The Referendum Thread

[RickMcD]

We will have a higher GDP and a lower level of debt than we currently have as part of UK.

You have unequivocal proof? Or is this leap of faith which of course means a gamble.

[Stuart Dickson]

Oh FFS.

First off why should Scotland, pop 6m, be equal partners in a currency union with the rest of the UK, pop 58m. Think about it. How would any English, Welsh or Irish MP sell that to his voters?

Secondly - Oaksoft thinks you can closely match the value of currencies to retain parity. What a f**king joke. That would involve matching rUK GDP, it would mean matching interest rate movements, it would mean matching tax and spending decisions and even then it assumes that the currency traders around the world retain the exact same confidence in both currencies and it assumes that the won't fancy using either currency to make a bit of money. The only way to keep parity would be full currency union and we know now Westminster MPs are not going to let the tail wag the dog.

As for GDP and levels of debt once again there's nothing to back that up. The Natsis will point to figures that show Scotland currently have the higher GDP because of North Sea Oil, but there's no evidence that this would continue post independence especially not if the Scottish Government was intending on increasing the tax levy on producing companies as seems likely. It also assumes that the financial markets in London won't improve, that England won't frack all that natural gas they have, and it assumes that the Westminster government wouldn't react to independence by withdrawing the huge public sector funded by Westminster that is based in Scotland.

Levels of debt? Well the Yes campaigns on papers show that Scotland cannot afford state pensions currently. They show that Scotland needs a large influx of immigrants to prop up the economy. When you pledge something you can't afford you'll quickly find you have to borrow to make it happen.

[salmonbuddie]

We will have a higher GDP and a lower level of debt than we currently have as part of UK.

 

You have unequivocal proof? Or is this leap of faith which of course means a gamble.

What he should have said is "Based on current information we will have....." No-one knows what the future will bring, does the No camp have unequivocal proof that we will be better off staying in the union? Didn't think so......

[oaksoft]

So how can we say we will be a wealthier nation if a much bigger country using the same currency says it's worth hee haw?

It's the same name of currency. There would be a different picture on the coin. Both would be called the pound and Scotland could if it wanted to, ensure it was worth the same as the RUK pound.

Technically it wouldn't be the same currency because that would require monetary union.

Why would you think RUK would be capable of unilaterally devaluing the currency of a different country?

The markets would dictate that.

TBH I'm not really sure why this is confusing you bud.

None of this matters anyway because the RUK would of obviously accept a monetary union in the case of a YES vote because all the evidence points to that - a position backed up by economics experts and at least one Nobel Prize winning ecconomist. Right now, the NO campaign is relying on the opinion of a humphrey.

Edited February 17, 2014 by oaksoft

[oaksoft]

What he should have said is "Based on current information we will have....." No-one knows what the future will bring, does the No camp have unequivocal proof that we will be better off staying in the union? Didn't think so......

In fairness the union is better for everyone.

Unless you are of course poor, uneducated, disabled, an immigrant, an asylum seeker, a child of any of that lot, unemployed, under employed, a young family trying to buy a house, a young mother trying to afford childcare, a woman trying to get on the board of a company, a woman trying to access equal pay, a council tenant with an unused room, a homosexual trying to get married to the person you love without interference from others...............oooh the list is endless.

Oh to be white and come from a rich family. Life must be great for them. Otherwise name 10 great things about the UK which we benefit from because TBH things look a bit shite from where I'm standing. Come on guys, make your case.

[ScotstounSaint]

 

In fairness the union is better for everyone.

Unless you are of course poor, uneducated, disabled, an immigrant, an asylum seeker, a child of any of that lot, unemployed, under employed, a young family trying to buy a house, a young mother trying to afford childcare, a woman trying to get on the board of a company, a woman trying to access equal pay, a council tenant with an unused room, a homosexual trying to get married to the person you love without interference from others...............oooh the list is endless.

 

Oh to be white and come from a rich family. Life must be great for them. Otherwise name 10 great things about the UK which we benefit from because TBH things look a bit shite from where I'm standing. Come on guys, make your case.

You don't need to have come from a rich family to be rich. An education and a brain are required though.

[Stuart Dickson]

"Please, please tell your friends to stop bullying me"

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/independence-referendum-alex-salmond-writes-3150801?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

LOL so much for the big tough talking statesman who's going to get his way in every negotiation. I think George Osbourne has succeeded in making Mad Alex go home tae think again!

