The New Fat Scotland 'Thanks for all the Fish' Thread.

TrickyTree83

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Yes, before any future referendum Scots would be better knowing which direction Brexit negotiations are going. The single market and immigration policies being priorities.

Brexit means trade between Scotland and the EU suffers. And independent Scotland in the EU means trade between rUK- Scotland suffers. We've all got that.

If rUK goes down the pan in a hard Brexit scenario which doesn't only affect trade but the £, inflation, jobs, businesses, EU nationals leaving en masse.. trade with Scotland will suffer anyway with less consumers etc etc.

That 64% fig is from 2 years ago. No one is going to be hinging independence on vague and short term trade figures from two years ago, which might bear little relation to what happens after a Brexit is concluded. One also has to ask if Scotland is reaching anywhere near it's full potential in accessing EU markets at the present time.

http://www.europeanfutures.ed.ac.uk/article-3347

Ok, I appreciate that you're engaging with me on this so lets agree that the figure of 64% could be different now. And that during a hard brexit situation the figure might fall. Although personally I think it would rise given we're an integrated domestic market.

If it fell as much as you do trade with the EU in entirety (as well as we know), so 11%, then that still leaves a large block of trade with rUK of 53%.

The UK by nature of the integrated market it is, our geographic position and 300 years of history means that the number will be high and remain high. It will take a concerted effort to change that number to a low enough number not to negatively impact an independent Scotland in the EU in a big way. Right?

So then there's what happens to the EU if the trade relationship goes down the pan. It's not going to be all sweetness and light on the continent either. French foods and drinks will suffer, German manufacturing will suffer, tourism on the continent particularly in Italy and Spain will suffer. So in an EU single market where the consumers have less money to spend are they really going to take up the slack Scotland requires when Scotland introduces problems to trade with the UK because it joins/remains in the EU?

With regards to the financial issues that the UK may experience during Brexit. We're well prepared to mitigate them because we have our own financial levers. Scotland may have to join the Euro, peg to Sterling or come up with its own currency. All present their own problems. A Scottish currency will struggle with capital flows, pegging to Sterling means you're not in control of monetary policy, and the less said about the Euro the better really as I'm sure you agree.

So to summarise yes, as a leave voter I was aware that there would be some short, perhaps even medium term suffering in our economy whilst we make the transition. This is going to affect all areas of the UK (not equally either), but what I'm trying to convey is where Scotland is best placed to weather that storm. Because one way or another a large contingent of the EU's net contributors and consumers are going to be leaving it. So if there's a bad deal where does the least suffering occur for Scotland. It's pretty clear from the trade numbers, even though they're aged, that remaining in the UK even for a period (medium term) is the best course of action.

elantan

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Ok,
.


So to summarise yes, as a leave voter I was aware that there would be some short, perhaps even medium term suffering in our economy whilst we make the transition. This is going to affect all areas of the UK n.

I could've written this about Indy ... how come it's acceptable to be written about Brexit but not indy ?

CLAPTON

elantan wrote: »

I could've written this about Indy ... how come it's accepted to be written about Brexit but not indy ?

well its true that iscotland would be viable
however, iscotland loses the massive subsidy they get from the english
whilst the UK will save lots of money once outside the EU

TrickyTree83

elantan wrote: »

I could've written this about Indy ... how come it's acceptable to be written about Brexit but not indy ?

The UK economy is big enough and has the institutions required to navigate brexit and make it a success.

Scotland has neither of these attributes, plus the numbers involved aren't the same, Scotland is the wrong side of 50% with regards to the trade bloc you want to separate from for a start.

What's your solution to the economic questions around independence?

elantan

You think the UK is big enough and has the institutions ... is that with or without Scotland ?

CLAPTON

elantan wrote: »

You think the UK is big enough and has the institutions ... is that with or without Scotland ?

its bigger without scotland

TrickyTree83

elantan wrote: »

You think the UK is big enough and has the institutions ... is that with or without Scotland ?

Clearly that distinction doesn't need to be made since the Bank of England would remain the Bank of England whether Scotland was in the union or not. Also the union would still be 60m+ people with or without Scotland. So the domestic market and the institutions would be large enough to deal with brexit.

What were those economic solutions again?

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Ok, I appreciate that you're engaging with me on this so lets agree that the figure of 64% could be different now.

Likewise, I appreciate all your posts engaging with me.:)

And that during a hard brexit situation the figure might fall. Although personally I think it would rise given we're an integrated domestic market.

If it fell as much as you do trade with the EU in entirety (as well as we know), so 11%, then that still leaves a large block of trade with rUK of 53%.

If everything comes to pass as well as a Yes vote. Then extra costs will be incurred just about everywhere in tariffs for the UK. Independent Scotland or not. Either way getting the lowest or 0 tariffs deal possible during Brexit talks is paramount, for everyone. If May and the Brexiteers would just calm the rhetoric a bit, and if a vote was put to Westminster the SNP would vote for a soft Brexit even if it scuppers their current chances for another referendum. Let's hope May does so.

The UK by nature of the integrated market it is, our geographic position and 300 years of history means that the number will be high and remain high. It will take a concerted effort to change that number to a low enough number not to negatively impact an independent Scotland in the EU in a big way. Right?

So then there's what happens to the EU if the trade relationship goes down the pan. It's not going to be all sweetness and light on the continent either. French foods and drinks will suffer, German manufacturing will suffer, tourism on the continent particularly in Italy and Spain will suffer. So in an EU single market where the consumers have less money to spend are they really going to take up the slack Scotland requires when Scotland introduces problems to trade with the UK because it joins/remains in the EU?

With regards to the financial issues that the UK may experience during Brexit. We're well prepared to mitigate them because we have our own financial levers. Scotland may have to join the Euro, peg to Sterling or come up with its own currency. All present their own problems. A Scottish currency will struggle with capital flows, pegging to Sterling means you're not in control of monetary policy, and the less said about the Euro the better really as I'm sure you agree.

So to summarise yes, as a leave voter I was aware that there would be some short, perhaps even medium term suffering in our economy whilst we make the transition. This is going to affect all areas of the UK (not equally either), but what I'm trying to convey is where Scotland is best placed to weather that storm. Because one way or another a large contingent of the EU's net contributors and consumers are going to be leaving it. So if there's a bad deal where does the least suffering occur for Scotland. It's pretty clear from the trade numbers, even though they're aged, that remaining in the UK even for a period (medium term) is the best course of action.

It's the age old politics v's economics thing. There's a lot in what you're saying and I don't think Scotland going independent would be easy at all. I think everyone in the UK is going to be a lot poorer for a while. I don't know if you caught this article in the Guardian ( I know ! The Guardian )... but it rang a lot of bells for me in terms of how I think EU negotiators and other countries are going to approach this.

and this is vital for her to understand: the other EU countries believe it is in their national interest to safeguard the single market. Why? Because of jobs. Millions of jobs have been created because European companies have been able to buy and sell freely to the richest consumers in the world, in the largest market in the world. Creating the single market was a painful process. Getting 28 countries to agree on everything from safety standards of hairdryers to banks’ capital levels was tough. A lot of politicians had to return home to their voters and admit that things would have to change.

Allowing one country today to dictate its own conditions while being part of this market would probably lead to the unravelling of the whole package of hard-won compromises. And that is not going to happen. This is what Angela Merkel is saying when she says that the UK will not be part of the single market without free movement of people.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/09/brits-punished-brexit-we-want-fairness

I think it's the Brexit Tories that are going to have to calm their narratives and expectations right down. The EU aren't going to budge at all, they've come too far to let things unravel now. If Davies, Fox et al do so and perhaps find a compromise to a softer Brexit then Scotland, NI and Gibraltar will no longer become problems to deal with for now.

Sky news are currently tweeting about 27% rises in food prices ( food ! ) under WTO rules. The Times has headlines of Brexit costing 66bn a year and 'one of Britain's biggest exporters' JCB is quitting the CBI in protest at possible job losses. Scottish voters aren't going to be immune from these sorts of headlines over the next few months/years and won't be pleased if many of them come to pass since they didn't vote for it. There are definate limits to how far simply repeating 'but you're part of the UK' or 'Sept 2014' will go.

I hate to mention the O word in this thread. But * throws caution to the wind* oil prices have been going up.

elantan

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Clearly that distinction doesn't need to be made since the Bank of England would remain the Bank of England whether Scotland was in the union or not. Also the union would still be 60m+ people with or without Scotland. So the domestic market and the institutions would be large enough to deal with brexit.

What were those economic solutions again?

How's that 1.5 trillion debt reduction going ? Think you'll manage that once we leave ?

kabayiri

CLAPTON wrote: »

its bigger without scotland

I would agree now.

I think SNP politics is pulling against the UK collective cause, and not with.

The socialist agenda the SNP want to follow is not in keeping with the Tory mainstream politics down here.

I would rather Scotland left, and we can remove that particular deficit burden.

Over time I think an independent Scotland could actually do quite well. It's just how they handle the transition. UK faces the same challenge when we leave the EU.

My only problem is with the timing of the next Scottish referendum. The priority of the 90% of the UK which is not Scotland must be Brexit. It's the biggest challenge we face.