Osbourne says no to currency union.

Without a government that has been voted for no we can’t, no idea what bencooper thinks he knows, but like I say democracy states that it’s impossible to predict or know.

So it’s not a reasonable question to ask the wider yes campaign. It’s a reasonable question to the wider bencooper campaign aye. but he seems to know things that we cannot know!

btw I don’t think it’s certain the uk will be using the pound in 20 years time either, there will come a time when there is more pressure for the uk to adopt the euro, the natural progression of the EU would point towards that(edit: especially if you/we have something like a lab lib coalition running things when that happens).

Btw the Yes campaign may be getting reported as stalling down in England, but up here on the ground, nah, not even close, very much on the ascendancy, I don’t care what any poll says.

Common sense (and history) tells you that you do enter into a currency union (or any union?) if the other party views it as being only a temporary situation. The risks become assymetric and untenable. At best, the use of the £ is a temporary solution for an iS, so it’s should be glaringly obvious what the rUK position should be (ignoring the fact that politicians are in charge for one moment).

If you want bets, the like.ihood of £ outlasting the € over the next 20 years is pretty obvious. Since the Euro area does not satiety the critieria for a successful currency union, the € will fail at some point. Politics can stand in the face of economic truths for only so long. In the end, economics wins over politics, it becomes merely a matter of when not if.

teamhurtmore – Member
the € will fail at some point.

The euro will not fail.

ernie_lynch – Member
…Bencooper freely volunteered the information that the long term plan isn’t currency union. So it’s reasonable to ask what it is…

No, it’s not reasonable because that is not something that can be settled right now.

The longterm plan is for the elected government of an independent Scotland to decide.

That happens after the referendum.

If you want a nice pension, that is the one financial bet that is sure to come home. A form of € may exist, but not the current one. It cannot by definition.

The longterm plan is for the elected government of an independent Scotland to decide.

Wrong, it’s (a CU) for rUK to decide, or at least agree. To suggest otherwise, as the deceitful one does, is arrogance and ignorance in the extreme. Or should we say, bullying and bluster?

teamhurtmore – Member
If you want a nice pension, that is the one financial bet that is sure to come home. A form of € may exist, but not the current one. It cannot by definition.

the likes of greece or one of the other countries that are struggling may well decide to go their own way, but to be honest, that’ll only strengthen the euro, if the uk ever decided to enter, that’d strengthen it further, so yes it may be different in the future, but weaker no.

Only reason countries have struggled under the euro isn’t becuse of the euro, it’s been because of piss poor management and corruption of their own personal finances. Ie they rode a gravy train they couldn’t afford.

Ok, I thought it was for other reasons…..

teamhurtmore – Member
Ok, I thought it was for other reasons…..

What other reason can there be for so much unemployment in the likes of spain, during the good time, too many people taking out(corruption) and not enough investment(piss poor management) to ensure that the economy would be robust enough to ride out a recession. why else would a country with lower average wages and and be able to compete. we scraped through like less-troubled because our economy was more robust and dynamic. why is germany doing so well, re investment.

very simplistic aye, but that’s the general jist.

seosamh77 – Member

I don’t care what any poll says.

That’s the spirit ! Chin up old boy.

ernie_lynch – Member

That’s the spirit ! Chin up old boy.
That’s it, you tell us from England how we’re feeling, that’ll boost the no campaign! 😉

why is germany doing so well, re investment.

Not quite that simple is it? I mean German workers have endured years under a deliberate programme of aggressive wage restraint supported by both employers and unions,

German wages barely moved in real terms from 2002 to 2007, whilst in the rest of Europe they were going up, same with government spending, theirs was going down (as %age of GDP) while nearly everyone elses was going up – Essentially the Germans went into the recession super lean, because they were incredibly prudent and controlled during the boom years (hard choices which were unpopular at the time domestically)

iow good management.

you tell us from England how we’re feeling

Have you got special glasses which lets you see what others can’t see ?

Because from where I’m sitting I can’t see where anyone is telling you how you’re feeling.

You claim not to care what any poll says, that’s excellent. But it’s you expressing how you feel. No one is telling you.

ernie_lynch – Member
you tell us from England how we’re feeling
Have you got special glasses which lets you see what others can’t see ?

Because from where I’m sitting I can’t see where anyone is telling you how you’re feeling.

You claim not to care what any poll says, that’s excellent. But it’s you expressing how you feel. No one is telling you.
you need a sense of humour transplant at times, you really do!

I’m perfectly happy with the sense of humour I’ve got that the present thanks.

And to be honest I’m finding some of your posts absolutely hilarious.

I rest my case!

Gordimhor here is the poll link. newsnet panelbase poll

Bencooper freely volunteered the information that the long term plan isn’t currency union. So it’s reasonable to ask what it is.

It’s sweet the way you keep mistaking me for someone in the Scottish government 😀

I have no idea what the short, medium or long term plans are. An independent commission said that a currency union would be the best option, so I’ll go with that advice, but it’s not an issue I’m losing a lot of sleep over.