[Stuart Dickson]

It's the same name of currency. There would be a different picture on the coin. Both would be called the pound and Scotland could if it wanted to, ensure it was worth the same as the RUK pound.

Technically it wouldn't be the same currency because that would require monetary union.

Why would you think RUK would be capable of unilaterally devaluing the currency of a different country?

The markets would dictate that.

TBH I'm not really sure why this is confusing you bud.

None of this matters anyway because the RUK would of obviously accept a monetary union in the case of a YES vote because all the evidence points to that - a position backed up by economics experts and at least one Nobel Prize winning ecconomist. Right now, the NO campaign is relying on the opinion of a humphrey.

Oh FFS Oaksoft, please stop.

How the f**k can you ensure that both currencies would be worth the same if you don't have a currency union. No-one in the history of economics has managed to map the currency valuation of another country on the world markets. Even within the EU they had to issue a target range for entry criteria into the EMU and Sterling struggled to meet the criteria at any point.

Even if you could map the other countries interest rates, GDP, taxation, spending etc, etc you cannot possibly stop speculators from devaluing one currency in order to make a profit as we've seen time and time again in recent years.

As for the rest of your shite, it's just that. Honestly how can you justify Scotland having parity in an currency union whilst refusing to take on half of the total UK National Debt.

To put it in simple terms Oaksoft, I am currently going through a divorce. When I was married we had a joint bank account. The first thing we did on separation was to close that account and to have our respective wages paid into our own bank accounts, because quite obviously it would be unbelievably stupid to allow my ex wife to continue to have access to the money I was earning. Why should a political divorce be any different?

[Drew]

You have unequivocal proof? Or is this leap of faith which of course means a gamble.

The course of history is littered with gambles.

If people want any form of change, they have to be prepared to take a gamble from time to time.

This is our time.

[pozbaird]

In fairness the union is better for everyone.

Unless you are of course poor, uneducated, disabled, an immigrant, an asylum seeker, a child of any of that lot, unemployed, under employed, a young family trying to buy a house, a young mother trying to afford childcare, a woman trying to get on the board of a company, a woman trying to access equal pay, a council tenant with an unused room, a homosexual trying to get married to the person you love

... and everything will be better for these disparate groups in an independent Scotland? Has Alex Salmond let you borrow his magic wand?

Mind you, if you ARE saying independence will be better for these people, then looking at 90% of them, an overwhelming 'yes' vote is assured in Greenock.

Drum roll.... Ker-tish!

[Drew]

Oh FFS Oaksoft, please stop.

How the f**k can you ensure that both currencies would be worth the same if you don't have a currency union. No-one in the history of economics has managed to map the currency valuation of another country on the world markets. Even within the EU they had to issue a target range for entry criteria into the EMU and Sterling struggled to meet the criteria at any point.

Even if you could map the other countries interest rates, GDP, taxation, spending etc, etc you cannot possibly stop speculators from devaluing one currency in order to make a profit as we've seen time and time again in recent years.

As for the rest of your shite, it's just that. Honestly how can you justify Scotland having parity in an currency union whilst refusing to take on half of the total UK National Debt.

To put it in simple terms Oaksoft, I am currently going through a divorce. When I was married we had a joint bank account. The first thing we did on separation was to close that account and to have our respective wages paid into our own bank accounts, because quite obviously it would be unbelievably stupid to allow my ex wife to continue to have access to the money I was earning. Why should a political divorce be any different?

You have completely missed the point of what Oaksoft was saying.

China has pegged its currency to the US dollar. As has Panama, and several others. They don't have currency union, do they? In fact, Jersey has an informal currency union with the UK.

In any event, if you had read a few posts back, you would see quite clear explanations as to why any notion of a currency being worth the same across nation states is spurious. You really need to start reading other people's posts as opposed to simply frothing at the mouth as you trawl through the Daily Mail website with a view to formulating your own.

To borrow your divorce analogy, it seems to me that the Westminster crowd are talking up how much they love us and want us to stay together, but should we choose to make the break, they are going to do everything they can to punish us for this. Classy, eh?

[Drew]

... and everything will be better for these disparate groups in an independent Scotland? Has Alex Salmond let you borrow his magic wand?

