Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 5
Discussion
McWigglebum4th said:
Walford said:
McWigglebum4th said:
Walford said:
SWTH said:
Just out of curiousity, is there any benefit to the rUK if Scotland remains in the union?
No.
ks to be of any importance.I meant to pose the question in financial terms - I don't think there are any good reasons for Scottish Independence, but as I understand it, even with the remaining North Sea oil/gas Scotland would still be a net beneficiary from the treasury based on tax receipts. Therefore, it follows that rUK could be better off, but I doubt that would be the case in reality.
McWigglebum4th said:
Walford said:
McWigglebum4th said:
Walford said:
SWTH said:
Just out of curiousity, is there any benefit to the rUK if Scotland remains in the union?
No.
There should be a cut-off date though as we wouldn't want the rats ("yes voters") from the sinking ship once it starts to go down. You make your bed Yessers, you can lie in it.
Edited by Funk on Sunday 31st August 14:32
PLEASEDELETE said:
Troubleatmill said:
PLEASEDELETE said:
If a Scots businessman decides to move house from, say, Peebles to Berwick, therefore domiciled in England, to whom will he pay his taxes. Uk or Scottish govt?
More importantly his business head office. 
Re: His business - All he needs to do is setup his HQ in England. Staff a couple of admin types in English Office.
He could keep main business in Scotland.
The old transfer pricing model can be used to keep the minimum amount of taxable profit in Scotland.
(Think Starbucks Switzerland and coffee beans )
Funk said:
McWigglebum4th said:
Walford said:
McWigglebum4th said:
Walford said:
SWTH said:
Just out of curiousity, is there any benefit to the rUK if Scotland remains in the union?
No.
There should be a cut-off date though as we wouldn't want the rats ("yes voters") from the sinking ship once it starts to go down. You make your bed Yessers, you can lie in it.
Plus MI5 are bound to have a complete list of all Yes activists and campaigners - the ones that really have to stay put.
Should be no problem to keep them north of Hadrians Wall Mk2 with the automated ID checks at the border.
Welshbeef said:
Would it be a bad thing if Scotland went directly for the €?
Even if a member of the EU they don't qualify to join the Euro so there is no option to use the Euro except under a Panama plan. In other words no currency agreement, just use it anyway, in the same way as for sterling.The reality is that forming their own currency is pretty much the only sensible option although there are huge problems with that.
HenryJM said:
Even if a member of the EU they don't qualify to join the Euro so there is no option to use the Euro except under a Panama plan. In other words no currency agreement, just use it anyway, in the same way as for sterling.
The reality is that forming their own currency is pretty much the only sensible option although there are huge problems with that.
Other than cost what are the huge problems? I genuinely have no idea and am one of those that doesn't understand why it wasn't plan A instead of the Euro. The Euro was plan A wasn't it as the pound hung around Scotlands neck or something like that, anyway it could be plan D to have their own money But I want to know why it wasn't plan A.The reality is that forming their own currency is pretty much the only sensible option although there are huge problems with that.
NoNeed said:
Other than cost what are the huge problems? I genuinely have no idea and am one of those that doesn't understand why it wasn't plan A instead of the Euro. The Euro was plan A wasn't it as the pound hung around Scotlands neck or something like that, anyway it could be plan D to have their own money But I want to know why it wasn't plan A.
No LOLR, no-one will lend to them, capital flight, cost of living would rocket as rUK and Scot economies diverged quickly.NoNeed said:
HenryJM said:
Even if a member of the EU they don't qualify to join the Euro so there is no option to use the Euro except under a Panama plan. In other words no currency agreement, just use it anyway, in the same way as for sterling.
The reality is that forming their own currency is pretty much the only sensible option although there are huge problems with that.
Other than cost what are the huge problems? I genuinely have no idea and am one of those that doesn't understand why it wasn't plan A instead of the Euro. The Euro was plan A wasn't it as the pound hung around Scotlands neck or something like that, anyway it could be plan D to have their own money But I want to know why it wasn't plan A.The reality is that forming their own currency is pretty much the only sensible option although there are huge problems with that.
