Salmond and Sturgeon Want the English Fish for More Fat Subsidies

Thrugelmir

Shakethedisease wrote: »

I think mabye the oil price argument is well and truly beginning to pall with Scots readers.

Maybe so. Unfortunately in the real world you cannot pick and choose the topics that really matter. Whatever the issue is it has to be faced head on. AS side stepped the issue in the campaign last year with a neat tactical diversion to the NHS. Since then it's been an anti austerity measure message that's been prevalent . While oil prices have slumped and show no immediate of recovery. Which undermines the economic policy totally. The ultimate inherent danger for the SNP is that they will lose credibility in this regard. Simply hoping that the future will somehow be better is political suicide. As tomorrow may well bring a different set of problems.

Chadsman

Shakethedisease wrote: »

If Scotland votes Yes in September, the UK will lose almost 10% of its GDP overnight. Not just for a year, but forever. Billions of pounds a year in oil revenues, billions of pounds from whisky exports, billions more from other industries like tourism and videogames – all areas, crucially, in which large sums of money enter the UK economy from overseas, boosting the UK’s balance of payments.

If the UK refused a currency union, Scotland would have no reason whatsoever to take on any of the UK’s debt, and the UK would have to face the same crippling debt mountain that’s causing the horrific austerity now, but with its economy hacked off at the ankles. If the current nightmare came from a brief single-digit recession, you don’t have to be an economist to imagine the apocalyptic effect of a permanent 10% one....


....The combined effect of the broader deficit and the balance of payments one would inevitably be a further downgrading of the UK’s credit rating, leading to increased borrowing costs and a vicious economic spiral. It would, in short, be a catastrophe that would make the 2007-09 recession look like a picnic....


Superficially, an independent Scotland would be a big winner from rejecting the UK’s debt in retaliation for being refused a share of Sterling. It would almost certainly have to pay higher rates for borrowing than the UK does now, but without UK debt repayments it would barely need any borrowing, and so would be easily able to afford slightly higher interest on it....
....The only problem for Scotland, and the reason the Scottish Government doesn’t just openly come out and say “We will absolutely not accept a penny of UK debt without a currency union” (although it hints pretty strongly at it), is that with the rUK being by far Scotland’s biggest trading partner, if the rUK economy went down the toilet it would drag Scotland with it.

If Scotland were to become independent then rUK would lose that 10% of its GDP regardless of whether there was a currency union with rUK.

It would be in the best interests of Anybank Bank if a particularly awkward customer who had run up an overdraft of tens of thousands of pounds had their overdraft paid off but it most certainly would not be in the best interests of said bank to write off the debt without receiving any repayments.
Similarly it would not be in the best interests of rUK to provide a subsidy to an independent Scotland by agreeing to a currency union without getting a significant payment either monetary or in kind in return.

...If the first act of iScotland were to renounce responsibility for its debts then it would be very difficult indeed for it to raise any capital.
Eventually North Sea oil will run out- climate change may mean the use of fossil fuels will stop before then anyway. When that happens around (???) a quarter of iScotland's income will be gone.

...and I still have not seen any reason that holds water why iScotland would want a currency union with rUK or why it would be in the best interests of rUK to agree to such a union.

CLAPTON

Shakethedisease wrote: »

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/28/independent-scotland-may-keep-pound

And if there hadn't been one, Scotland would've walked away debt free. Have some Wings too and what was said (at the time).. * lights touchpaper*

http://wingsoverscotland.com/why-there-will-be-a-currency-union/

Gosh this all seems so long ago already ! At least the next time round, if there is one, the Pro-indy side will have learnt well from their mistakes I hope. Most arguments for and against the EU will have already been done to death, but over the UK as a whole. And imo, they'll just go for a separate currency and be damned. You're right that the currency union thing was the 'least worst' option. In terms of campaigning anyway.

But for the Queen, and 'not asking her' ? You do realise Mary Queen of Scots son, and James VI, or I ( depending on Scotland or England ) was the reason for the Union of the Crowns in the first place right ? :cool:

what do you think a currency union is?

Tromking

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Gosh this all seems so long ago already ! At least the next time round, if there is one, the Pro-indy side will have learnt well from their mistakes I hope.

I don't recall too many mistakes, just an inability to make the case for independence palatable to enough of the Scottish people.
The SNP ran a great campaign, unfortunately the facts did for them.
I don't ever see that situation changing.

Shakethedisease

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

I'd agree with that...

"This is a once in a generation, perhaps even a once in a lifetime, opportunity for Scotland."

~ Alex Salmond

"The SNP have always said, these votes are a once in a generation event, this is a once in a generation, a once in a lifetime, opportunity for Scotland"

~ Nicola Sturgeon

Now it seems they can't wait to find an excuse to break those promises....

