![]() |
Re: if the scots go, do you care?
This is the guy you need to listen to ,the governor of the Bank of England not the numpties from the NO mob a.ka. Project Fear.
Finance Secretary welcomes Carney comments | Scottish National Party |
Re: if the scots go, do you care?
Originally Posted by neilcumming
(Post 11367888)
This is the guy you need to listen to ,the governor of the Bank of England not the numpties from the NO mob a.ka. Project Fear.
Finance Secretary welcomes Carney comments | Scottish National Party Of course, of bloody course, the currency union would continue "after a vote for independence." The series of events leading up to secession from the union will take some considerable time, with the earliest suggested "Independence Day" some time in the summer of 2016. At that point, when Scotland leaves the union, the currency union will also cease. Swinney's comments are a complete non-sequitur. "This also shows why it is in the best interests of the rest of the UK to continue with a currency union on independence," he says. How, FFS? It has absolutely nothing whatever to do with anything that happens after independence, Carney was talking about what happens before the union is split up, while Scotland is still officially part of the UK but preparing for departure. Is that the best they can come up with? It's really rather pathetic. |
Re: if the scots go, do you care?
I can't imagine there'll be a vote for independence. Such a vote would imply that a politician had convinced the public that a significant change in the running of the country would be a good thing, that politicians should be trusted to make such a change.
The public weren't born yesterday. Some remember decimalisation, many remember joining the EU, most remember privatisation, they'll remember that they were worse off after these changes. I suspect that even people who favour independence won't vote for it because they know that something as big as creating a new country with new institutions and a new currency is something the government will inevitably cock up and that they'll be stuck with the bill. The only people who have the funds to afford the government making a bollocks of rearranging Scottish government are people who don't live in Scotland. |
Re: if the scots go, do you care?
Originally Posted by neilcumming
(Post 11367888)
This is the guy you need to listen to ,the governor of the Bank of England not the numpties from the NO mob a.ka. Project Fear.
Finance Secretary welcomes Carney comments | Scottish National Party |
Re: if the scots go, do you care?
What Carney actually said...
Carney Has Contingency Plans for Scottish Independence - Bloomberg http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...itics-28773893 To my uneducated eye he appears to be saying that if Scotland wants to continue to use the pound (like say El Salvador uses the US$), they can, but the bank of England has at least discussed contingency plans to ensure any impact on the UK economy due to the likelyhood of money draining from scottish based institutions is minimized as much as it can. He also makes it clear its up to the UK politicians to set policy regarding currency union, not him. Not sure what sort of independence it would be when you have no control over your currency and all financial decisions relating to it! |
Re: if the scots go, do you care?
Originally Posted by dbd33
(Post 11367917)
I can't imagine there'll be a vote for independence. Such a vote would imply that a politician had convinced the public that a significant change in the running of the country would be a good thing, that politicians should be trusted to make such a change.
The public weren't born yesterday. Some remember decimalisation, many remember joining the EU, most remember privatisation, they'll remember that they were worse off after these changes. I suspect that even people who favour independence won't vote for it because they know that something as big as creating a new country with new institutions and a new currency is something the government will inevitably cock up and that they'll be stuck with the bill. The only people who have the funds to afford the government making a bollocks of rearranging Scottish government are people who don't live in Scotland. At present the chances of independence are low. My brothers concerns are that many of the eligible voters are young and swayed by emotion, and the clear problems of an independent scotland dont matter to them. If the Yes campaign is effective in getting out the young voters, then a Yes win is still possible despite the current poll data and he is likely, along with many thousands of other affluent residents, to jump ship before he's taxed to death and everything turns to shit. He's lived in Scotland since the mid 1980s. |
Re: if the scots go, do you care?
I am just curious as to why RoUK are so keen to hang on to Scotland? If they cost more than they bring in , why would Westminster be campaigning so hard to keep them? If this was a business, which running a nation basically is, then they would have been sold off years ago.......so why is Westminster so keen to hang on to Scotland?
I am a Scot and if had a vote, it would be AYE! |
Re: if the scots go, do you care?
Originally Posted by Calgaryscot
(Post 11367970)
If this was a business, which running a nation basically is,
Maybe the rest of the UK actually sees Scotland as part of the UK for the last several hundred years and doesnt see any point in changing things. It would be rather like Canada deciding to ditch Newfoundland (which has rather less time served) or Quebec. Either that or the nobs just like shooting things on their highland estates... Doesnt really matter anyway, its how many Scottish residents wish to be independent/ remain in the UK that matters. |
Re: if the scots go, do you care?
Its a simple equation...do you believe an old 007 living richly on foreign shores....or.!!!
|
Re: if the scots go, do you care?
Originally Posted by Calgaryscot
(Post 11367970)
I am just curious as to why RoUK are so keen to hang on to Scotland? If they cost more than they bring in , why would Westminster be campaigning so hard to keep them?
And, of course, Cameron is leader of the official Unionist party. Since the Tories would benefit from losing all those Labour seats in Scotland, it seems to be one of the few places where principles are taking precedence over short-term political gain. Or perhaps it's a double-bluff, and the Tories want Scotland to go, and believe that opposing it makes a 'Yes' vote more likely... |
Re: if the scots go, do you care?
Originally Posted by Calgaryscot
(Post 11367970)
I am just curious as to why RoUK are so keen to hang on to Scotland? If they cost more than they bring in , why would Westminster be campaigning so hard to keep them? If this was a business, which running a nation basically is, then they would have been sold off years ago.......so why is Westminster so keen to hang on to Scotland?
I am a Scot and if had a vote, it would be AYE! |
Re: if the scots go, do you care?
Originally Posted by Shard
(Post 11368049)
Not great logic here. RUK is not "so keen" to hang on to Scotland, plenty are not bothered either way, and there are others who would like Scotland to go. Whether Scotland is a net contributor or not can be argued both ways, however even if we assume it is not there are many other reasons why RUK might want to stay in tact. Finally, running a country and running a business are not the same by any stretch (no taxation for one).
As for running a business, I was simplifying things maybe a bit too much haha, but at the end of the day, books still have to be balanced and if a "drain" on your economy wanted to leave, then they should let them leave. Simple truth is 8 out of 10 of the wealthiest nations are small Northern European countries similar in size, population and resources to Scotland. Westminster don't want to lose them at all. |
Re: if the scots go, do you care?
They are desperate to go on subsidising SCO ? Something does not add up here !
|
Re: if the scots go, do you care?
Originally Posted by Calgaryscot
(Post 11368059)
The money, time and effort spent on the "better together" campaign would suggest that Westminster is very keen to hang on to Scotland.
Last week, all 2.5  million households in the country received a 12-page glossy government booklet, Scotland’s Future – What Independence Means for You. What independence means, apparently, is that “we will get the government that Scotland votes for – every time,†which happens to be Mr Salmond’s key slogan in the referendum campaign. Life would be “easier for families,†with reduced energy bills, increased benefits, tax allowances and tax credits “giving greater financial security to thousandsâ€. Among the most conspicuous fantasy promises was a “50 per cent increase in exports,†which could “create 100,000 more jobs.†And of course, “an independent Scotland will keep the poundâ€. The cost to the public purse of distributing just this one booklet was £550,000. But it is one of 17 such publications, straightforwardly Yes propaganda, produced and sent out over the past year at taxpayers’ expense. When the result is a resounding "No" to independence I guess we can all happily conclude that the whole thing was a terrible waste of taxpayers money on both sides. By the way, the No campaign has asked that people stop sending small donations – because it has been inundated with cash since the debate. So it seems that its not just London government and big business bankrolling the no campaign. |
Re: if the scots go, do you care?
Originally Posted by Calgaryscot
(Post 11368059)
The money, time and effort spent on the "better together" campaign would suggest that Westminster is very keen to hang on to Scotland.
As for running a business, I was simplifying things maybe a bit too much haha, but at the end of the day, books still have to be balanced and if a "drain" on your economy wanted to leave, then they should let them leave. Simple truth is 8 out of 10 of the wealthiest nations are small Northern European countries similar in size, population and resources to Scotland. Westminster don't want to lose them at all. Government's in fact do not need to "balance books" and rarely do. Hence ever present national debt. The "simple truth" part is a shot in the dark. Scotland may thrive it may also find it struggles as it loses sterling and businesses move away. What is unhelpful is when the SNP dispenses with objective debate and tries to hoodwink the public into thinking its a simple proposition with guaranteed success. If Scots were, say, voting on a 20% decrease in their pension to bring about independence, they might be more critical of Salmond's claims. |
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 2:32 am. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.