Effect of Scottish Independence Vote

DaveTheMus

CLAPTON wrote: »

If Scottish companies, local authorities, private individuals had been foolish enough to use RBS as their banker and RBS went bankrupt and assigned to the rubbish tip, then all those depositors would lose their money;

Half of scottish industry and commerce would them be unable to pay their staff and their suppliers and any private depositors would be unable to access their own money and be unable to pay their bills.

This maybe would have caused some concern.

Remember, the banks weren't bailed out, it was the depositors that were bailed out.

It would be possible to guarantee the domestic depositors without saving the bank.

The UK Government guaranteed some depositors cash held with Icesave without keeping that zombie institution plodding on

CLAPTON

DaveTheMus wrote: »

It would be possible to guarantee the domestic depositors without saving the bank.

The UK Government guaranteed some depositors cash held with Icesave without keeping that zombie institution plodding on

Iceland did that of course; it refused to bail out foreigners (i.e. the UK and European depositors) but bailed out their own people.

This would be an option but then the entire Scottish financial services would collapse as no-one would ever trust the Scottish government again.
Not many people have their life savings in Icelandic bank nowadays.

ColdIron

DaveTheMus wrote: »

It would be possible to guarantee the domestic depositors without saving the bank.

And what form would that guarantee take? The UK can provide one by issuing gilts or even just printing the stuff because we control Sterling. What security could the Scots provide if they were simply piggy-backing on the Pound or the Euro?

Last time I looked the international bond market in Groats wasn't that buoyant

jem16

atush wrote: »

I can't see an independant Scotland has any right to use GBP and can't see it being in the interests of the UK to allow it.

There's a whole lot of difference between a currency union and the simple use of the Pound as currency.

The Scottish Pound was the unit of currency in Scotland long before the union of the two kingdoms of Scotland and England. So Scotland has as much right to use the Pound as any other country in the UK.

So if Scotland were to vote for independence it could still use the Pound and peg its value to that of Pound sterling just as happened with Ireland.

Workable or not? That's another matter altogether.

Archi_Bald

C'mon, just because Scotland a few centuries ago used something called "pound Scots" is no reason for why today's and tomorrow's economic reality doesn't apply to them.

Of course an independent Scotland could use something called "Scottish Pound" (which they issue and protect themselves), and they could peg that to the Pound Sterling (or the US Dollar or whatever) for as long as they can sustain it (i.e. until some financial or economic crisis hits them).

However, Alex Salmond still sticks to his plan A, a currency union with the UK. He even pretends he doesn't need anything but a plan A. He is doing Scotland a huge disservice.

planteria

absolutely right, Archi Bald. and i don't expect it, but the people of Scotland might just go along with it..

going back to some of the above, David Cameron is certainly not playing games over it. he clearly very genuinely wants Scotland to remain part of the union. i kind of hope that they choose independence and make his party stronger in the process though:idea:

JohnRo

CLAPTON wrote: »

Remember, the banks weren't bailed out, it was the depositors that were bailed out.

There's something so deeply flawed in that remark it's difficult to know where to start. Scapegoating the victims seems to be becoming a national pastime.

Make no mistake the bankers are still being bailed out because they told their captured governments who cannot function without them that they must be or the music stops. Any depositors being "saved" is coincidental, the banks don't even need depositors money any more...they get everything they need from financial repression, as long as the toxic debts can all be nationalised and the paying debts preserved that's all that matters to them.

jem16

Archi_Bald wrote: »

C'mon, just because Scotland a few centuries ago used something called "pound Scots" is no reason for why today's and tomorrow's economic reality doesn't apply to them.

What makes you think I agreed with it?

Buzby

planteria wrote: »

absolutely right, Archi Bald. and i don't expect it, but the people of Scotland might just go along with it..

going back to some of the above, David Cameron is certainly not playing games over it. he clearly very genuinely wants Scotland to remain part of the union. i kind of hope that they choose independence and make his party stronger in the process though:idea:

He'll get his wish of a clear run at Westminster - he has nothing to lose and much to gain. Why else would would be hearing all the pontificating about why we shouldn't? The refusal to debate with the First Minister, preferring to defer to an ex-Labour chancellor who has little credibility elsewhere. As he's the leader of the 'no' campaign he needs to discuss it with the leader of the 'yes' campaign (who is Blair Jenkns) but I heard recently the No campaign folk were disinterested in doing so.

I'll do what I can to ensure we both get our wishes granted - but with 7 months to go I believe all that is needed is a continuation of the bullying tactics and nonsensical statements from the the Westminster politicians and the job is done.

Buzby

ColdIron wrote: »

You say this as if it's a bad thing

It had been for Scotland & the NE (and in the former case, we have more Panda's than Tory MP's). That might tell you something.