Osbourne says no to currency union.

I see a documentary has been made about life in the Borders

there is nothing but opinion to base it on. One is not a valid sample size, even if the example given was a facsimile of what is being proposed for Scotland. Maybe I’m a cynic but I can’t see separation being anything but painful over the short to medium term.

Are you expecting 5-10 years of recession?

Don’t be silly. The knock on effects will last far longer than that.

vintagewino – Member

there is nothing but opinion to base it on. One is not a valid sample size

You’ll have to forgive me, but an example of one is better than a guess.

The Noers on this thread seem to be raising a lot of important questions that no-one can answer. The Yessers seem to be ignoring them and focusing on hope

To be fair the No ers are going hypothetically this could happen and then getting annoyed that no one can say accurately what will happen in the future Lets look at another example. Will the UK stay in the EU ? We dont know and we cannot say what will happen if we leave. The conclusion is that it is harder to predict the consequence of change than the consequence of the status Quo.
Likewise economically it would be worse to leave the EU [ IMHO] but the UK wont collapse economically if we do.

It not hope to say dont worry it will work out ok in the end [ unless you wish to say it is unrealsitic to suggest iS can exist as a state] even if it is a bit bumpy in the short run. Anything else would be attacked as hopelessly unrealistic by BT anyway

The knock on effects will last far longer than that.

Indeed but what you have to do is list them all ,explain them and quantify them …best of luck 😉

To be fair the No ers are going hypothetically this could happen and then getting annoyed that no one can say accurately what will happen in the future

The noers’ hypotheses are more realistic, imo. Plenty of countries fell into deep shit during this recession, not at all unrealistic to expect Scotland to have some serious trouble and not be able to implement the changes that the people might want.

On the other hand, the yessers’ ideas seem to be based on romantic ideals. I reckon they have about as much chance of utopia as we do in the rest of the UK. Which is some, but not any time soon.

ah right so your guesses are realistic and the others are not

Pretty scientific that one molly 😉

all we are doing is saying the view we have /the way we vote is more informed and realistic but they are still “guesses”

I am not sure why you think they are claiming a eutopian view as many , on here and in general, accept it will be economically worse in the short run.

It also interesting how self determination and democratic will of the people is dismissed as “romantic”

To be fair the No ers are going hypothetically this could happen and then getting annoyed that no one can say accurately what will happen in the future

Haven’t you previously vociferously criticised the UK government for refusing to say accurately what will happen in the event of a hypothetical yes vote when questioned by the Yes campaign?

molgrips – Member

I reckon they have about as much chance of utopia as we do in the rest of the UK.

Which is exactly why nobody’s promising it. It’s a weird recurring word though, lots of No people use it, in the same way lots of No people refer to FREEEEDOM. Always think that misrepresenting the other side’s argument instead of engaging with it is a bit of an admission of defeat tbh.

I reckon they have about a

That’s right molly. YOU reckon… YOU think… YOU don’t know anything, you just have an opinion on something you don’t really know anything about. Read this thread, long on opinion, short on fact. Plenty of uniformed opinion like yours telling us things will be bad in an independant Scotland because, well, no reason really, just because YOU think so. Just as well your opinion doesn’t count then, eh?

The Noers on this thread seem to be raising a lot of important questions that no-one can answer. The Yessers seem to be ignoring them and focusing on hope

This article on the technical matters which will have to be negotiated is interesting: it’s not a short list…

Tbh it’s deeply irresponsible to ask the Scottish people to vote on this when there’s no agreement on exactly what they’re voting for…

Negotiatons after a Scottish Referendum Yes Vote[/url]

for an independent Scotland to start functioning as an independent state, some key top-order issues have to be resolved. Prominent among these are:

the currency the new state will use, and who bears the risks associated with that
the borders of the new state – particularly its maritime borders, which will affect oil and gas reserves unless a distinct arrangement is made for these.
the arrangements for movement of persons between rUK and the new state, both at the border and more generally
whether, when and on what terms the new state will be or become a member of the European Union
the division of the UK’s current National Debt
the division of other UK assets and liabilities – ranging from defence infrastructure to museum and gallery collections
what happens to the existing UK nuclear bases on the Clyde
if rUK is to continue to administer welfare and pensions payments in Scotland for some transitional period, the basis on which it will do so
the means by which outstanding issues are resolved, and what happens if the parties cannot reach agreement by negotiation.

