Effect of Scottish Independence Vote

giffnockhibee

Heedtheadvice wrote: »

just though of a positive all by myself!

RBS might leave Edinburgh! The way it's performing anybody would be welcome to it! Not sure how the Board and senior managers etc. could have the gall to award themselves any bonus, they must have known that they were soon to declare a big loss. Time they paid back any cash bonus and gave up any other performance bonus.

We (the taxpayer and shareholders) cannot afford to reward under performance ............let me put it stronger: heads should roll (perhaps not literally though)!

Salmond has already disowned RBS, stating that this is a London company, nothing to do with Scotland, thank you very much. Changed days from him hob-nobbing with Fred the Shred, when he thought there was some kudos in it for him.

giffnockhibee

eskbanker wrote: »

I wasn't implying anything, just clarifying what Standard Life actually did and didn't say! The underlying issue, that uncertainty is unsettling, is undeniable, but I'm not aware of companies coming out and saying they'll definitely bale out, just making contingency plans in case the trading environment and market aren't to their liking - not in case of independence per se but how it would actually pan out, which is obviously where all the uncertainty is. The SL statement doesn't just talk of currency and EU but a range of other currently unknown factors too....

It is a fairly safe assumption that companies who have not stated their position are anti-independence. Companies which are pro-independence have little to lose by saying so, as No voters are unlikely to mount a campaign against them. The same cannot be said for the reverse case.

planteria

giffnockhibee wrote: »

Salmond has already disowned RBS, stating that this is a London company, nothing to do with Scotland, thank you very much. Changed days from him hob-nobbing with Fred the Shred, when he thought there was some kudos in it for him.

comedy clown. but not a very funny one.

innovate

giffnockhibee wrote: »

Salmond has already disowned RBS, stating that this is a London company, nothing to do with Scotland, thank you very much. Changed days from him hob-nobbing with Fred the Shred, when he thought there was some kudos in it for him.

Needs an underground journalist to figure out and report on where Fred The Shred is now, and what his official and unofficial financial prowess is these days. Nobody has declared Fred dead yet, have they?

atush

eskbanker wrote: »

I wasn't implying anything, just clarifying what Standard Life actually did and didn't say! The underlying issue, that uncertainty is unsettling, is undeniable, but I'm not aware of companies coming out and saying they'll definitely bale out, just making contingency plans in case the trading environment and market aren't to their liking - not in case of independence per se but how it would actually pan out, which is obviously where all the uncertainty is. The SL statement doesn't just talk of currency and EU but a range of other currently unknown factors too....

SL talked abt leaving w/o a currency union and a TAX union which will not happen. as with devolution as it is, I can't see why else to be independent as you already run everything?

There WILL NOT be a tax union with an independent scotland full stop.

atush

Heedtheadvice wrote: »

OK Eskbanker, I paraphrased poorly and read in between the lines (if not happy with the situation they will move parts of the business affected - paraphrased again and that's not just my interpretation) but do you imply: there is no probability i.e. it is a certainty or
that putting contingency plans in place is all they are doing or
it will never happen?

General point still remains. How many companies are saying they will or are putting contingency plans in place to move to Scotland resulting from any potential independence?

Robert Peston says there are a number who will come out of the shadows now. No one wanted to be the first one with their heads above the parapet

markwilkinson

There won't be a Scotland without the UK.

Alex Salmond is a one trick pony - independence.

Whilst businesses in Scotland, carry out exercises, in what they may do, should the vote be yes, it's not less than certain that those businesses won't exercise their plans. These businesses don't spend money lightly. They have profits and shareholders to think of.

Let Scotland have the oil they keep banging on about. Far greater money heads north than is taken. They can keep the money they get from the genuine heather honey too.

I'm biased, of course, I pay tax. A percentage of my tax pays for the Scots who tend to be a miserable race of folks, in my experience.

black_taxi_2

Westminster hid true value of scottish oil


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/this-britain/how-black-gold-was-hijacked-north-sea-oil-and-the-betrayal-of-scotland-518697.html

Marazan

markwilkinson wrote: »

Far greater money heads north than is taken. They can keep the money they get from the genuine heather honey too.

I'm biased, of course, I pay tax. A percentage of my tax pays for the Scots who tend to be a miserable race of folks, in my experience.

Under current UK spending Scotland has a lower deficit than the rest of the UK, that is, Scotland subsidises the rest of the UK.

ColdIron

Marazan wrote: »

Under current UK spending Scotland has a lower deficit than the rest of the UK, that is, Scotland subsidises the rest of the UK.

Is this still true once you remove the extra initial funding via the Barnett Formula?