SNP Win - The Economics of D-I-V-O-R-C-E

sabretoothtigger

Scotland will do well with a higher oil price.
Their economy might even take off if relieved of central governments plans to restrict and tax oil explorers from raising revenue

They are in danger of being a one trick pony though. They could not survive without good amounts of oil exports (presently uk oil is declining quite badly)
The state is bloated and inefficient, biased to subsidising so it seems likely they would collapse if separate, within a decade maybe

the modern territory recognised as Wales has never been united as one independent country

Wales was united under one ruler before being conquered

basically broke when they joined the Union,

They would leave the union in the same state with overbearing debts. They'd also operate the same way for some years paying excessive interest and eventually collapse broke and then rejoin.

They show no ability to operate a trade or budget surplus which is what they'd need to survive as a tiny country, whole idea is doomed to failure.

It'd require a reversal in policy to a very slim government not providing free services. A modern spruce goose, likely to hit the end of the runway then ever take off

Shakethedisease

They are in danger of being a one trick pony though. They could not survive without good amounts of oil exports (presently uk oil is declining quite badly)
The state is bloated and inefficient, biased to subsidising so it seems likely they would collapse if separate, within a decade maybe

Out of interest, how would the rest of the Uk cope without the oil exports should Scotland indeed, turn into a one trick pony as mentioned ? I've read a lot about Scotland never being able to survive on the oil and without subsidies etc.. but little as to what would happen ecomomically to the other 3 nations without access to the 'oil money' at all ?

pbouk

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Out of interest, how would the rest of the Uk cope without the oil exports should Scotland indeed, turn into a one trick pony as mentioned ? I've read a lot about Scotland never being able to survive on the oil and without subsidies etc.. but little as to what would happen ecomomically to the other 3 nations without access to the 'oil money' at all ?

first the uk only has the ability to tax the oil that bp etc take out of the uk sector.

secondly, the uk was around long before north sea oil and will be around long after north sea oil.

third, the "oil money" isnt the biggest part of the uk economy and never has been, and never will be.

the tax from north sea oil is only because they pipe it to scotland, the oil companies can pipe it to england and we will get all the tax from it.you assume that scotland would get the oil because it is near scotland, the falklands are near argentina but we all know what happened there. at best the oil will be divided 50 -50 .

Shakethedisease

Sigh.. I don't think you've actually read most of the thread have you ?

But just for future reference for yourself, and something I posted a few pages back..

The rules inside this international convention have been marshalled in legal disputes, resolving the who-owns-what maritime resources of new states, but with 30 years of experience in looking at the North Sea and its petroleum resources, Kemp is sure of one thing: "There would need to be negotiations. At first between Scotland and England and then perhaps in international arbitration, but it would be a fair estimate that well over 90 per cent of the oil wealth would fall in the Scottish sector with most of the North Sea gas resources, plus the fields in the Irish Sea, going to England."
Whitehall appears to have been aware of this tough economic reality for some time. In a report written in the mid-1970s, the then Scottish Office economist, Gavin McCrone, indicated ownership of North Sea oil would deliver to an independent Scotland "embarrassingly large tax surpluses". McCrone's full report was never made public, fearing it would inflame the It's-Scotland's-Oil debate about the continuing value of the union.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m.../ai_n18758796/

However, Mr Mackay said it was more realistic to expect that Britain would only allow an independent Scotland an 84 per cent share of North Sea revenues .

Read more: http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/...#ixzz1MBRSno2f

So not quite 50/50 as far as the 'experts' are concerned. However, if you read a little further back in the thread you may be interested to see how much of the discussion centred on possible renewable energy sources, revenues and feasibilities etc and not oil in particular. Go and educate yourself a little.. The SNP of 2011 aren't quite the throwbacks to the SNP 'it's our oil' of the 1970's as you imagine.:)

pbouk

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Sigh.. I don't think you've actually read most of the thread have you ?

But just for future reference for yourself, and something I posted a few pages back..



http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m.../ai_n18758796/


Read more: http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/...#ixzz1MBRSno2f

So not quite 50/50 as far as the 'experts' are concerned. However, if you read a little further back in the thread you may be interested to see how much of the discussion centred on possible renewable energy sources, revenues and feasibilities etc and not oil in particular. Go and educate yourself a little.. The SNP of 2011 aren't quite the throwbacks to the SNP 'it's our oil' of the 1970's as you imagine.:)

sigh.. actually i have been here and have read the posts since the start of the thread.

the problem for scotland is that oil production reached peak about ten years ago and has been slowly falling ever since. britain is now a net importer of oil and so as every year passes it means less money from north sea oil.
yes there is natural energy but that will not be enough to build an economy.

Shakethedisease

but that will not be enough to build an economy.

Yet. However, bear in mind the population of Scotland is only 5 million or so. A much easier place to start from without oil revenues than from England's perspective. Salmond IS an oil/energy ecomomist after all.., so he's not completely unaware of the potential pitfalls and the implications of declining oil revenues in the next few decades.

pbouk

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Yet. However, bear in mind the population of Scotland is only 5 million or so. A much easier place to start from without oil revenues than from England's perspective. Salmond IS an oil/energy ecomomist after all.., so he's not completely unaware of the potential pitfalls and the implications of declining oil revenues in the next few decades.

i dont agree with that,salmond comes over to me as a man who wants independence at all costs, no matter what the outcome.

Shakethedisease

salmond comes over to me as a man who wants independence at all costs, no matter what the outcome.

Mabye, but he'd be a compete fool not to working towards bettering 'any' potential outcome before going for an independence referendum wouldn't he ? And you can say what you like about him, but I don't think Salmond is anyone's fool.

yorkshirekev

England would have a real problem without Scotland, namely the Conservative majority in this country. It would be difficult to see a change of Government for a long time in this country. That would cause significant problems for democracy.

Zanu PF in South Africa have a seemingly permanent majority and it is something that is causing problems already. Government needs change and renewal in order for it to function. Particularly as a counterbalance to complacency and incompetence.

chewmylegoff

yorkshirekev wrote: »

England would have a real problem without Scotland, namely the Conservative majority in this country. It would be difficult to see a change of Government for a long time in this country. That would cause significant problems for democracy.

Zanu PF in South Africa have a seemingly permanent majority and it is something that is causing problems already. Government needs change and renewal in order for it to function. Particularly as a counterbalance to complacency and incompetence.

as has been discussed at some length in this very thread, if you got rid of scotland, the labour party would have still been in power in the uk from 1997 to 2010.

the tories would currently have an overall majority though. of 19 seats. after 13 years of labour rule.