Scottish Referendum / Independence - Vol 5

[anonymous-user]

Moonhawk said:

el stovey said:

Being in charge during the break up of the union must be career ending for the PM surely?

Not if that PM ensures the best interests of the rUK are met. It could actually be a defining moment.

Scottish independence has been a spectre waiting in the shadows for decades - which PM gets lumbered with the actual breakup (should it happen) is largely down to where the roulette wheel stops.

The only reason there is a referendum at all was the bungling way the devolved Scottish parliament was set up. I doubt any UK PM ever wanted a Scottish independence referendum.

I can't see this referendum ending well for Cameron no matter how it pans out, particularly with a general election in 2015. Yes vote = He gets blamed for the break up of the union and labour get in, No vote = Scottish YES voters switch back to Labour from SNP and Labour win.

[AstonZagato]

Nick Grant said:

AstonZagato said:

Great for the rUK.

Wait until you see UK/rUK torn apart in the Euro referendum it is the most unplesent experience I can assure you, regardless of the outcome.

I weep for Scotland that has been torn apart by a selfish minority. A country I love being ruined by people whom I wouldn't trust to organise a panic in a doomed submarine yet claim to have a plan for independence. One of the saddest things I've seen in my lifetime as it looks like it is doomed to fail (at least if they try to do what they have said they will do).

Whilst I agree that an in/out referendum will be divisive, I don't think it will have anywhere near the heat or venom of the Scottish debate or the long-term blame culture.

There are rabid UKIPers but they are rather comical figures (often - but not always - tweedy men who are "disgusted of Tunbridge Wells" types). It is difficult to imagine that there will be the spite doled out to "Inners" by "Outers" that we have seen the Yessers pouring onto anyone who dares to voice a "no". The government of the day and the main parties will all be pro-union, with only dissident MPs (mainly Tories) voicing the No arguments. The debate is more likely to be focused on whatever "new deal" is on offer versus an out. Equally the debate is more clearly about the institutions of the European bureaucracy rather than the constituent nations (with some borderline racism on immigration control)

[confused_buyer]

Edinburger said:

Calm down, calm down. Those are just contingency plans.

What Lloyds actually said was that they could move south if Scots vote for independence. They're considering having the group's registered office in London, with Bank of Scotland operating from Edinburgh as a foreign division of the business.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/09/02/uk-lloyds...

Let's face it, they are basically a London based company which only remained in Scotland as a face saving thing for the bankrupt HBOS. There is no earthly reason for them to remain in Scotland after independence.

RBS I don't know about. If it remains as is then that won't remain in Scotland either but I can forsee the Scottish bit being split eventually with the bulk remaining in London as Natwest. The RBS brand is due to die outside Scotland soon anyway.

[jimKRFC]

Edinburger said:

Such a shame our representatives at Westminster wouldn't ask questions our behalf... as I said two or three years ago on this htread.

The letter was an answer to the questions by Danny Alexander (MP for Inverness) so the elected representatives at Westminster are asking questions. So what's your point?

[AstonZagato]

Also see the letters exchanged by the Scottish Parliament and the EU. Clear as day that Scotland will not be in the EU.

Also look at the question asked by the Scottish UKIP (lol) MEP in Brussels. Clear again.

People have asked. The answers are clear but ignored by the Yes campaign. Why is that?

[ralphrj]

el stovey said:

I can't see this referendum ending well for Cameron no matter how it pans out, particularly with a general election in 2015. Yes vote = He gets blamed for the break up of the union and labour get in, No vote = Scottish YES voters switch back to Labour from SNP and Labour win.

I don't see it having any major impact either way as opinion polls suggest that the public would not blame Cameron and in the event of a No vote the SNP only have 6 Westminster seats in Scotland (out of 59).

The SNP may well see their share of Westminster MPs increase at the next GE but probably at the expense of the Lib Dems have have nearly twice as many MPs as the SNP.

[S13_Alan]

jimKRFC said:

Edinburger said:

Such a shame our representatives at Westminster wouldn't ask questions our behalf... as I said two or three years ago on this htread.

The letter was an answer to the questions by Danny Alexander (MP for Inverness) so the elected representatives at Westminster are asking questions. So what's your point?

Must be a common thing as that's the response I got from a yes voter too when I brought this up (along with providing links to the letters etc).

It's like being told you're not 18 yet, you're not getting into this club, then ignoring it because you don't like it and responding with 'well what if I get my Mummy to ask for me'.

[confused_buyer]

EU membership seems to be a passion for the SNP, but, really, is it that bigger issue for Scotland?