In fairness, I assumed he was suggesting that the status quo doesn't serve everyone equally well, and it might be worth considering how we might collectively (by devolving more power to Scotland by way of a YES vote) look to address this. As I asserted in an earlier post, I'm not confident that a great deal will change in terms of securing a fairer and more equitable society as long as we have the political (and social) elite pulling the strings in Westminster.

Edited February 17, 2014 by Drew

[Stuart Dickson]

You have completely missed the point of what Oaksoft was saying.

China has pegged its currency to the US dollar. As has Panama, and several others. They don't have currency union, do they? In fact, Jersey has an informal currency union with the UK.

In any event, if you had read a few posts back, you would see quite clear explanations as to why any notion of a currency being worth the same across nation states is spurious. You really need to start reading other people's posts as opposed to simply frothing at the mouth as you trawl through the Daily Mail website with a view to formulating your own.

To borrow your divorce analogy, it seems to me that the Westminster crowd are talking up how much they love us and want us to stay together, but should we choose to make the break, they are going to do everything they can to punish us for this. Classy, eh?

Really? The Natsi's way of handling the divorce is to threaten to leave the rUK with all the debt whilst demanding half the value of the house, the car, the timeshare, the broken chair in the living room - etc, etc. I think Westminster are being very restrained given the madness of the Nationalists. Christ it almost makes my ex-wifes bizarre demands almost reasonable.....

[Stuart Dickson]

In fairness, I assumed he was suggesting that the status quo doesn't serve everyone equally well, and it might be worth considering how we might collectively (by devolving more power to Scotland by way of a YES vote) look to address this. As I asserted in an earlier post, I'm not confident that a great deal will change in terms of securing a fairer and more equitable society as long as we have the political (and social) elite pulling the strings in Westminster.

And what makes you think it would be any better in Scotland, given that you'll be operating on a far smaller tax take to expenses ratio?

The SNP's proposed policy on immigration spells it out as clearly as it can. An Independent Scotland is not viable without a huge influx of immigrants - that's immigrants who refused to come to Scotland even when Labour left the door wide open.

[Drew]

Really? The Natsi's way of handling the divorce is to threaten to leave the rUK with all the debt whilst demanding half the value of the house, the car, the timeshare, the broken chair in the living room - etc, etc. I think Westminster are being very restrained given the madness of the Nationalists. Christ it almost makes my ex-wifes bizarre demands almost reasonable.....

Whit?

The Scottish Government want a currency union - which would include keeping Scotland's share of the national debt.

You're losing it Stuart. I'm assuming this divorce is proving stressful?

[Drew]

And what makes you think it would be any better in Scotland, given that you'll be operating on a far smaller tax take to expenses ratio?

The SNP's proposed policy on immigration spells it out as clearly as it can. An Independent Scotland is not viable without a huge influx of immigrants - that's immigrants who refused to come to Scotland even when Labour left the door wide open.

How do you know what the 'tax take' to expenditure ratio will be?

Your contribution regarding immigration doesn't dignify a response.

[smcc]

In fairness, I assumed he was suggesting that the status quo doesn't serve everyone equally well, and it might be worth considering how we might collectively (by devolving more power to Scotland by way of a YES vote) look to address this. As I asserted in an earlier post, I'm confident that not a great deal will change in terms of securing a fairer and more equitable society as long as we have the political (and social) elite pulling the strings in Westminster.

Fixed it for you, Drew. I'm confident that that was what you really meant to say!

To go off on another tack, why does Barroso say that Scotland will have to negotiate entry to the EU as a new country if it becomes independent? The present EU member, the UK, was formed by a union of the kingdoms of Scotland and England (including the pricipality of Wales). Northern Ireland was incorporated as an afterthought. Surely if Scotland votes to leave the UK the UK ceases to exist and England/Wales/NI would also have apply to be admitted.

[Maboza]

wee query for the economists among you... re the economy of an Independent Scotland.

As far as I can tell, the Yes campaign say we will be better off as an independent country.

If that is the case, and we retained the pound... surely my pound would increase in value. England, Wales and Northern Ireland presumably would also retain the pound as their currency. Without the wealth of the North sea oil and all Scotland contributes it would presumably reduce in value... at best stay the same.

So a Scottish pound is worth £1.20... a UK (minus Scotland) pound is worth 95p.

I go to Wales on holiday and take a fiver spending money... what is it worth?

I really can't see how an economic union would be in Scotland's best interests... surely it would hold us back? Is it not a good thing that it has been rejected by the other parties? What is plan B?

