North or South Falling the Most?

MissMoneypenny

mitchaa wrote: »

Scotland just like Norway would be far better off and 1 of the richest countries in the EU.

Scotland would have to wait their turn to apply to the EU, but even then it's highly unlikely that Scotland would meet the entry requirements to join the EU as their deficit is too high, even with the oil. An independent Scotland would have to impose massive spending cuts and tax rises, but it is still unlikely that Scotland would be able to meet the EU target.

A points system to live in the rest of the UK could backfire on Gordon Brown and his cronies.

Guy_Montag

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

Scotland would have to wait their turn to apply to the EU, but even then it's highly unlikely that Scotland would meet the entry requirements to join the EU as their deficit is too high, even with the oil. An independent Scotland would have to impose massive spending cuts and tax rises, but it is still unlikely that Scotland would be able to meet the EU target.

A points system to live in the rest of the UK could backfire on Gordon Brown and his cronies.

Surely if Scotland becomes independent that's the end of the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland. Effectively neither Scotland nor the Rump of England, Wales & NI* would be a member of the EU.

My internet connection right now is too flaky to follow up on this. I suspect that both countries would automatically receive membership of the EU because it would be too politically difficult to do anything else. The deficit no matter how large or small makes no odds to joining the EU, the current criteria are that a country has a "functioning market economy and that their producers have the capability to cope with competitive pressure and market forces within the Union." (1) Scotland & the Rump would meet all the criteria for joining the EU, but perhaps not for joining the Euro.

Which brings me onto the next point which is that Scotland would probably peg its currency to the pound until such time that it joins the Euro.

Now here's where it gets interesting - an independent Scotland cold follow two political routes. Firstly they could try to ape the small countries of east Europe in a low tax, liberal economic style. In some ways a parasite on the larger, less agile rump. There would be few expensive embassies to run, no nuclear deterrent, a small armed forces, a tendency not to get involved in expensive conflicts so the tax take could be much lower - companies could be encouraged to set up in the small, low-tax, educated, English speaking country, rather than in the Rump, where taxes would be higher to maintain its global power infrastructure. A similar way that Ireland ran its economy for the last decade until it became another country dependent on HPI.

However, I suspect that Scotland would elect a socialist or semi-socialist government instead, at least in the first instance. Trying to ape Scandanavia, hoping that the dwindling North Sea Oil reserves will keep it financially viable. Always looking inward & to it's bigger neighbour, blaming problems on the Rump for the mess into which it would get. Not quite coming to terms with its position on the world stage - a small country on the edge of Europe with little influence. In summary an independent Scotland could be a good thing, both for Scotland & the Rump. Turning Scotland into a small, agile country able to attract global investment while removing a financial & political burden from the Rump.

On the other hand I suspect the truth would be a small, parochial country, looking inwards & trying to tax it's way to equality - leading to an outflow of finance to the former UK. Further I suspect Scotland dissolving the Union would see NI & possibly Wales doing the same.

(1) Wikipedia

*Rump is not used in a pejorative sense, it's just an easy term. Disclaimer (I am a Scot living in the NE of England, working in a public sector job, despite this Generali & I get on extremely well).

lostinrates

Generali wrote: »

The point that a lot of people miss about the Square Mile is that while there are quite a few people earning £xxx,xxx pa, there are a huge number on say £30-80k whose earning capacity doing a similar job for a non-financial institution would be closer to £18-30k. There are a lot of people who are going to be facing a very large drop in earnings. They'll be paying a lot less tax in the next year or two.

I think they are also a lot of 'talk it ups' about wages. (I'm excluding the super payments here). I only know about the City law payments and have mainly loooked at the first five years post TC and TC payments. A lot of people who make a big thing about being City lawyers are on a LOT less then we would imagine. Post TC contract payments of £22k are not unheard of in the small City firms (in fact I have a friend about to qualify on to that wage in shipping firm) and quite frankly, I wonder how they cope and what makes it worthwhile. There is a reason those law events are full of the smaller firms.....they are free (I'm only half joking:o ). There are a lot of huge, staggaring, and sometimes obcene wages, don't get be wrong, but.....
also, DH is on a great wage or his level in England, but I will point out he gets no 'overtime' its merely accepted that he will work ong hours and weekends, and is allowable excusably from the EU directive on work hours. Thats not a gripe in the least, thats what makes his wage appropriate. There is a moment at College meet ups where people are implying they are on big wages in a City firm etc etc and then they remember that the first two years 'not less than' wages are all printed in a book designed to provide recruitment information for law students and graduates....then a sort of glaze comes over their eyes as they realise that should you so wish you ould know pretty much what they earn....(I'd like to point out what peopel earn interests me but doesn't matter to me, a crucial difference.)

mitchaa

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

Scotland would have to wait their turn to apply to the EU, but even then it's highly unlikely that Scotland would meet the entry requirements to join the EU as their deficit is too high, even with the oil. An independent Scotland would have to impose massive spending cuts and tax rises, but it is still unlikely that Scotland would be able to meet the EU target.

Would you care to expand further?

Have you seen facts and figures? Tax generated vs expenditure?

Are you suggesting that the Scottish government would struggle to cope with supporting 5.1m people? All Scottish taxation would remain in Scotland, O&G revenue, tourism, whisky export and so on and on.

Perhaps you can back up your above claims?

Generali

Independance for Scotland would be very hard to negotiate as what happens to the debt? Does England as the Colonial Power take it all on? Perhaps it is split between England and Scotland equally. So equally means on the basis of debt per head. Or debt per £ of GDP. Or debt per £ of Government spending. What happens to the unfunded liabilities the UK Government has run up in the name of Scotland eg state pensions for Scots, Pensions for Civil Servants working in the Scottish Office?

What happens to the assets owned by the current UK government? Would England keep her naval bases that are in Scotland in the way that the US has bases in Japan and Cuba or the UK does in Cyprus?

The current Scottish socialist model relies on the Barnett Model to subsidise it. Taxes or borrowing would have to rise substantially to continue with current levels of Government spending in Scotland under independance.

PayDay

Generali wrote: »

The current Scottish socialist model relies on the Barnett Model to subsidise it. Taxes or borrowing would have to rise substantially to continue with current levels of Government spending in Scotland under independance.

Barnett was on tv the other year saying that his model was right for the time but that it was now out of date.

He said he was surprised that the government still used his model, as it was now grossly unfair that England was still having to subsidise Scotland to such a high degree.

PayDay

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

Allow us independence and in time you will see who benefits.

I'm sure if they let the rest of the UK have a vote, Scotland would get independence.

PayDay

Guy_Montag wrote: »

Surely if Scotland becomes independent that's the end of the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland.

Dropping a country would not mean that the other countries are not still united.

Guy_Montag

PayDay wrote: »

I'm sure if they let the rest of the UK have a vote, Scotland would get independence.

& if the proles got a vote on everything we'd probably be back with public executions - starting with illegal immigrants. Doesn't make it a good idea.

ad44downey

Guy_Montag wrote: »

However, I suspect that Scotland would elect a socialist or semi-socialist government instead, at least in the first instance. Trying to ape Scandanavia, hoping that the dwindling North Sea Oil reserves will keep it financially viable.



.

Scotland would be much more worried about the special brew running out rather than the oil