Scottish independence

black_taxi_2

An economist is someone who, when he finds something that works in practice, tries to make it work in theory.

rpc

black_taxi wrote: »

An economist is someone who, when he finds something that works in practice, tries to make it work in theory.

So what you are saying is that the Fiscal Commission Working Group report should be ignored as a work of fiction?

And I guess a man with a 2:2 joint degree in Economics and Medieval History is just a laughing stock when it comes to economic and financial planning.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Scotland faces a decade of economic decline if it leaves the UK, with the painful consequences of independence likely to be felt years after a split, leading investors have warned.

A majority of major fund managers expect the Scottish economy to be worse off 10 years after separation than it is now, according to research from Capital Spreads, which regularly canvasses leading investors.

The warnings add to a catalogue of ominous predictions about the consequences of a vote in favour of independence at Thursday’s referendum.

Banks and insurers that employ tens of thousands of people in Scotland have said they will move to England in the event of a “Yes” vote, while retailers and telecoms groups have warned of higher prices and leading economists have predicted disastrous consequences.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11095472/Scotland-told-to-prepare-for-years-of-decline-under-independence.html

rpc

A couple of interesting blogs from Peston today.

One is suggesting that avoiding capital flight post-yes (and the associated handcuffs that would be placed on lending up here) would require two statements asap after the result is announced and ideally before 7am.

1 - The BoE and Osbourne make clear that they guarantee Scottish deposits and will do so until independence day. (they already have and there isn't a problem here I think)
2 - Salmond announces a plan B that does not require someone else to consent (i.e. if we can't have a currency union then X).

The other blog quotes Moody's as saying they think they would give Scotland an A rating. Two full points below the UK. Ouch.

Archi_Bald

Another concerned voice from the industry. This time from Terry Scuoler, chief executive of EEF, the manufacturers’ association which represents more than 6,000 companies employing 900,000 staff. He is a Glaswegian.

"Independence would be a disaster for Scotland, economically and politically,” he said. “People need to wake up to the enormity of the decision they are facing and the potential nightmare scenario were the Yes campaign to succeed.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/11097333/Yes-vote-would-be-nightmare-for-engineering-and-defence-businesses.html

No doubt he has now also been added to the Jim Sillars little book of people who need punishing, along with those academics from HAMISH_MCTAVISH' post.

jimjames

black_taxi wrote: »

An economist is someone who, when he finds something that works in practice, tries to make it work in theory.

How many people need to point out the flaws before the Yes camp will accept that their sums don't add up?

It seems to me that on one side (No) there is certainty and on the other (Yes) there is guesswork, assumptions and undeliverable promises. Anyone voting yes is taking a massive leap of faith that those assumptions are correct. Don't blame anyone else if they turn out to be fiction.

Back to the currency, no-one has yet answered why an independent country would want to use another country's currency and have their monetary policy dictated by a country they accuse of bullying tactics. In any other situation you'd want to get as far away as possible.

Would a new currency scare off too many voters?

kingrulzuk

I have waited so long for this. Now its my chance to see I Scotland

Rollinghome

zeupater wrote: »

however, it's likely that when the level of honesty employed dawns, it may have a serious effect on sanity .... a situation which could become very, very ugly .....

Sadly, it could.

Reminds me of the invasion of Iraq. At the time, the large majority of people in the UK were in favour, though you wouldn't guess that now, as was the Sun and Mail, naturally, and even the Observer which had a late sanctimonious editorial in favour. It sounded such fun at the time: a spot of shock and awe, kick out Saddam and install someone more to our liking. Something to watch on the telly and what could possibly go wrong?

Now it's hard to find anyone who admits to being in favour of the war, certainly none of the newspapers, and if they do, it was only because Blair took advantage of their simple trusting nature and misled them. (Just as no German ever voted for Hitler apparently, even though he was elected Chancellor in 1933.)

But Blair told them what they wanted to hear, and they were more than happy to believe him. There were plenty of warnings from saner voices: one being Robin Cook who as Foreign Secretary knew all about "intelligence" and resigned from the Cabinet in protest. He told us exactly what could go wrong including warned that Iraq could break up into a basket-case far worse than Afghanistan and Somalia; but he and others were ignored by those who didn't want to hear.

If Alex's brave new world isn't quite as much fun as he promises, how many will be admitting to voting for it without claiming it wasn't their fault?

Doshwaster

Archi_Bald wrote: »

It is not going to happen. None of the 3 main parties would survive the next rUK general election if there was even a hint of them going away from their stated position on the currency matter. If any of them tried to con the electorate and changed their mind after they got into government, a vote of no-confidence and new elections would follow.

Aside from that, a currency union just wouldn't make any sense, and it would not be in the best interest of rUK, however often Salmond says it would. He might be successful in bullying half of the population of Scotland but rUK won't be bullied by anybody.

Even if the UK leaders (whoever is in power post the 2015 election) do a massive U-turn and agree to a currency union then surely that would have to be approved by a UK referendum - just as there would need to be if we joined the Euro currency union. What are the chances of the English, Welsh and N. Ireland voters agreeing to underwrite a country which has just walked away? I certainly wouldn't support it.

silverwhistle

rpc wrote: »

Can't find the reference at the moment, but over the weekend Alex said that the currency union would, in practice, be that Scotland had a veto over any decisions involving the Bank of England.

You couldn't find the reference, could you? If it's true it's rather strong [additional?] evidence that the man is a fantasist.