1. Use sterling in a currency union.
2. Use Euro in a currency union
3. Form the new Scottish currency
4. Use sterling without a currency union
5. Use Euro or something else without a currency union - US$, for example.
Both 1 and 2 require the agreement of the other party and neither is available.
4 and 5 are possible but they strictly limit the options to borrow.
So that leaves 3, form a central bank, set up a new currency and use that. In the long term that has a lot of sense but it brings lots of problems. For example your mortgage is with a company in sterling, why should they convert that to another currency? So you earn in one but pay out in another. If you have money in the bank would you want to keep it there and have it converted in the likely knowledge that uncertainty would mean the new currency would drop due to lack of confidence. Many would look to get their money out into established currencies, capital flight in other words.
Who is going to lend the £10 or £12bn equivalent that Scotland currently needs? Lenders would look at it as a risk, they'd want more interest to make it worth taking the risk.
It is the way to go, from there it is possible over time to go through the EU or even Euro joining process, get the currency to stay in line on value for at least 2 years, but the starting point is to build the confidence to get the currency established. That's not easy.
HenryJM said:
Well there are basically five options mentioned, except they come down to three in practice.
1. Use sterling in a currency union.
2. Use Euro in a currency union
3. Form the new Scottish currency
4. Use sterling without a currency union
5. Use Euro or something else without a currency union - US$, for example.
Both 1 and 2 require the agreement of the other party and neither is available.
4 and 5 are possible but they strictly limit the options to borrow.
So that leaves 3, form a central bank, set up a new currency and use that. In the long term that has a lot of sense but it brings lots of problems. For example your mortgage is with a company in sterling, why should they convert that to another currency? So you earn in one but pay out in another. If you have money in the bank would you want to keep it there and have it converted in the likely knowledge that uncertainty would mean the new currency would drop due to lack of confidence. Many would look to get their money out into established currencies, capital flight in other words.
Who is going to lend the £10 or £12bn equivalent that Scotland currently needs? Lenders would look at it as a risk, they'd want more interest to make it worth taking the risk.
It is the way to go, from there it is possible over time to go through the EU or even Euro joining process, get the currency to stay in line on value for at least 2 years, but the starting point is to build the confidence to get the currency established. That's not easy.
Thanks1. Use sterling in a currency union.
2. Use Euro in a currency union
3. Form the new Scottish currency
4. Use sterling without a currency union
5. Use Euro or something else without a currency union - US$, for example.
Both 1 and 2 require the agreement of the other party and neither is available.
4 and 5 are possible but they strictly limit the options to borrow.
So that leaves 3, form a central bank, set up a new currency and use that. In the long term that has a lot of sense but it brings lots of problems. For example your mortgage is with a company in sterling, why should they convert that to another currency? So you earn in one but pay out in another. If you have money in the bank would you want to keep it there and have it converted in the likely knowledge that uncertainty would mean the new currency would drop due to lack of confidence. Many would look to get their money out into established currencies, capital flight in other words.
Who is going to lend the £10 or £12bn equivalent that Scotland currently needs? Lenders would look at it as a risk, they'd want more interest to make it worth taking the risk.
It is the way to go, from there it is possible over time to go through the EU or even Euro joining process, get the currency to stay in line on value for at least 2 years, but the starting point is to build the confidence to get the currency established. That's not easy.
SWTH said:
I meant to pose the question in financial terms - I don't think there are any good reasons for Scottish Independence, but as I understand it, even with the remaining North Sea oil/gas Scotland would still be a net beneficiary from the treasury based on tax receipts. Therefore, it follows that rUK could be better off, but I doubt that would be the case in reality.
Most article i've seen suggest rUK would be much the same financially but may suffer in the long run due to reduced world influence. It's naive to assume rUK would be unchanged or better off after vastly reduced land mass and coastal waters possibly even leading to loss of place at political top tables like the security council, reduced influence in Europe and possible loss of trident.
