I want them to succeed just so I can laugh at the inevitable nationalist rambling on the internet.
I want them to succeed just so I can laugh at the inevitable nationalist rambling on the internet.
"God is fake because space and science."
-Jimmy Neutron
You were arguing about using the pound without establishing a formal currency union. This is not the SNP policy, so you were wrong. Simple.
Actually I was arguing that we have 3 options for currency, so how can that mean I am arguing about using the pound without establishing a currency union? You are jumping to conclusions that is all, go back and read all the posts again as you seem to have missed a few. It should be easy to quote where I was wrong, I will be waiting...
In the garb of old Gaul, with the fire of old Rome,
From the heath-covered mountains of Scotia we come;
Our loud-sounding pipe breathes the true martial strain,
And our hearts still the old Scottish valour retain.
Selder, your three options are fantasy. The SNP have explicitly said they are pursuing using sterling, with the Bank of England Governing it. Your main tactic in this thread has been to promote independence on pure wishful thinking - I will only engage on the facts.
Sounds like Salmond at this rate basically wants all the good things of remaining in the UK just without being in the UK. Like he got into politics realising he has no chance of ever becoming PM so he decided to use nationalism in Scotland so he could make it independent and become a prime minister anyway.
Scotland could remain in a sterling currency union with Britain, just as the Republic of Ireland did from 1921 to 1978. Or we could adopt an independent currency, which finance minister John Swinney has already stated was a contingency. I still don't see the fantasy. Like I said it is in the best interest of everyone involved to make currency a non issue, as Scotland contributes to 10% of Sterling anyway. With the loss of the AAA rating, I really don't see how you think your position is any stronger. Who knows where the Euro will be in 2014, it might very well be the better option.Originally Posted by Ferrets54
What a novel idea, politicians who actually fight to enfranchise their constituents.
Wow maybe he is psychic, I mean when he entered into politics their wasn't even a Scottish Parliament yet.Originally Posted by nemgod
In the garb of old Gaul, with the fire of old Rome,
From the heath-covered mountains of Scotia we come;
Our loud-sounding pipe breathes the true martial strain,
And our hearts still the old Scottish valour retain.
I know, I don't even know how to talk to Selder. It's as if he thinks independence is the equivalent to a blank slate.
Are you saying that the UK is governed by the Bank of England? Because that is what it sounds like. You see I always thought it only managed monetary policy, you know as in ensuring currency stability. So I guess I don't see how that qualifies as governing. Maybe you are right though, and come July 1 the UK will be governed by Canada when Carney takes over.
As for the currency union, the Scottish government has established a panel of experts. The Fiscal Commission Working Group includes two winners of the Nobel economics prize, Joseph Stiglitz and Sir Jim Mirrlees, as well as Scottish economist Andrew Hughes-Hallett and Frances Ruane. The Fiscal Commission Working Group report proposes that Scotland should have a shareholding in the Bank of England, based on its population share of nearly 10%. This should ensure a role in appointments to key committees, and oversight at meetings by Scottish officials. It says there should be a Macroeconomic Governance Committee, in which the economic institutions of Scotland and the rest of the UK would co-ordinate policy. So it will not be a simple handing over full power to the BoE, but instead there would be a Macroeconomic Governance Committee, in which the economic institutions of Scotland and the rest of the UK would co-ordinate policy. Of course this is only a proposal as like I said earlier, Scotland has several options. That is the beauty of being independent, the ability to choose what is best for you. I personally would choose Sterling, because I honestly want to make the transition to be beneficial to all parties. I do not want independence to hurt the economy here in Britain, I only seek to strengthen our countries. To do that we must modernise our democracies.
Alex Kemp: “From the point of view of the balance of trade, oil exports would be a big plus for the Scottish economy. If Scotland were part of the EU, there would be an obligation not to discriminate against EU partners on exports. It would depend on the open market as far as Europe was concerned. One point is worth bearing in mind. Although it is a big plus for Scotland, it would help the rest of the UK as well. If Scotland were in the sterling area, it would help sterling as well, as there would be a need to acquire sterling to buy the oil.
Last edited by selder; February 25, 2013 at 12:56 PM.
In the garb of old Gaul, with the fire of old Rome,
From the heath-covered mountains of Scotia we come;
Our loud-sounding pipe breathes the true martial strain,
And our hearts still the old Scottish valour retain.
In the garb of old Gaul, with the fire of old Rome,
From the heath-covered mountains of Scotia we come;
Our loud-sounding pipe breathes the true martial strain,
And our hearts still the old Scottish valour retain.
But this all comes down to in the end more assumptions that Scotland will be able to get anything it wants post-independence, and that this will also happen to coincide with what will be best for the rest of the UK. What are the plans if it doesn't go the way Salmond wants?
Let's say in the hypothetical independence negotiations it turns out that creating a currency union and sharing control of the Bank of England is not in fact in the UK's interest. The SNP plans to keep Sterling, what are their plans if they don't gain any influence over monetary policy, which is now controlled by an entity that no longer has to concern itself over Scotland? Perhaps they could try and join the euro, or even create a new currency of their own, but these are both endeavours with their own significant risks and crucially without any indication that the Scottish people would end up better off. That's why so many people are against independence, the SNP aren't showing much more than hope and wishes.
create a scottish currency
the dream will never die
Robert Wishart, Bishop of Glasgow, 'the kingdom of Scotland is not held in tribute or homage to anyone save God alone.' - 1290.