In any negotiation, of course you don’t tell the other side what your fallback negotiating positions are – you’d be nuts to give away info like that. But the No side keep assuming that, because Yes haven’t said what a plan B could be, there’s no plan B.

The deputy first minister is pretty clear what the fallback position is;

“Scottish Government has made clear it will retain sterling as the currency of an independent Scotland. Accordingly it will not be in any position to meet the prerequisites for membership of the Eurozone. I have enclosed some further quotes from experts to reinforce this point.”

you’d be nuts to give away info like that

😉

Source: http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/S4_EuropeanandExternalRelationsCommittee/Inquiries/20140222_DFM_to_Gavin_Brown_re_ratification.pdf

That depends what the fallback positions are – I explained a few pages ago why if plan B was to have a totally independent currency it would be advantageous in negotiations to let the rUK know that if plan A is still to have a currency union.

I have since realised that doesn’t mean plan B is to keep the pound with no currency union, or have a Scottish currency pegged to the pound. I can see some other reasons for keeping quiet
– there is no plan B, or they’ve not worked out what plan B is
– they’re not actually bothered about the negotiations, just the referendum and want to keep it quiet as breaking away from the pound entirely will lose them support
– they’re a bit dim

I sincerly hope the no campaign continue the currency issue as their number one card, It’ll drive no voters away the longer it goes on. no-one believes osborne.

With a UK general election in May 2015, there’s no prospect of GO conceding currency union before then as he’d be toast in the Westminster elections were he to do so. The persistent refusal of the Yes campaign to understand he’s no way out of that commitment is remarkable.

oldbloke – Member

With a UK general election in May 2015, there’s no prospect of GO conceding currency union before then as he’d be toast in the Westminster elections were he to do so.

People keep saying this, but why? Simple matter to pitch it, better together, keep doing easy business with scotland, etc etc. The biggest issue seems to be the trap they’ve made for themselves, having sworn blind it won’t happen. But I can’t see voters casting them out because of a currency union per se.

It might be a simple matter to pitch it, but believe me when i say that i haven’t met a single person who thinks the idea is acceptable. Quite the opposite in fact, & as it would have to be a policy platform it would be electoral suicide in the UK.

The polling doesn’t agree with that. Ugov poll says 26% in favour, 53% against so not the black/white case you reckon.

But leaving that aside, that doesn’t make it a vote breaker. Regardless of the split of opinion why do you believe it would be a central issue for the election? More important than the economy in general, jobs, schools, the NHS… It’s not something without its advantages and it’s not something that immediately impacts the lives of people in the rUK (unless they do cross-border business or travel, in which case they may be saying good work)

For any politicians (in rUK) to accept CU would show a level of economic ineptitude that should immediately disqualify them from any senior office of state.

NW, perhaps some of the pop of rUK are also fooled by the currency = assets and we share assets and liabilities BS. Such deceit works north of the border, so why not in the south?

Anyway good to see wee eck show some self awareness in recognising (1) that women are increasingly seeing though his BS and (2) this is note a vote for the SNP. I wonder why that is…..?

Because it affects our taxes in the event of a Scottish failure – put it this way, would you Scots be happy to be tied into an unequal and potentially financially damaging contract that had very little upside but a huge potential detriment with a separate & independent Nation? Of course not, that’s why we don’t want it.
Most people i speak to about Scots independence are either indifferent or want Scotland gone & some are unhappy about the prospect but i haven’t yet met anyone who would accept CU with Scotland.
It boils down to not wanting our taxes bailing you out, which is a pretty simple & fundamental idea.

bencooper – Member

It’s sweet the way you keep mistaking me for someone in the Scottish government

I mistook you for duckman actually 🙂

It was him who said :

duckman – Member

A currency union isn’t long term independence,it would be handy short term while we found our feet. It’s the single biggest issue surrounding Indy

The confusion arose because you suggested that not knowing what the long term plan was
was reasonable.

I appreciate that the Yes supporters each have their own idea what this “independence” will mean for Scotland. I appreciate that you don’t all sing from the same hymn sheet. I appreciate that you don’t have a plan. And I appreciate that the left hand doesn’t know what the right hand is doing. I realise all that.

I said several pages ago that the Yes argument appears to be based on faith, hope, and wishful thinking, I can’t see much evidence to suggest that assessment is far from wrong.

The “plan” from the Yes camp appears to be : Hopefully we will get lucky and it’ll all come out in the wash.

Another reason why there is no plan b is that without a currency union the majority of Scots won’t vote for independence. The only way to guarantee a currency union and safeguard all the trade that Scotland does with the rest of the UK is to remain in the currency union you are in already. It is called the united Kingdom. 🙂

muddydwarf – Member

Because it affects our taxes in the event of a Scottish failure

Which is a far-off might-do. Meanwhile many people will see the day to day benefits immediately, other people will see the benefits that it brings in the negotiations… I’ve no doubt many people would be against it for various reasons of assorted quality but it’s a big leap from “many people are against this” to “political suicide”.

