Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 5
Discussion
Cabinet Enforcer said:
Indeed, that is an appealing sentiment but what in reality would the alternative to a bailout look like? Massive immigration pressure on a border that doesn't even exist physically right now, maybe even some armed insurgency. Even if there was a big swing to yes it's pretty clear there a couple of million fairly solid no voters. You can't just wall them in and pretend it's not your problem if it all goes badly wrong. The cheapest option for rUK would seem to be subsidy in the early stages (5 to 10 years maybe), hardly a vote winner either.
^This. Ireland had been independent for nearly 80 years when we had to help bail them out in 2010. Easier in the long run than turning your back and then having to deal with mass immigration.Unfortunately, it plays in to the hands of the 'Yes' supporters. If everything Salmond promises comes to pass then they win. If it all turns to s
t then the rUK loses.toppstuff said:
How does the collection of oil revenue actually work?
Hydrocarbon taxes are payable to the country that owns the mineral rights. So BP may have an oil field on the other side of the world but would pay taxes to whichever country owned those oil fields. The location of the head office is not relevant.In the event of a Yes vote, we DO NOT WANT Yes voters coming South of the border. If you vote Yes, you stay up there, sun or snow, boom or bust. I don't want these nasty, vindictive, devisive little victim sts in my country. Because it will be MY country, more than theirs. Hadrian's Wall Mk2? Fine by me.
ts in my country. Because it will be MY country, more than theirs. Hadrian's Wall Mk2? Fine by me. ralphrj said:
toppstuff said:
How does the collection of oil revenue actually work?
Hydrocarbon taxes are payable to the country that owns the mineral rights. So BP may have an oil field on the other side of the world but would pay taxes to whichever country owned those oil fields. The location of the head office is not relevant.Guam said:
My understanding of the Irish situation was that it had nothing to do with the "goodness of our hearts or mass migration" it had more to do with the Exposure of the UK banks to the issues (plus an agreement with the EU Or did I misread that)?
Yes you are correct. I did oversimplify it by implying that immigration was the only consequence. However, if you imagine that we had turned our back and whole Irish economy had imploded the UK would be first port of call for lots of people wanting to getaway from the situation. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-28690534
Even with the bailout Ireland has the highest emigration rate of any EU country as people look for work in other countries.
I have to mention the way Salmond continually makes reference to Norway, like we`ll have some some sort of parity in a year or twos time. On that note, I heard a radio interview on radio 4 the last night and the interviewee , a Norwegian politician (name escapes me) stated the people in Norway still complain about the same things. Pot holed roads, Heath service, public services etc in spite of the 100Bn oil fund they`ve accrued over the 40 years head start they have on Scotland. This, which, funnily enough the working class never get to see nor have any say on.
Darling didn`t say it enough last night, nor did he say it loud enough. We`re being misled.
Darling didn`t say it enough last night, nor did he say it loud enough. We`re being misled.
ralphrj said:
toppstuff said:
How does the collection of oil revenue actually work?
Hydrocarbon taxes are payable to the country that owns the mineral rights. So BP may have an oil field on the other side of the world but would pay taxes to whichever country owned those oil fields. The location of the head office is not relevant.London424 said:
And guess which country owns the mineral rights...
The United Kingdom as part of the UK Continetal Shelf (not Scotland, Wales, NI or England) and, under international law, the rUK is entitled to most of them. Any subsequent discoveries in Scottish waters after independence are 100% Scotland's.Scotland may well end up with a geographic share of the oil but only by negotiation. If the rUK took it to international arbitration it would get very mess for Scotland.
bigkeeko said:
I have to mention the way Salmond continually makes reference to Norway, like we`ll have some some sort of parity in a year or twos time. On that note, I heard a radio interview on radio 4 the last night and the interviewee , a Norwegian politician (name escapes me) stated the people in Norway still complain about the same things. Pot holed roads, Heath service, public services etc in spite of the 100Bn oil fund they`ve accrued over the 40 years head start they have on Scotland. This, which, funnily enough the working class never get to see nor have any say on.
Darling didn`t say it enough last night, nor did he say it loud enough. We`re being misled.
100% misled.Darling didn`t say it enough last night, nor did he say it loud enough. We`re being misled.
But nearly half of Scotland is stupid enough to buy the lie.
they also seem to be forgetting that the government currently only get 20% corporation tax on a companies profit.
hence it is very easy for large corporations(amazon, starbucks.....) to shy away from paying any tax, they declare loans/ investments from other parts of their business etc..... that all reduce the profit to zero (or even on paper make a loss) and declare the profit in a country that makes them pay a much smaller rate of corporation tax.
also dont forget that if scotland becomes independent, our largest trading partner (rUK) will be a foreign country, this will increase the cost of business (accountancy costs, possible exchange rates, different tax regimes), reduce the profit margins for companies and in return reduce the income of the scottish government.
hence it is very easy for large corporations(amazon, starbucks.....) to shy away from paying any tax, they declare loans/ investments from other parts of their business etc..... that all reduce the profit to zero (or even on paper make a loss) and declare the profit in a country that makes them pay a much smaller rate of corporation tax.
also dont forget that if scotland becomes independent, our largest trading partner (rUK) will be a foreign country, this will increase the cost of business (accountancy costs, possible exchange rates, different tax regimes), reduce the profit margins for companies and in return reduce the income of the scottish government.