More here

Tbh it’s deeply irresponsible to ask the Scottish people to vote on this when there’s no agreement on exactly what they’re voting for…

How are they going to get agreement? The UK government refused to do any negotiations or make any plans. You can’t tell people what they’re agreeing to if one side refuses to agree on anything.

brooess – Member

Tbh it’s deeply irresponsible to ask the Scottish people to vote on this when there’s no agreement on exactly what they’re voting for…

Basically what you’re saying is, since Westminster refuses to negotiate before the vote, and calling for a vote is irresponsible unless you know exactly what it’s for, Scotland should just forget about independence entirely.

**** knows it is along thread I could have said almost anything
What I said was that it was poor* to refuse to negotiate before the vote and then to criticise them for not knowing what will happen

* for the voters not politically – politically it was a wise move

Perhaps it suited both sides to not really know what was actually on offer- wee eck could promise eutopia and BT could engage project fear.

I think one of the reasons the Yessers aren’t too worried about all the obstacles real and imaginary that are being thrown up is because of a basic confidence to handle whatever issues independence throws up.

Stalinist Russia demonstrated that 5 year plans don’t work because circumstances change. The important thing is to have people who can handle that.

We believe we have those people.

But just in case – Yesterday on my ride somewhere between Bonar Bridge and Ledmore Junction I stumbled upon what may be the secret HQ of the Scottish Republican Army.

On the 19th of September, we invade!

Which is exactly why nobody’s promising it. It’s a weird recurring word though, lots of No people use it, in the same way lots of No people refer to FREEEEDOM. Always think that misrepresenting the other side’s argument instead of engaging with it is a bit of an admission of defeat tbh.

Bit of hyperbole but I don’t think it’s an entirely unfair way to describe the way some Yes politicians and supporters are characterising things.

There’s an awful lot of awkward questions being asked and a lot of avoiding answering and saying ‘it doesn’t matter, we will have change – and hope for a brighter, fairer future’ etc. It just doesn’t sound very convincing – at all.

TBF to Molly – there’s some fairly well qualified people agreeing with his un evidenced opinions (yes I’m sure it’s been done already).

http://www.salon.com/2014/09/08/paul_krugman_on_scottish_independence_the_risks_are_huge/

grum – Member
…TBF to Molly – there’s some fairly well qualified people agreeing with his un evidenced opinions (yes I’m sure it’s been done already).

A reasonable point, but there were also an awful lot of very well qualified people involved in stuffing up the economy.

This thread’s fun, it’s rather like watching every tenth episode of Corry, Eastenders or Dallas; just dipping into every tenth page or so is all that’s needed to keep up with what’s going on… 😉

The fact that there are Nobel-Prize-winning economists on both sides just goes to show that nothing is certain.

How are they going to get agreement?

Exactly! Pointing out the reasons why there’s no plans isn’t a substitute for actual plans 🙂

Basically what you’re saying is, since Westminster refuses to negotiate before the vote, and calling for a vote is irresponsible unless you know exactly what it’s for, Scotland should just forget about independence entirely.

No, what he’s saying is if you’re going to do something hugely risky, make sure it’s properly planned out first! Not unreasonable, is it? This isn’t the only chance you’ll get – if there’s a no vote, the issue won’t go away. It’ll just come back and hopefully be better presented. I.e. the referendum will give people a chance to choose what most people actually want, rather than being pawns in politics.

So with a week to go Darling Cameron et al have decided that BetterTogether needs to step things up a bad news story about independence every day and their name for this new phase according to ch4 news “Shock and Awe” . The name for the intense bombing operation at the start of the war against Iraq.