Funk said:
I would have no reservations about a mass exodus from Scotland post-independence; we'd be getting the brightest, most intelligent Scots and you would be most welcome.
There should be a cut-off date though as we wouldn't want the rats ("yes voters") from the sinking ship once it starts to go down. You make your bed Yessers, you can lie in it.
The UK hasn't exactly been tight on immigration over the last few years. Good luck with your plan though. There should be a cut-off date though as we wouldn't want the rats ("yes voters") from the sinking ship once it starts to go down. You make your bed Yessers, you can lie in it.
NoNeed said:
Also I have just watched the egg incident and it show quite conclusively that the Violent thug from the yes camp was NOT wearing an ear piece when he committed the crime.
That claim the egg thrower was wearing an earpiece was a hoaxhttp://yes2014.net/2014/08/30/sorry-stunt-proving-...
Oakey said:
NoNeed said:
Also I have just watched the egg incident and it show quite conclusively that the Violent thug from the yes camp was NOT wearing an ear piece when he committed the crime.
That claim the egg thrower was wearing an earpiece was a hoaxhttp://yes2014.net/2014/08/30/sorry-stunt-proving-...
HenryJM said:
NoNeed said:
HenryJM said:
Even if a member of the EU they don't qualify to join the Euro so there is no option to use the Euro except under a Panama plan. In other words no currency agreement, just use it anyway, in the same way as for sterling.
The reality is that forming their own currency is pretty much the only sensible option although there are huge problems with that.
Other than cost what are the huge problems? I genuinely have no idea and am one of those that doesn't understand why it wasn't plan A instead of the Euro. The Euro was plan A wasn't it as the pound hung around Scotlands neck or something like that, anyway it could be plan D to have their own money But I want to know why it wasn't plan A.The reality is that forming their own currency is pretty much the only sensible option although there are huge problems with that.
1. Use sterling in a currency union.
2. Use Euro in a currency union
3. Form the new Scottish currency
4. Use sterling without a currency union
5. Use Euro or something else without a currency union - US$, for example.
Both 1 and 2 require the agreement of the other party and neither is available.
4 and 5 are possible but they strictly limit the options to borrow.
So that leaves 3, form a central bank, set up a new currency and use that. In the long term that has a lot of sense but it brings lots of problems. For example your mortgage is with a company in sterling, why should they convert that to another currency? So you earn in one but pay out in another. If you have money in the bank would you want to keep it there and have it converted in the likely knowledge that uncertainty would mean the new currency would drop due to lack of confidence. Many would look to get their money out into established currencies, capital flight in other words.
Who is going to lend the £10 or £12bn equivalent that Scotland currently needs? Lenders would look at it as a risk, they'd want more interest to make it worth taking the risk.
It is the way to go, from there it is possible over time to go through the EU or even Euro joining process, get the currency to stay in line on value for at least 2 years, but the starting point is to build the confidence to get the currency established. That's not easy.
Welshbeef said:
NoNeed said:
Except it isn't a Tory policy it's an EU policy and what quite a few people do not realise is that if we deny a big German health company access to our market they are able to sue us.
This is an old report but explains it better. The EU will privatise the NHS and the SNP wants into the EU.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/...
Burger Fluffnick PVC driver XJS driver black swan Vincter prince bent over - care to share your thoughts on this and why Scotland wants to move towards this policy?This is an old report but explains it better. The EU will privatise the NHS and the SNP wants into the EU.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/...
NoNeed said:
Welshbeef said:
NoNeed said:
Except it isn't a Tory policy it's an EU policy and what quite a few people do not realise is that if we deny a big German health company access to our market they are able to sue us.
This is an old report but explains it better. The EU will privatise the NHS and the SNP wants into the EU.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/...
Burger Fluffnick PVC driver XJS driver black swan Vincter prince bent over - care to share your thoughts on this and why Scotland wants to move towards this policy?This is an old report but explains it better. The EU will privatise the NHS and the SNP wants into the EU.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/...
Yep its good we have a good defence service.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff