The Economic outlook for Scotland

setmefree2

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

As part of the negotiation, would they also be discussing the fracking opportunities in the ROUK?

Yup I guess it will all be up for grabs.

setmefree2

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

The UK is running a large deficit as well Hamish.
You seem to be forgetting that.

No doubt you'll try and cite one years specific figures, but if you look over the longer term, Scotland proportionally has a smaller deficit than the ROUK.

Only if you count all the oil tax revenues as Scotland's...

Kohoutek

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Basically you're saying that independence is a stupid idea then ? Fair do's.. For me economically risky, short term.. politically risky, in terms of the differences in how both countries vote these days ? Not much.

Well, Scotland backed the winning party three consective times before the last election. One year from now, in all probability the current government will not be in power. Don't really see the case for something as dramatic as independence. Every country has differences in political alignment between different nations/regions, that's not a reason to break-up. Do you think the 413,000 Scots that voted Tory in the last election should start their own country?

Shakethedisease wrote: »

There's much more to this that the pound. And the Yes campaign is mandating negotiating at the start for a currency union. Not forcing rUk into anything it doesn't want. Seems fair enough to me.

What is it about negotiations you have a problem with ?

I don't have a problem with the idea of negotiations if Scotland votes yes, but I do have a problem with the way Salmond presents it.

No-one can know the outcome of the negotiations (especially considering it's become clear in the last few weeks that theUK doesn't have proper contingency plans). For Salmond to suggest that the likely outcome is that the rUK would accomodate Scotland to the extent he's suggesting is obviously misconceived (or disingenous). It's similar to Nigel Farage's explanation of what would happen if the UK left the EU - the suggestion that the UK would somehow be able to negotiate to retain the benefits of EU membership whilst sticking two fingers up at the European project.

In both cases, where the party breaking away is much smaller than the other and breaking away against the wishes of the other, the more likely scenario is that the smaller party has to accomodate the larger one.

Thrugelmir

setmefree2 wrote: »

I guess that depends on how unstable the banking sector becomes. I guess nobody wants the Scottish housing market to crash because it would destabilize the banks. So the banks will try to support the housing market. However, if the referendum causes The UK to go into a recession - all house prices might fall again across the UK???

Highly possible scenario. Though banks don't have the financial firepower to absorb a sharp fall in asset prices. So interest rates on borrowing would have to rise.

Thrugelmir

IveSeenTheLight wrote: »

The UK is running a large deficit as well Hamish.
You seem to be forgetting that.

No doubt you'll try and cite one years specific figures, but if you look over the longer term, Scotland proportionally has a smaller deficit than the ROUK.

How dependent is the Scottish tourist on visitors RoUK?

200,000 jobs and Uk spending of £3.7 billion.

Then's there's exports of Scottish products. So easy to buy English instead.

There's many levels this game could be played out at. Nationalism is a double edged sword potentially.

IveSeenTheLight

Thrugelmir wrote: »

How dependent is the Scottish tourist on visitors RoUK?

I don't know, potentially you could ask the same question in reverse?

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Then's there's exports of Scottish products. So easy to buy English instead.

I'm not getting your point here

People can buy English Whisky as opposed to Scotch Whisky.
Of course they could, but there is the point on personal preference and quality that might want them to stick with their preferred label.

Thrugelmir wrote: »

There's many levels this game could be played out at. Nationalism is a double edged sword potentially.

I agree, there are many consequences, which both sides will be aware of at the negotiating table, hence they will want to work positively to come to an agreed solution

beecher2

Thrugelmir wrote: »

How dependent is the Scottish tourist on visitors RoUK?

200,000 jobs and Uk spending of £3.7 billion.

Then's there's exports of Scottish products. So easy to buy English instead.

There's many levels this game could be played out at. Nationalism is a double edged sword potentially.

You think rUK will boycott Scotland and Scottish products if we vote for independence?

Graham_Devon

beecher2 wrote: »

You think rUK will boycott Scotland and Scottish products if we vote for independence?

I reckon it might go the other way, with a sense that the products are now "truly" scottish. I've stated before now, a lot could be made of the scottish name. Iceland and Norway have done this very thing and attached their country to their products to make them appear even more appealing (and it's worked, just check out the Icelandic claims on fish, for instance in the shops).

I'm certainly not gonna go without an Aberdeen Angus burger simply because Scotland is no longer part of the UK. And I doubt anyone really will.

mayonnaise

Graham_Devon wrote: »

I'm certainly not gonna go without an Aberdeen Angus burger simply because Scotland is no longer part of the UK. And I doubt anyone really will.

You can also have Australian or U.S. Aberdeen Angus you know.

Psst Graham, Aberdeen Angus is a cattle breed, they're not called like that because they're all grazing in and around Aberdeen.

mayonnaise

I don't think many would boycott Scottish products.
On the other hand, a rUK depositor or investor would be mad to leave anything in a Scottish based bank/fund post a yes-vote.
But that's got nothing to do with boycotting, it's just financial prudence.