TBF to Molly – there’s some fairly well qualified people agreeing with his un evidenced opinions

Wow you used the internet to find some folk who agreed with you
You is the awesomes 😉
We can ignore his concerns as the honourable purveyors of truth in the UK have said the currency wont be shared….not that you or the other no voters could ever be accused of trying to have it both ways here.

Nothing is certain – which is why it seems so risky to embark on a path that has major risks and very few benefits other than fulfilling an emotional desire for ‘change’ and being ‘free’ (except for being in a currency union with a much larger economy).

JY – if I’ve got what you’re saying – I think it’s fairly likely there will be some sort of currency union deal don’t you? IIRC it’s the least worst option for Scotland. ‘Give us a currency union or we won’t take our fair share of the debt’ might work I suppose.

To be fair the No ers are going hypothetically this could happen and then getting annoyed that no one can say accurately what will happen in the future

Hypothetically iS could have to use the currency of a different country and have no central bank of its own and no control over the levers used to control the currency
Hypothetically iS could have higher interest rates for its government borrowing
Hypothetically Standard Life could move a significant proportion of its operations to rUK
Hypothetically iS could have insufficient public money to cover all the plans
Hypothetically iS could have to renegotiate entry to the EU, on worse terms than the UK currently has
Hypothetically the sun will rise tomorrow morning

molgrips – Member

No, what he’s saying is if you’re going to do something hugely risky, make sure it’s properly planned out first!

But that’s exactly the point- you can’t “plan out” any of the points he raised unilaterally.

Looks like everyones offski:

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/tech/399323/SCOTS-REFERENDUM-Has-the-Loch-Ness-monster-just-left-Scotland

which is why it seems so risky to embark on a path that has major risks and very few benefits other than fulfilling an emotional desire for ‘change’ and being ‘free’

Only on this thread and this issue has the wish for self determination and democracy been used an insult 😥

if I’ve got what you’re saying

My position remains I would vote for almost anything that ensured the Tories never governed me as , however difficult it was, as that is the least worst scenario.

IMHO the it is a bit risky view[ yours] and we will be better off financially ignores the massive issue of whether the UK stays in the EU.
A vote yes is a vote for something that we will decided afterwards exactly what it was you just voted for.

Only on this thread and this issue has the wish for self determination and democracy been used an insult

It’s not meant as an insult. I do think it’s misguided though.

the massive issue of whether the UK stays in the EU.

If self determination and democracy meant anything to an independent Scotland, surely they would hold a referendum to decide whether iS joined the EU?

Or have we found another issue where the wish for self determination and democracy has been used an insult ?

ninfan – Member
If self determination and democracy meant anything to an independent Scotland, surely they would hold a referendum to decide whether iS joined the EU?

Surely that won’t be necessary?

Seeing as all the Westminster pundits say we’re not getting in.

Anyway, one step at a time… 🙂

The reasons for no Pre Referendum negotiation were given in evidence to the House of Lords

Scottish independence: constitutional implications of the referendum – Constitution Committee Contents

CHAPTER 4: negotiations

Pre-negotiation

85. The UK Government’s position is that they will not negotiate the terms of independence before the referendum: they will not “pre-negotiate”. The first Scotland analysis paper elaborated that, “This is because of a profoundly important principle arising from the fact that the UK Government is one of Scotland’s two governments. UK Government ministers represent the whole of the UK, including Scotland, and serve the interests of all its citizens. As such the UK Government has direct responsibility for many of the key areas likely to feature heavily in post-referendum negotiations”.[90] Moreover, unless and until a “yes” vote is delivered, neither the UK nor the Scottish government have any mandate to negotiate independence.

Granted the SNP wanted to start discussions but surely this would put Westminster at a distinct disadvantage especially if “agreements” had been leaked before the vote.

Woohoo North Korea is on board

Do you think they’d like some nice nuclear submarines?

Latest You Gov poll No52% Yes 48% with dk excluded.

It’s all noise in the signal.

In response to Ben.

The future of faslane

The UK would be crazy to base their nuclear deterrent in another country, which is effectively what that would be.

Is there actually any signal in the noise?