If they can get an EFTA deal then really, does it make a lot of difference? The argument against this is - like Norway - you have to follow all the rules but have no say on them. However, small countries have no say anyway so, really, it makes no odds.

According to the Yes campaign Scotland will be a wealthy net-contributor anyway, so, really, wouldn't they be better off out? Why, actually, is the Yes campaign so passionate about EU membership?

[Nick Grant]

AstonZagato said:

I don't think it will have anywhere near the heat or venom of the Scottish debate or the long-term blame culture.

There are rabid UKIPers but they are rather comical figures (often - but not always - tweedy men who are "disgusted of Tunbridge Wells" types). It is difficult to imagine that there will be the spite doled out to "Inners" by "Outers" that we have seen the Yessers pouring onto anyone who dares to voice a "no". The government of the day and the main parties will all be pro-union, with only dissident MPs (mainly Tories) voicing the No arguments. The debate is more likely to be focused on whatever "new deal" is on offer versus an out. Equally the debate is more clearly about the institutions of the European bureaucracy rather than the constituent nations (with some borderline racism on immigration control)

You don't think the Yes campain is full of comical figures?

You are forgetting the power of the news media and social media both of which have made the situation in Scotland what it is now. Even the most irrational idiots now have a platform to speak from and report lies as facts. I aleady see the storm brewing in the same way in England over the Euro Ref on Facebook. Still I'm going off topic we have to see how this pans out first.

[jimKRFC]

Being a cautious person when it comes to my families finances. If I wished to avoid the risk of Lloyds losing it's lender of last resort, other than HSBC what major banks are available to me? Is Santander (in the UK) backed by the BOE?

[Troubleatmill]

jimKRFC said:

Being a cautious person when it comes to my families finances. If I wished to avoid the risk of Lloyds losing it's lender of last resort, other than HSBC what major banks are available to me? Is Santander (in the UK) backed by the BOE?

Yes - Backed by UK Govt - if that's what you mean.

Start reading here.
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/savings/safe-savi...


Edit- read the Banks section in full - if you want complete piece of mind.

http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/savings/safe-savi...
"In the aftermath of the financial crisis, a spate of building society takeovers peppered daily news broadcasts. Initially, the Government acted to protect savers who had money stashed in two different building societies that merged, but that ended in December 2010.

So, if you have money in more than one of the institutions contained within the following groups, you now only have £85,000 protection across that group.

Nationwide, Derbyshire, Cheshire and Dunfermline building societies
Skipton and Scarborough building societies
Co-operative Bank and Britannia
Nottingham and Shepshed building societies, trading as Nottingham BS
Coventry BS and Stroud & Swindon BS
Yorkshire, Chelsea, Barnsley, Norwich & Peterborough building societies, plus Egg."

Edited by Troubleatmill on Wednesday 3rd September 12:13

[jimKRFC]

Troubleatmill said:

Yes - Backed by UK Govt - if that's what you mean.

Start reading here.
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/savings/safe-savi...

Thanks

[Troubleatmill]

jimKRFC said:

Troubleatmill said:

Yes - Backed by UK Govt - if that's what you mean.

Start reading here.
http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/savings/safe-savi...

Thanks

Click to expand ( 2 seperate clicks needed )

[McWigglebum4th]

Moonhawk said:

Indeed - it was only a few weeks back that it was suggested that there was a Westminster conspiracy to keep data regarding vast new reserves in the Claire field a secret until after the referendum.

We have a stanch YES voter in the office

She was posting on facebook about how it was a HUGE conspiracy by the tory scum to hide the BP clair discovery from us



She has been working on a valve project

I had a look at it today

Top of the data sheet

BP clair

[ellroy]

I love Scotland, I have many Scottish friends and my Mum lived in the Highlands until recently.

I hope to God you vote no.

Salmond and his mates are simply power hungry chancers with self interest above all else.

Not once have I seen a clear answer to any of the major questions asked of them, simply soundbites and platitudes.

In the longer run I have no doubt that Scotland could run as an independant nation. However, the penury and problems that the nation will face for many years to come impacting generations seems to me to be a far higher price to pay than you will see any benefit of whilst any of you are alive and probably your children's lives as well.

If I were being selfish a Yes vote would be good for the UK, less outgoings, less Labour and funds spent on areas which desperately need them.

However, I'm trying to be a bigger man around this, we are better together, we all got the government we all voted for, like it or not, and our shared history and achievements shoud not be thrown away for some small mided, power hungry, jumped up, xenophobic local councillors.