Well, actually you couldn't have got that more wrong.

£1 = £1 , so for your holiday to Wales scenario your £5 = £5.

As for us being better off - this is not suggested to be delivered by the value of the currency increasing (against England, Wales, NI) but rather the wider economic benefits and opportunites that independence brings. From a starting position of a higher GDP than the rUK (good), a higher tax take per head (good), a lower deficit than the rUK (good) means we're in a pretty decent starting position in comparison.

Worth noting that on your £1 you have already paid tax & national insurance from the initial figure of roughly £1.33 (depending on your level of earnings).

So it becomes a question of where those taxes go and do you get the benefit of it? i.e. will you be 'better off'.

When you consider that the SNP propose to keep the NHS firmly in public hands (compared with the privatisation of it in England through PFI), propose to keep free student tuition (as opposed to the £9k per year fees in England - incidentally those £9k fees come out of your £1's after they've taken the 33p taxes - I'd rather that they came out of the 33p taxes if you ask me). On top of that I would rather my taxes went towards other things such as transport, schools, universities, welfare policies (such as childcare) to provide opportunities make Scotland a fairer society and grow the economy rather than billions on Trident nuclear weaponry and illegal wars. Investments in the country to attract business and higher skilled jobs which provide the opportunity of more and higher paid jobs (which won't increase your value of pound but will increase the number of them that you have).

And going back to your holiday to Wales for another simple but significant thing - if you chose to fly Glasgow-Cardiff with FlyBe then you're flight will be cheaper with the reduction of Air Passenger Duty (tax) in Scotland which you would benefit from (and give you more £1's) - the wider scenario being that air fares to Scotland are cheaper which entices even more visitors to boost the tourism industry in Scotland (already worth £9bn) and this in turn contributes to making the economy go round.

So that ^ details the value of your pound and why it is so much more than that.

We don't need to spend much time on why the currency union is of benefit as simply put - there is currently a huge amount of trade/exports from Scotland -> UK and from UK -> Scotland. A currency union allows the simplest continuation of that relationship without any barriers to trade and associated transaction costs.There are a number of currency options but this is the preferred one for the above reason.

Edited February 17, 2014 by Maboza

[oaksoft]

You don't need to have come from a rich family to be rich. An education and a brain are required though.

You don't think there may be slightly more to it than education and a brain?

[oaksoft]

To put it in simple terms Oaksoft, I am currently going through a divorce.

Why am I not surprised at that.

As for the rest of your post, I'll start engaging when you put all this Nazi nonsense to bed once and for all.

[oaksoft]

In fairness, I assumed he was suggesting that the status quo doesn't serve everyone equally well, and it might be worth considering how we might collectively (by devolving more power to Scotland by way of a YES vote) look to address this. As I asserted in an earlier post, I'm not confident that a great deal will change in terms of securing a fairer and more equitable society as long as we have the political (and social) elite pulling the strings in Westminster.

You've put that very well indeed.

Only through independence can we even hope to try something different to attempt to alleviate these problems for people.

Of course people want guarantees but that's not always a good thing.

For example it can't be comforting to know there's an absolute guarantee that things will get worse for those groups by sticking with the Union.

[Stuart Dickson]

 

You've put that very well indeed.

Only through independence can we even hope to try something different to attempt to alleviate these problems for people.

Of course people want guarantees but that's not always a good thing.

For example it can't be comforting to know there's an absolute guarantee that things will get worse for those groups by sticking with the Union.

At least you can quote a firm union position. We don't know what an Independent Scotland would do for those groups. We don't have costings, tax figures, a currency - nothing. All we do know is the SNP assertion that without a huge influx of immigrants Scotland can't meet its future pension liabilities.

You advocate taking a punt but you'd be backing the dead three legged horse.

[pozbaird]

In fairness, I assumed he was suggesting that the status quo doesn't serve everyone equally well, and it might be worth considering how we might collectively (by devolving more power to Scotland by way of a YES vote) look to address this. As I asserted in an earlier post, I'm not confident that a great deal will change in terms of securing a fairer and more equitable society as long as we have the political (and social) elite pulling the strings in Westminster.

Aye, I know, but how else was I supposed to set up my latest poor gag?

Shame on you, ya bunnet wearing ner' do well!

[groucho]

This guy knows what he is talking about ....