IainT said:
Borghetto said:
With Salmond broadcasting his default plan without cu, I would imagine that the negotiations with rUK will be influenced by this threat.
The smart move is to foist them with all the debt and let them default on it... win winte to pick up on this.When Salmond made his point on defaulting payments at £5 Billion a year, old Badger could have replied that seeing as Scotland was £12 Billion in the hole last year according to GERS, that immediately puts the rUK £7 Billion in front whilst you become BFF's with Argentina in the borrowing stakes.
But he's a 3rd rate t
t, so he didn't.Welshbeef said:
Welshbeef said:
Troubleatmill said:
Edinburger said:
Welcome to those new posters and/ or those who just emerged from a coma.
Hospital parking in Edinburgh - extortionate.
Dental bills in Edinburgh - expensive
University is free of charge for reasons which have been covered several times.
Hi Edinburger.Hospital parking in Edinburgh - extortionate.
Dental bills in Edinburgh - expensive
University is free of charge for reasons which have been covered several times.
You never got back to me with what you thought of John Swinney's secret memo. ( The one that says... pensions will be cut, public sector workers cut, defence cut, oil revenues slashed )
Any thoughts?
Welshbeef has a £50 charity wager riding on this - if that is some motivation.
As a fence sitter it would push me more towards a no vote
As you are back again - care to respond? Not sure why you don't want a great charity to get a donation - being mute on it doesn't count.
Here's what I think:
Lower defence budget
It's already been announced that defence spending would be £1bn less than Scottish taxpayers currently contribute. I'll gloss over the "Scottish taxpayers" anomoly for now. That doesn't surprise me as all Holyrood parties in some shape or form have agreed that iScotland does not need the same level of defence that the UK currently has.
Hasn't it also been said that the iScottish annual security budget would be £500m more than the UK's - I'm not sure where that figure is from?
Pensions must be cut
Pensions must be cut - really? This refers to state pensions and contradicts everything else I've read. There would be an uprising if state pensions were cut!
Volatility surrounds oil production and prices
Everyone knows that! It's like saying weather is variable in Scotland. I read that the OBR predicts oil will be $92 a barrel by 2016 and the DECC predicts it will be $130 and the OECD claims $150. If those orghanisations have such different projections, then who do you beleive? Oil fluctuates. Simple as that. Foolish to base an entire economy on a single asset. Diversify
Scotland's population share of debt interest payments could rise by 40%
This was "in cash terms" and a £500 million bill was expected setting up a Scottish HMRC. I've not seen any substance to those claims and it's difficult to comment without more information.
Larger fiscal deficit than the UK by 2016-17
So, a larger fiscal deficit than the UK by 2016-17 along with the possibility of welfare reform to help balance budgets. Seems niaive to expect anything other than a significant fiscal deficit in the first 5-15 years, I'd suggest. The welfare reform depends on who is in Holyrood. I can't see the SNP rushing that down, can you?
Welshy - that's fifty big ones to a cancer charity please, I nominate MacMillans.
E.T.A. I have also just found that "an official" said the year-old report had been “overtaken by events” and pointed out it has previously been announced that defence spending would be £1 billion less than Scottish taxpayers currently contribute.
Edited by Edinburger on Tuesday 26th August 14:55
///ajd said:
confused_buyer said:
Oh dear Scotland what was that. It appeared to be two 3rd rate politcians from a 3rd world country debating pointless subjects with a wild audience. If it had some silly accents it would have looked like a Fast Show sketch.
Pretty much all of it was pointless. Here today - gone tomorrow political issues like a Bedroom Tax or DLA rules are not relevant when discussing the next 50, 100 or 200 years. This was small time politics being discussed with silly points scoring over any reasoned relevant debate. Salmond, Darling, BBC Scotland and Scotland as a whole should be ashamed of it.
As for Salmond's vision of an independent Scotland it seems to be some sort of rogue state on the edges of Europe with a reckless default to its name using someone else's currency and pleasing benefit receivers by sticking their fingers up at the English for the 3 months before all the money runs out. Presumably, after that, the bankrupt Scotland will blame it on all England for retaining the Malvinas.
I don't know what the result will be - despite all the logical arguments against I've always thought Scotland might vote Yes - but if I lived in Scotland tonight and had even half a brain I would be absolutely stting myself.