[Wombat3]

ellroy said:

I love Scotland, I have many Scottish friends and my Mum lived in the Highlands until recently.

I hope to God you vote no.

Salmond and his mates are simply power hungry chancers with self interest above all else.

Not once have I seen a clear answer to any of the major questions asked of them, simply soundbites and platitudes.

In the longer run I have no doubt that Scotland could run as an independant nation. However, the penury and problems that the nation will face for many years to come impacting generations seems to me to be a far higher price to pay than you will see any benefit of whilst any of you are alive and probably your children's lives as well.

If I were being selfish a Yes vote would be good for the UK, less outgoings, less Labour and funds spent on areas which desperately need them.

However, I'm trying to be a bigger man around this, we are better together, we all got the government we all voted for, like it or not, and our shared history and achievements shoud not be thrown away for some small mided, power hungry, jumped up, xenophobic local councillors.

You are 100% correct, unfortunately we are dealing with utter wkers.

[Oakey]

My brother, an Englishman living in Glasgow also seems to have been sucked in. He's usually pretty smart but seems to have adopted the stance of the usual Yes supporter without actually doing any research.

He said "What exactly would stop them using the pound". I reply "lender of last resort?". He says "Cambodia uses the USD as a full on stable currency". "But Cambodia is a tinpot third world country with a GDP of $12billion and the population live in poverty! Is that what Scotland should aspire to?".

He genuinely thinks it'll just be 'business as usual' in post independent Scotland. It's as if they think that 'independence' simply means keeping the status quo except where it comes to money, which they'll get to keep all of and spend as they wish.

That they won't have their own currency, or a lender of last resort in the event st hits the fan, or EU membership, or that business might migrate en-masse from Scotland, etc are concepts they simply refuse to believe.

[Nick Grant]

Oakey said:

My brother, an Englishman living in Glasgow also seems to have been sucked in. He's usually pretty smart but seems to have adopted the stance of the usual Yes supporter without actually doing any research.

He said "What exactly would stop them using the pound". I reply "lender of last resort?". He says "Cambodia uses the USD as a full on stable currency". "But Cambodia is a tinpot third world country with a GDP of $12billion and the population live in poverty! Is that what Scotland should aspire to?".

I had this conversation with someone at work the other day. Baring in mind I work at a bank. I asked him why he wanted to use the pound anyway if he wanted independence. He said that he didn't and didn't want a lender of last resort anyway and the banks should have been allowed to fail. I pointed out that had the banks been allowed to collapse then none of use would have a job. "Well I would be persuing another career now" was his response. WOW! No concept of the impact that would have had on the rest of the economy at all.

[Funk]

Nick Grant said:

Oakey said:

My brother, an Englishman living in Glasgow also seems to have been sucked in. He's usually pretty smart but seems to have adopted the stance of the usual Yes supporter without actually doing any research.

He said "What exactly would stop them using the pound". I reply "lender of last resort?". He says "Cambodia uses the USD as a full on stable currency". "But Cambodia is a tinpot third world country with a GDP of $12billion and the population live in poverty! Is that what Scotland should aspire to?".

I had this conversation with someone at work the other day. Baring in mind I work at a bank. I asked him why he wanted to use the pound anyway if he wanted independence. He said that he didn't and didn't want a lender of last resort anyway and the banks should have been allowed to fail. I pointed out that had the banks been allowed to collapse then none of use would have a job. "Well I would be persuing another career now" was his response. WOW! No concept of the impact that would have had on the rest of the economy at all.

It worries me that someone who thinks like your colleague works in an actual bank.

What does he do? Please tell me it's some sort of cleaning position or counting the paperclips?

[ralphrj]

Oakey said:

That they won't have their own currency, or a lender of last resort in the event st hits the fan, or EU membership, or that business might migrate en-masse from Scotland, etc are concepts they simply refuse to believe.

They also don't appear to be able to grasp the notion that a result of 51:49 in favour of Yes is not going to result in a smooth transition.

If 49% of the population don't want independence they can avoid it simply by moving. From the date of the referendum to the date of independence there will be no barriers to prevent emigration. Obviously not everyone who opposed it will either want or be able to pack their bags and move but the ones who will are likely to be the talented and/or the wealthy who will not struggle to find work outside of Scotland. All of which will leave Scotland a poorer place - not good when your finances don't add up in the first place.

The reverse does not apply in the event of a No vote. Those that want an independent Scotland are unlikely to be able to pack up and find one elsewhere.