Effect of Scottish Independence Vote

bigheadxx

grey_gym_sock wrote: »

please let's not conflate the issues. EU membership is perfectly realistic.



correct. but what does that imply? because 2 independent countries can't be compelled to continue to share a currency, unless both of them want to.

what it really implies is that both countries can continue to use something called the pound, and have full control of their own pound, but they will be 2 different currencies.

the scottish pound would be just as real a pound as the south british pound. laws would be passed to determine which accounts, contracts, debts, etc, that are currently in pounds, would be converted to scottish pounds, and which to south british pounds. and crucially, the share of the national debt which scotland takes over would be in scottish pounds, avoiding the problems of having a debt without controlling the currency.

it may not be your first preference, but this is all perfectly workable.

I think the clue is in the name "Bank of England".

Archi_Bald

bigheadxx wrote: »

I don't agree with that because most people don't understand the difference.

Shouldn't they then ask what the difference is? Particularly if they are voting on something that is critical for their future and their children's future?

Or are you saying they don't understand that they don't understand? That would be rather scary.

bigheadxx wrote: »

If there was a continued fiscal union, currency union, union of the crowns, unified pension provision and so on, what actually is the argument for independence?

well quite

bigheadxx wrote: »

Devo Max, which is ultimately to the benefit of E&W is obviously the most logical course to pursue.

This may or may not be the case, and NI would also like a say, but it's rather academic right now since nobody is asked to vote on Devo Max.

ColdIron

Triumph13 wrote: »

Why can people not undertsand that the value of a currency is entirely down to the markets' estimation of the government that stands behind it.

Indeed

Interestingly Scotland's previous currency, the Pound Scots, started with the same value as Stirling but devalued until it was pegged at 12 Pound Scots to 1 Pound Stirling until it was replaced in 1707

History could always repeat itself

giffnockhibee

grey_gym_sock wrote: »

please let's not conflate the issues. EU membership is perfectly realistic.



correct. but what does that imply? because 2 independent countries can't be compelled to continue to share a currency, unless both of them want to.

what it really implies is that both countries can continue to use something called the pound, and have full control of their own pound, but they will be 2 different currencies.

the scottish pound would be just as real a pound as the south british pound. laws would be passed to determine which accounts, contracts, debts, etc, that are currently in pounds, would be converted to scottish pounds, and which to south british pounds. and crucially, the share of the national debt which scotland takes over would be in scottish pounds, avoiding the problems of having a debt without controlling the currency.

it may not be your first preference, but this is all perfectly workable.

The two nations did not share the Pound (Sterling), prior to the 1707 Union. England used Sterling, and Scotland used the Pound Scots. The exchange rate at the time was £1 Sterling = £12 Scots. Scotland adopted the Pound Sterling in 1707, but the Pound Scots was still in use for most of the 18th century.

black_taxi_2

I never said prior

ColdIron

grey_gym_sock wrote: »

the scottish pound would be just as real a pound as the south british pound

Of course we in South Britain would refer to it as the Scotch Pound because we know it really annoys them

black_taxi_2

US Federal Reserve made emergency loans available to RBS of £285bn and to HBOS of £115bn and bailed out Barclays with $550bn, because they were operating in the USA.

The same principle would apply to banks in an independent Scotland. Most of their trade would be abroad and that’s where the bail-out would take place.

black_taxi_2

Quote:
Originally Posted by grey gym sock
the scottish pound would be just as real a pound as the south british pound

Of course we in South Britain would refer to it as the Scotch Pound because we know it really annoys them


ID BE DELIGHTED

rpc

Archi_Bald wrote: »

I think it would probably fair to say that the people in E&W, and those in NI, would not be against a continued currency union if there was a continued fiscal union.

Polls suggest otherwise http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/02/16/opposition-currency-union-rises-sharply-england-an/

The impression I get is that most in E&W feel it is up to Scotland to decide on independence, but if the answer is Yes then we should be independent and not try to mostly-but-not-entirely separate.

Chadsman

black_taxi wrote: »

federal state

English labour MPS will never go for it

Have I understood correctly- you don't want any Scottish MPs at Westminster, you don't want to pay any taxes to the rUK treasury and you want the BoE to act as a lender of last resort to Scottish banks?