Picture the scene

Negotiations: day one, hour one, everyone sits down round the table, says good morning, coffee and biscuits are served.

George Osbourne: “Well, we said before the referendum that a currency union was highly unlikely. During the referendum campaign we had a look at it. we took the advice of the Treasury and they advised us that it’s not in our national interest, and we’re not going to do it, I’m not doing it, Ed balls has agreed that he’s not doing it. End of, Let’s move on…Now what shall we talk about?”

Which is a far-off might-do.
We have just gone through the biggest recession since the great depression of the 1930s. I seem to remember the UK bailing out a few banks that are based in Scotland so it does not require an active imagination to see the rest of the UK having to bail out the banks of an independent Scotland should we join a currency union. We trade with lots of countries and don’t have currency unions with them. I don’t think Scotland is too wee to go it alone and I am sure you think the same about the rest of the UK without a currency union.

Simply put, its not in our interests to enter a CU with Scotland despite what Mr Salmond has said & many of us in the UK do not see any or enough potential benefit – but we do see the huge & disproportionate risk entailed. Scotlands economy/tax base isn’t large enough to return the favour should it be needed so its a simple equation for us, too much risk/not enough reward.
It won’t happen because we won’t vote for it. By all means toddle off into Independence & good luck, but you’re not doing it on my taxes thank you very much.

fasternotfatter – Member

I seem to remember the UK bailing out a few banks that are based in Scotland so it does not require an active imagination to see the rest of the UK having to bail out the banks of an independent Scotland should we join a currency union. In fairness if it did happen you probably get the same situation as Ireland, ie the bailout would just be a long term loan that will be paid back eventually. So if Scotland did go tits up and England bails us out, ultimately that will be beneficial to England. Certainly wouldn’t be to it’s detriment.

The uk loaned Ireland 7bn as part of the international loan deal to bail them out. That money wasn’t a gift.

I said several pages ago that the Yes argument appears to be based on faith, hope, and wishful thinking, I can’t see much evidence to suggest that assessment is far from wrong.

Actually Ernie,we have lots of plans for Scotland post Indy,it is called the white paper,only slightly more fanciful than the Scottish Analysis that THM keeps referring us to as “fact.” AS has been offering to debate this with anybody from Westminster since it was launched.
If Westminster are unwilling to discuss anything in the white paper as they refuse to negotiate any potential seperation other than saying “no you won’t nah nah nah” while sticking their fingers in their ears,whose fault is it the claims in the white paper cannot be proven or rebuked? It has been referred to on here as a good poker/bridge strategy,yet the Nat’s are the only ones who are devious.

Z-11,Osbourne does open negotiations with that line…Wee Eck takes out a clothes peg for the currency and an eviction notice for faslane…That should stimulate debate.

Actually Ernie,we have lots of plans for Scotland post Indy

Mmm, I see lots of evidence of “intentions” but very little or no evidence of any “plans”. The get out clause appears to be “we don’t know the political makeup of future Scottish governments” and is used every time anyone asks for details.

As an example I was looking at the Yes Scotland website yesterday in the section concerning “a fairer society”, the intention I was told, is for an independent Scotland to have a fairer society. However they couldn’t go into any detail about how that would be achieved as it would depend on the political makeup of future Scottish governments.

In other words : “just have faith in us and trust us”. Which is pretty much what all politicians will say if they can get away with it, and hardly signifies a new type of politics.

So yeah, an appeal to faith, hope, and wishful thinking, seems a fair assessment to me. And from what I gather appears to be Yes Scotland’s achilles heel, ie, lack of detail and carefully laid out convincing plans is encouraging Scots to vote No.

I said several pages ago that the Yes argument appears to be based on faith, hope, and wishful thinking, I can’t see much evidence to suggest that assessment is far from wrong.

Whereas the No argument is based on pessimism, fear, and short-term self-interest. See, I can over-generalise too 😉

However, even if what you said was true, I’d still vote Yes. It’s good to have hope in the future.

only slightly more fanciful….

Progress at last!

than the Scottish Analysis that THM keeps referring us to as “fact.”

Hmm, not quite, but hey why stick to what people actually say? AS doesn’t do, so why should those unfortunate enough to swallow his guff? Still waiting for Godot here…..what page was the unanswered challenge on now?

AS has been offering to debate this with anybody from Westminster since it was launched.

The equivalent of debating with a shouty Nick Farage spouting mindless but vaguely populist gobbledygook. Mildly amusing political satire/ammunition for jumping of a bridge (depending on your state of mind) but of little value otherwise.

See, I can over-generalise too

No, that isn’t over generalisation, it’s talking nonsense. The No argument is based on “better together”, better is not a pessimistic term. Nor is it anything which anyone should fear. And there’s nothing short term about it.

We should welcome the deceitful one opening up with “we will make no financial transfers in recognition of UK debt” and “FO from Faslane now”. The immediate reaction would be obvious domestically and internationally……be careful what you wish for. It would be funny if it were not so serious.