Professor

Michael

Keating

Job Title:

Professor of Politics, University of Aberdeen and Director of ESRC Scottish Centre on Constitutional Change

http://futureukandscotland.ac.uk/blog/scottish-independence-and-eu

[The Original 59er]

It's really interesting to see the views aired by so many pro-independence supporters and their relatively dogmatic following of the faith that is the pro-Yes campaign.

That above statement would strongly suggest that I am against the principle, but that in reality would be wrong. As a generality I support the idea of a strong independent Scotland completely un-reliant on others to survive.

My faith however has been strongly eroded over the years by the quality of the debate and the paucity of the quality of good politicians advocating separation. I recall attending SNP debates in the town hall in Paisley as far back as the late 60's. I remember amongst others, Gordon Wilson speaking and it is fair to say he argued well for the independence route, but the party never really gained much momentum by following a well-trodden path of argument that Scottish Oil for Scotland would make us truly self-sufficient and strong. I could see it then and with the obvious argument ringing in our ears, you would have thought that the Scottish Assembly vote in 1979 would (if ever there was an appropriate moment) have been followed.

I know that many point to Norway as a shining example of a country that has used North Sea oil as to how we should prosper, and also point to Denmark as an example of a similarly sized country that can survive financially in this hostile economic world. Sweden also gets mentioned in much the same way. Indeed just last week there were newspaper reports that the separated Scotland may ally themselves to the Scandinavian grouping more, if independence was secured.

All of these countries, bar none, have anything like the economic profile, the post industrial revolution economic woes and housing issues that Scotland has and will continue to face.

The time for Scotland to have turned their back on the rest of the UK and secured separation in all areas, would have been between 1966 and the coming of the Margaret Thatcher era. Why it didn't happen in '79 beats me, as we soon learned how bitter Thatcher was in her regard for Scotland.

So here we are now in a period of deja-vu, only this time round we have achieved a Scottish Assembly (now called a parliament) and even more so now, there is a terrible scarcity of good political heavyweights who in a political sense tick the box. The quality of the politician debating the argument is dire.

All I see or hear are negative arguments emanating from each side. In many respects I understand the UK parliament and the "no" campaign's position, all they can argue for is much of the same as you have now - they can't offer anything new they can't promise gold for us all, they can't say that if you vote "no" in September all will get better, all they can say is you know what you have at present and the strength of the UK behind you will ensure that it will not get any worse.

On the contrary the SNP's approach is that they can tempt you and offer you little tit-bits and they can tell you that it will get better, but they would say that wouldn't they! They've got nothing to lose................................... Yet I can't believe them. The quality of the debate in the Scottish Parliament building is pathetic and nothing convinces me from what I see or hear, that I want the current SNP political group that has secured a SMP position, as being the people that I want running my country.

The example of Salmond's argument that we must and have a right to keep the £ is of course central to his cause and a defeat of that argument would severely dent his and his party's credibility. Yet no-one has yet convinced me just how an independent Scotland can keep the current UK£ as its currency. Whatever the UK does, affects the £. Either by waging war, arguing with the EU, strength of exports and imports, increasing or decreasing the balance of trade, and meanwhile independent Scotland has no control over that stage,

I've read above that yes the £ in your Scottish pocket would be worth the same as the English £ so on your theoretical Welsh holiday it would be worth the exact same. Sorry I don't get that one - if you follow Alex Salmond's theory that we would all be better off, then the Scottish £ will actually buy you more and the stronger Scottish pound will be say 5% stronger than the UK £. I would then theoretically use my Scottish £ notes and pay 5% less for my Welsh holiday!............................................ Balderdash.

No the policy of retaining the UK £ and then not having any control over how it performs is distorted logic at its extreme. It's a flawed policy and Alex Salmond knows it. I bet he wished that their policy stated that Scotland will establish its own currency (just like the Icelanders or Norwegians) and be truly independent. The groat comes to mind readily.

This all comes back to the scarcity of good informed debate as opposed to tabloid proclamations that are designed to appeal to the Sun readership at its best. AS's counter to last week's economic intervention was risible: he called it the 3 B's, "Bluster, Bluff and Bullying", .........is that the best he can come up with! Yet again the paucity of good debate.

Either some flash of brilliance is going to happen, or by September he and his SNP acolytes will soon be looking over their shoulder at the next Scottish Parliament elections as to whether they will still have their £57,500 salaries for the next few years.