That was only their opinion at the time. One of which a lot of Scots voters don't share. Certainly not now with another Conservative Government in situ. You can't base the entire independence issue on the opinions of just two people. They'll have to go with what their members want. The General Election changed everything, including the political map north of the border.

Shakethedisease

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Maybe so. Unfortunately in the real world you cannot pick and choose the topics that really matter. Whatever the issue is it has to be faced head on. AS side stepped the issue in the campaign last year with a neat tactical diversion to the NHS. Since then it's been an anti austerity measure message that's been prevalent . While oil prices have slumped and show no immediate of recovery. Which undermines the economic policy totally. The ultimate inherent danger for the SNP is that they will lose credibility in this regard. Simply hoping that the future will somehow be better is political suicide. As tomorrow may well bring a different set of problems.

No like I said, despite wall to wall 'oil price' negativity for a LEAST the last 3 or 4 years in Scotland... good or bad. The SNP haven't lost any credibility or support whatsoever. In fact it's increased over the same period.

Crying 'wolf' too often I think. Might have been different if the story had been any different when oil prices where at their peak. But no, Scotland still wouldn't have 'made it' as an independent country then either as there wasn't enough oil left ( or similar ).
Whatever the difficulties or challenges that would lie if Scotland went independent. The fact is that the oil price, current or past, hasn't, and isn't having a great deal of success in persuading people that the SNP are crap and not to vote for them. It may be time to leave off for a while. Of course it matters. But there's only so many times one can listen to the same story. People switched off long ago re oil.

Shakethedisease

Chadsman wrote: »

If Scotland were to become independent then rUK would lose that 10% of its GDP regardless of whether there was a currency union with rUK.

It would be in the best interests of Anybank Bank if a particularly awkward customer who had run up an overdraft of tens of thousands of pounds had their overdraft paid off but it most certainly would not be in the best interests of said bank to write off the debt without receiving any repayments.
Similarly it would not be in the best interests of rUK to provide a subsidy to an independent Scotland by agreeing to a currency union without getting a significant payment either monetary or in kind in return.

...If the first act of iScotland were to renounce responsibility for its debts then it would be very difficult indeed for it to raise any capital.
Eventually North Sea oil will run out- climate change may mean the use of fossil fuels will stop before then anyway. When that happens around (???) a quarter of iScotland's income will be gone.

...and I still have not seen any reason that holds water why iScotland would want a currency union with rUK or why it would be in the best interests of rUK to agree to such a union.

Yes, yes.. Scotland is doomed. England and rUK will be juuuuust fine. I know this story too.

You should probably look up a few things, and make your own mind up. See both sides of the argument and take it from there. The problem with this sort of thing is that it's so one-sided when it comes to reportage. You'll rarely 'see' any evidence unless you really look for it. And the places you tend to find the other side of the coin... are places that are generally instantly dismissed as 'loony tunes' for going against the grain of what's on the front pages.

I'm not really sure what else I can say.

Generali

Shakethedisease wrote: »

No like I said, despite wall to wall 'oil price' negativity for a LEAST the last 3 or 4 years in Scotland... good or bad. The SNP haven't lost any credibility or support whatsoever. In fact it's increased over the same period.

Crying 'wolf' too often I think. Might have been different if the story had been any different when oil prices where at their peak. But no, Scotland still wouldn't have 'made it' as an independent country then either as there wasn't enough oil left ( or similar ).
Whatever the difficulties or challenges that would lie if Scotland went independent. The fact is that the oil price, current or past, hasn't, and isn't having a great deal of success in persuading people that the SNP are crap and not to vote for them. It may be time to leave off for a while. Of course it matters. But there's only so many times one can listen to the same story. People switched off long ago re oil.

The SNP had their chance and they blew it: a weak UK Government and oil at record prices flattering the putative Scottish state's finances and they couldn't get it through.

Scotland will never be independent in my lifetime. As the oil runs out or simply becomes uneconomic to drill, the appetite for independence will dwindle. The SNP will be reduced to a risible hard left party, looking for ever increasing handouts from the hated oppressor while shouting about how Scotland must be allowed the one thing that would destroy the SNP.

kabayiri

Generali wrote: »

The SNP had their chance and they blew it: a weak UK Government and oil at record prices flattering the putative Scottish state's finances and they couldn't get it through.
...

I'd say the Scottish people made a calculated decision that they would be better off by staying in the Union.

They have been proven right too. What's the phrase ? Canny Scots!

It's not just the collapse in oil price.

The UK government has had to pump financial support into the Scottish oil industry in several forms. That would have been tricky for an independent newly formed country to raise the required resources.

kabayiri

Given the SNP stance against Trident, is Mr Osborne right to announce significant investment in FastLane ?

Shouldn't we be looking for a new home for the submarines somewhere in rUK?