Managing policy and governing mean the same thing; both need context, which I gave. In terms of currency, the Sterling (which is what my post said) is managed by, i.e. governed by the Bank of England. If Scotland uses the Sterling, it will not be governing the currency it is using, which is not financial independence. Even with your intentional misinterpretation, the Canada comparison is meaningless, as the BoE remains a UK government institution regardless of the individuals in it.
Nevertheless, the point remains, you are singing the virtues of how Scotland will negotiate a currency union, because that is the best thing to do, while at the same time mocking the downgrading of the credit rating.
As for the last post, that would be completely stupid. I would not vote for independence if that was the result, whatever else I felt. Even if it wasn't, how can someone vote for independence when they don't know which of three different currencies they might end up with?
Last edited by Colossus; February 25, 2013 at 04:12 PM.
Quem faz injúria vil e sem razão,Com forças e poder em que está posto,Não vence; que a vitória verdadeira É saber ter justiça nua e inteira-He who, solely to oppress,Employs or martial force, or power, achieves No victory; but a true victory Is gained,when justice triumphs and prevails.
Luís de Camões
Who said it will take place post-independence?
The UK economy is suffering from stagflation, UK government debt is rising fast, there will have to be tax rises and spending cuts.Originally Posted by Bobz
Sometimes you need a little irrational exuberance."So, first of all, let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself—nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance.
Yet our distress comes from no failure of substance. We are stricken by no plague of locusts. Compared with the perils which our forefathers conquered because they believed and were not afraid, we have still much to be thankful for. Nature still offers her bounty and human efforts have multiplied it. Plenty is at our doorstep, but a generous use of it languishes in the very sight of the supply. Primarily this is because the rulers of the exchange of mankind’s goods have failed, through their own stubbornness and their own incompetence, have admitted their failure, and abdicated. Practices of the unscrupulous money changers stand indicted in the court of public opinion, rejected by the hearts and minds of men.
True they have tried, but their efforts have been cast in the pattern of an outworn tradition. Faced by failure of credit they have proposed only the lending of more money. Stripped of the lure of profit by which to induce our people to follow their false leadership, they have resorted to exhortations, pleading tearfully for restored confidence. They know only the rules of a generation of self-seekers. They have no vision, and when there is no vision the people perish.
The money changers have fled from their high seats in the temple of our civilization. We may now restore that temple to the ancient truths. The measure of the restoration lies in the extent to which we apply social values more noble than mere monetary profit.
We face the arduous days that lie before us in the warm courage of the national unity; with the clear consciousness of seeking old and precious moral values; with the clean satisfaction that comes from the stern performance of duty by old and young alike. We aim at the assurance of a rounded and permanent national life."
In the garb of old Gaul, with the fire of old Rome,
From the heath-covered mountains of Scotia we come;
Our loud-sounding pipe breathes the true martial strain,
And our hearts still the old Scottish valour retain.
The timing is the least important thing I said. What about the main point, do the SNP have an answer when everything doesn't go their way?
I would disagree, but what's that got to do with what I said? How is Scotland going to be any better and what are the SNP's plans if the UK doesn't want a currency union?The UK economy is suffering from stagflation, UK government debt is rising fast, there will have to be tax rises and spending cuts.
Perhaps if you're a young idealist. Most people want the less romantic tendrils of reality.Sometimes you need a little irrational exuberance.
This post here, sums up exactly how myself and most scots i know feel my friends. The SNP is dealing with might be's and is assuming it will get everything perfect as it wants...while ignoring the fact that per say Nato membership is not guarenteed, The EU dosen't want us (As has been stated for reasons earlier in this thread...also who's to say what shape or form it will be in in a few years time...maybe it will become far too federal for an independent Scotland to stomach...irony, escape UK just to be in the same situation, where the ones in charge are even further away! Or indeed it may be a rich boys club so to speak, only containing the stable economies of those who are powerful enough...whatever), the sterling issue as stated above, the realistic economic plan, tax plans, the structure of the civil and public services, the armed forces... all of this, the SNP hasn't actually got yet...or considered the possibilities that maybe the UK won't lend us all the equipment we need, maybe the EU will be in no position to take us...or will be undesirable for us. Maybe we won't even get the oil revenues, due to them being drilled by companies who have a contract with the UK...too many maybes for us, not enough answers my friends. I appreciate your arguments Selder, but i'm afraid as eloquent as you are, even you can't cover up for the fact that the SNP themselves, don't really know much for certain yet. That is the big problem.
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
You can agree or disagree but what matters are facts.
Most economists hold to the notion that lenders lend to borrowers and banks are mere intermediaries. The reality is that it is banks who create new money and lend to borrowers. After decades of credit expansion Britain faces a profound decades long contraction/decline. Credit cannot be extended because Britain has reached the point of debt saturation and the capital to borrow against is spent and actually diminishing thanks to low interest rates. The UK's staggering debt to GDP ratio is almost 1000%, most of which is financial debt. Therefore, the austerity vs stimulus argument does not even apply here. Not even the US or Europe have this problem, their problem is not debt, but fiscal/monetary structure.
So you see, that is the less romantic tendrils of reality.
In the garb of old Gaul, with the fire of old Rome,
From the heath-covered mountains of Scotia we come;
Our loud-sounding pipe breathes the true martial strain,
And our hearts still the old Scottish valour retain.