Good points, it was very very poor. It is a bit of a worry, we are - as a Nation - on the edge of a momumentally idiotic leap into a billion pound folly, and some of the audience clearly looked stupid enough to go for it, cheering all the way over the cliff. Pretty much all of it was pointless. Here today - gone tomorrow political issues like a Bedroom Tax or DLA rules are not relevant when discussing the next 50, 100 or 200 years. This was small time politics being discussed with silly points scoring over any reasoned relevant debate. Salmond, Darling, BBC Scotland and Scotland as a whole should be ashamed of it.
As for Salmond's vision of an independent Scotland it seems to be some sort of rogue state on the edges of Europe with a reckless default to its name using someone else's currency and pleasing benefit receivers by sticking their fingers up at the English for the 3 months before all the money runs out. Presumably, after that, the bankrupt Scotland will blame it on all England for retaining the Malvinas.
I don't know what the result will be - despite all the logical arguments against I've always thought Scotland might vote Yes - but if I lived in Scotland tonight and had even half a brain I would be absolutely s
tting myself.I'd hate to see the Union breaking up. I have a real fear Scotland will vote to leave and this will result in a terrible mess. I don't want that for either of us.
The reasons for Scotland to stay in the Union hugely outweigh the reasons to leave, but many people don't vote dispassionately, they vote with feelings and emotion.
Once the head of emotional steam is raised, the result of the vote can be difficult to predict. It won’t make me popular on here, but I feel hard line Eurosceptics in England (those who actively want to leave the EU, as opposed to reforming it) have a lot in common with the Scottish Nationalists. Just with a different set of emotional blusters. Leaving the EU doesn't add up financially either, but it doesn't stop millions of people wanting it. So too with the Scottish Nationalists leaving the UK. Dangerous times.
dbdb said:
I agree with this.
I'd hate to see the Union breaking up. I have a real fear Scotland will vote to leave and this will result in a terrible mess. I don't want that for either of us.
The reasons for Scotland to stay in the Union hugely outweigh the reasons to leave, but many people don't vote dispassionately, they vote with feelings and emotion.
Once the head of emotional steam is raised, the result of the vote can be difficult to predict. It won’t make me popular on here, but I feel hard line Eurosceptics in England (those who actively want to leave the EU, as opposed to reforming it) have a lot in common with the Scottish Nationalists. Just with a different set of emotional blusters. Leaving the EU doesn't add up financially either, but it doesn't stop millions of people wanting it. So too with the Scottish Nationalists leaving the UK. Dangerous times.
Actually I fully agree with you and have tried to express those sentiments myself.I'd hate to see the Union breaking up. I have a real fear Scotland will vote to leave and this will result in a terrible mess. I don't want that for either of us.
The reasons for Scotland to stay in the Union hugely outweigh the reasons to leave, but many people don't vote dispassionately, they vote with feelings and emotion.
Once the head of emotional steam is raised, the result of the vote can be difficult to predict. It won’t make me popular on here, but I feel hard line Eurosceptics in England (those who actively want to leave the EU, as opposed to reforming it) have a lot in common with the Scottish Nationalists. Just with a different set of emotional blusters. Leaving the EU doesn't add up financially either, but it doesn't stop millions of people wanting it. So too with the Scottish Nationalists leaving the UK. Dangerous times.
mcdjl said:
dbdb said:
I agree with this.
I'd hate to see the Union breaking up. I have a real fear Scotland will vote to leave and this will result in a terrible mess. I don't want that for either of us.
The reasons for Scotland to stay in the Union hugely outweigh the reasons to leave, but many people don't vote dispassionately, they vote with feelings and emotion.
Once the head of emotional steam is raised, the result of the vote can be difficult to predict. It won’t make me popular on here, but I feel hard line Eurosceptics in England (those who actively want to leave the EU, as opposed to reforming it) have a lot in common with the Scottish Nationalists. Just with a different set of emotional blusters. Leaving the EU doesn't add up financially either, but it doesn't stop millions of people wanting it. So too with the Scottish Nationalists leaving the UK. Dangerous times.
Actually I fully agree with you and have tried to express those sentiments myself.I'd hate to see the Union breaking up. I have a real fear Scotland will vote to leave and this will result in a terrible mess. I don't want that for either of us.
The reasons for Scotland to stay in the Union hugely outweigh the reasons to leave, but many people don't vote dispassionately, they vote with feelings and emotion.
Once the head of emotional steam is raised, the result of the vote can be difficult to predict. It won’t make me popular on here, but I feel hard line Eurosceptics in England (those who actively want to leave the EU, as opposed to reforming it) have a lot in common with the Scottish Nationalists. Just with a different set of emotional blusters. Leaving the EU doesn't add up financially either, but it doesn't stop millions of people wanting it. So too with the Scottish Nationalists leaving the UK. Dangerous times.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff