and the capital that the SNP would be trying to make. Blimey, if you explain basic economic facts and definitions (that don’t suit the “agenda”) you are a bully. The only fun thing is (to repeat) watching the wriggling required to ignore/downplay/justify the comments.

The ironing of rejecting a “kid’s comments” while including younger voters in the referendum is the full starch and steam iron version. As crisp as a dress shirt – brilliant.

The trouble is you don’t explain “basic economic facts and definitions” you rant…To the point you spend time making up strange nicknames for nat politicians.

@ Ben- that story doesn’t seem to reliable, with Mori denying they have an employee by the name… Keeping polling internal isn’t really suspicious.

It was Gordimhor – though I believe the person used a false name to protect their job.

Kind of makes you wonder if other westminster departments have been retasked to fight this and what affect that’s having.

Well, there’s the stuff we know about – the Treasury and MoD producing various reports and wheeling out civil servants and military men to make comments to the media. Overseas embassies being instructed to brief against Scottish independence and trying to get foreign governments to comment.

Oh, and speaking of that Cabinet Office Devolution Team:

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/con-dems-dish-out-30k-3536326

duckman – Member
The trouble is you don’t explain “basic economic facts and definitions”

Nice misrepresentation (as per) and easily falsifiable (as per) as lots of links to external sites throughout this thread to help those who simply don’t believe/are not prepared to believe what I say. Including pros and cons and, as NW happily points out, to articles that challenge some of my own assumptions (eg, recent NIESR article).

TBF, I do let trolls do their own work though, especially when it comes to central bank accounting. No point in wasting time there….

To the point you spend time making up strange nicknames for nat politicians.

“DO” is meant more as an accurate description rather than a nickname. Nicknames are reserved more for the Westminster “elite” (sic). HTH! 😉

EDIT:

easily falsifiable

Would you link to your reply that explained why currency was not an asset the only answer i got was you may as well ask if a stumpjumper was a marsupial or something like that.

he trouble is you don’t explain “basic economic facts and definitions” you rant.

Careful now or he will call you a troll.
I would love to see his marking system for his answers and how he would grade his essays on here 😀

On cue!!! This stalking obsession is quite creepy now……

[P23:9]

Its rather ironic that you replied to me somewhat faster than I replied to DUCKMAN but I am the stalker 😛

I stalk lots of people in a chat based forum then iirc its how they work – they work better if you reply to what I say rather than just insult me though 😉
PS would that be a troll or an ad hom then for they are bad.

How can that be a misrepresentation? I copied EXACTLY what you posted and pointed out EXACTLY what you do.Doesn’t matter how often you try to suggest people are falsifying what you say. You rant and as said,have spent 130 pages coming up with strange names and links to North Korea/BNP etc for Nat politicians.

Junkyard – lazarus
I would love to see his marking system for his answers and how he would grade his essays on here

Essays need balance,he wouldn’t do too well,certainly wouldn’t be going to Embra.

No went to the better version across the Firth!!!

(Misrepresentation again – the falsifiable point relates to your ones (which are easy to falsify).Point proven again, thanks,)

What, Lochgelly technical College?

Third page, my goodness.

This hidden poll, assuming it exists. Seems to have been shortly followed by further ‘statements of facts/unsubstantiated fear mongering’ (you’ll need to choose which you prefer)

Can’t help but think Better Together research was actually a hedging of bets trying to determine how to retain the probably/possibly vote no electorate rather than attempt to change the probably/possibly vote yes segment. Intriguing.

In a series of grave warnings about the consequence of a Yes vote, the Chancellor also claimed that Scotland could run out of hard cash in the event of independence, the financial-services sector would not survive, and average mortgage payments north of the Border would increase by £5,400 per year.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/osborne-independence-will-kill-scottish-banknotes-1-3411277

The banknote thing is particularly odd – Scottish banknotes aren’t legal tender anyway, and that’s never caused us any problems.

Whilst I’ve got my suspicious slightly intrigued conspiracy hat on.

Wonder wether this possible poll was conducted as research in a known ‘Yes’ community? An attempt to ‘know the enemy’ so to speak.

The banknote point is technically correct as is the balance of payments requirement that the FT alludes to today. Not sure where the other figures come from though.

But point out a technicality and what is the response – the “Three Bs”. Right on script, brilliant!

I would post a link to a good article explaining the technicalities of how this works now and could/would work in the future but (1) you have to accept that a currency is not an asset to understand the article and (2) apparently I don’t do that kind of thing! So I had better stay on Duckman’s script too!

You will run out of contributors trolls to abuse soon THM

“Liar” – very nice.

The “Duckman script” refers to not explaining things (apparently.) Ben asked about how GOs latest comments worked in practice. It’s easy if somewhat dry – but decided not to waste the link in order to stay on script. Perhaps you guys could help him instead? It’s an important point especially when Scotland runs a trade deficit with rUK.

Nice misrepresentation again though – sticking to the other script perfectly.

But take some deep breathes, you sound stressed. Is it the polls or the home truths sinking in? It’s still a great country even as part of the UK (in fact better that way 😉 )

None of your posts on this page are to do with the topic. They’re all just trolling other posters.

Okay, being a slightly geeky person, I’m interested. At the moment, Scottish notes are backed by deposits at the BoE, aren’t they?

So either that continues, or the BoE gives the deposits back, and they’re held by the banks that issue the notes (or some central bank or whatever).

The idea that an independent Scotland is going to run out of money is preposterous – the real elephant in the room, which Osborne refuses to address, is what happens to the rUK’s balance of payments when Scotland leaves.

Ben, yes at the moment there is “in effect” and informal currency union in place between Scotland and the rUK. True, the BOE accepts Scottish assets in return for providing Scottish banks with £ liquidity. Under independence, the issue would become whether Scotland could generate enough £assets (they would not be able to simple print notes) and how they would be valued. Then comes the tricky question of how Scottish assets would be valued in practice.

Osbourne is correct to predict that an unofficial peg is likely to prove unsustainable. Of course, telling the truth leads to the obvious responses – see above and today’s newspapers.

(Edit: Ducks, I have given you plenty of opportunity to respond to specific points I have made and am still waiting for the answers. You can hide behind the stressful tirades if you like, they won’t get you anywhere though. Vladimir and Estragon would be only too happy to be put out of our misery)

But most countries hold currency assets in other currencies – the UK has dollar assets, etc. So it’s just the same as that – the only variation is that it might or might not involve a Scottish central bank.

Still, in the big scheme of things, no big deal.

Not quite Ben IMO, but I will let others explain. I am sure they are gagging to get back on topic!

Okay, there are technical details which I’m sure are of interest to banking geeks.

However, Scottish bank notes are backed by some sort of asset, and that will continue after independence, so it’ll be fine. Ironically, the biggest threat to the value of those assets would be if the rUK’s economy worsened – Scotland’s curency could be dragged down if it invests too much in Sterling assets.

In a new currency yes.

Bigger threat would be rising oil prices. Look what they did to Scottish and rUK I manufacturing exports in the 70s. Scotland already runs a BoT deficit with rUK. The last thing it needs is a strong independent currency (if that ever happens)

bencooper – Member

though I believe the person used a false name to protect their job.

Just out of interest, is that based on anything other than a guess?

The UK as a whole runs a deficit. The important figures are that Scotland generates 9.9% of revenues and receives 9.3% of spending.

Just out of interest, is that based on anything other than a guess?

It was reported that way in several online sources.

Actually IMO the important figure with respect to pegging a Scottish pound (option D I believe) is the one given by the Scottish Gov ie, Scotland runs a trade deficit with rUK of 3-6% which makes the issue of £ assets quite important – as Osbourne pointed out (under oath 😉 ) yesterday.

“Liar” – very nice.

Why do you use it and so many other terms towards AS then ?
yet another example of you not liking your own modus operandi but still attacking anyone who also objects
Anyone who has bothered to comment has done so against you – it must be all of us then – your good with these evidence based conclusions aren’t you 😉
iS cannot just print another countries notes for a variety of reasons – some obvious some less so

Its an interesting one as whatever way you look at it the two economies are going to be so intertwined one going belly up will clearly affect the other. IMHO the two real issue are
1. what is the best way of mitigating this risk to both sides.
2. How do we deal with the asymmetrical risk as the larger economy can bale out the smaller one but not vice versa.

IMHO neither solution is brilliant and the two economies are heavily linked
Cooperation is best but I have no idea how to best achieve this

Scotland runs a trade deficit with rUK of 3-6%

Quite a lot of that is interest payments on the UK’s debt. Another big wodge is paying for Trident.

The 9.3% vs 9.9% thing has another effect, though, related to deficits. When the UK’s economy is in deficit (like now) then the UK borrows on the international markets, and gives 9.3% of that to Scotland. But Scotland pays 9.9% of the interest on the loans.

No, interest payments are not included in trade stats. You will have to run me through the other numbers – I can’t follow that one. I do not believe that the final point is correct, but may well be missing something.

Missed what my old mucker Paul Donovan said in the ft the other day

If the Scots want independence, they should of course become independent. But on the issue of monetary union, economics must triumph over politics and nationalistic emotions if the problems of the Euro are to be avoided. Monetary unions need fiscal unions to survive, and this is not on the cards for a post-independence Scotland. The question Alex Salmond has to answer is a simple one: can he give a single example of a democratic monetary union, for any mid-sized economy, that has survived in the absence of a fiscal union? There are two millennia of economic precedent to examine. “No” is the answer.

Tricky. I wonder what they reckoned the best way to do that was 307 years ago?

“Liar” – very nice.

Why do you use it and so many other terms towards AS then ?

Salmond doesn’t post on here. As far as I’m aware.

I could describe Nick Clegg as a worthless tosser, and I really wouldn’t be bothered if someone called me the same, but if I called you a worthless tosser I would expect the mods to quite rightly have an opinion on the matter.

Aracer +1

Ernie, very true. Odd that the mods seem perfectly happy for people to call each other liars though. Seems at odds with

The ethos of this forum must be one of mutual respect for everyone who uses it. You may argue and debate with anyone but when the argument becomes heated or abuse begins to creep in, then you will have crossed the line. If you don’t step back from it then you will likely be moderated.

Perhaps calling someone a liar twice is deemed not to be abuse? Who knows?

With respect to AS – he has lied repeatedly. The example I use every time is the one about the pound being an asset. So the proof is there. Funnily enough, the whole GO thing yesterday is all about the need to back liabilities with corresponding assets. No surprise that these guys got things correct (under oath). And no hint of a currency being an asset. I wonder why? Even less surprise that these facts were greeted by the 3Bs!

The World was a bit different 307 years ago, and it was more about wealthy Scottish investors who had lost everything in the Darien scheme than anything particular about the Scottish economy.

I’ve got an original copy of the 1699 book “A Defence of the Scots Settlement at Darien” – it’s fascinating reading, though mostly it’s a massive whinge about how the natives are annoying and the English won’t trade with them 😀

With respect to AS – he has lied repeatedly. The example I use every time is the one about the pound being an asset

With respect to you, you use the word “asset” in a narrow economic sense that doesn’t tally with what most people think of as an asset.

So you’re both liars 😉

Ignorance is no excuse. And AS is an economist so he was doing it deliberately and with good effect as people swallow the untruth (see above) So by definition he is also a deceitful one. It’s a clear are the waters in the Moray Firth.

Remember what it says on a bank note – “I promise to pay the bearer on demand the sum of…” So it can only ever be a liability and only then under certain circumstances. Non-accountants get confused with creditors and debtors but still doesn’t mean that folk should deliberately mislead the layman.

Lots of people think Edinburgh lies east of Carlisle but that doesn’t make it true!

Anyway Ben, a bit of AS macro tutoring to do this afternoon. You have reminded me to go over the parts of the current and capital accounts. Just because lots of students get confused with them doesn’t meant that we shouldn’t help them score the correct marks in next weeks exam!!

Remember what it says on a bank note – “I promise to pay the bearer on demand the sum of…”

Except that if you go into the Bank of England, hand over a £10 note and demand they pay you the promised amount, they’ll give you another £10 note.

So that’s not really a liability for the bank.

However, if you go into a shop, hand over a £10 note, they’ll give you £10 worth of stock.

So it is an asset for you.

See, I can do economics too 😉

wonder what they reckoned the best way to do that was 307 years ago?

Was it the right to bear arms 😉 nothing gets outdated [ ok I am scrapping the barrel a bit and I did like that as a reply tbh]

if I called you a worthless tosser I would expect the mods to quite rightly have an opinion on the matter.

Nicely played ernie but i think you would get away with it anyway 😆
What a strange argument that you can use those words to describe someone but only if they are not here. Would any of you like to argue we can use racist terms as long as none of “them” are here? They are either offensive terms or they are not offensive terms, they are either ok terms or they are not ok terms- clealry they are not ok.
Its either ok to call someone a liar or it is not THM thinks it ok for him to do it but not for him to be called one.
With respect THM duckman believes you are a liar just as much as you believe that AS is one.
I suspect AS would also disagree with you as well re the lie claim – even if it was another lie

I am genuinely stunned you think it should be moderated out and amazed that after that you called him a liar again.

Well played Ben 😉

THM Wee eck knew what he was doing for sure.