to ask why the Yes campaign in Scotland wants to keep the pound?

[grovel]

That's it really. Surely an independent Scotland would want its own Central Bank setting interest rates etc?

The pound is as much Scotland's as rUK's

How? The pound sterling was the currency for England and Wales long before the union. Scotland used the pound Scots. At the time of union one pound sterling would buy you 12 pound Scots.

Like it or not, the pound sterling is controlled by the Bank of England which belongs to the UK government. If Scotland votes for independence the pound sterling will belong to rUK. Scotland can enter a currency union with rUK if the Westminster government agree (unlikely because of the risks to the rUK taxpayer), continue to use the pound without a currency union (risky as they will have no control over monetary policy and no recourse to the lender of last resort but not impossible - a number of small nations use someone else's currency in this way) or use some other currency.

Except that Scottish bank notes do not have to be accepted in England and Wales - acceptance is a matter of agreement between the parties involved. Scottish banks have to back their note issues with English bank notes and coins and an account with the Bank of England.

Sorry - for rUK I should have said England. It is true that there are only two elections (out of 14 - that's still 1 in 7 elections) where we've ended up with a Labour government when rUK voted Tory but there have been rather more elections where England voted Tory but we've ended up with a Labour government due to Scotland and Wales.

Lucky, when the SNP won a majority gvt (under a system designed to prevent majority gvts) and the issue of a referendum became real, more devolution would have been welcomed by the Scottis people. That's why Alex wanted the question. WM, playing hardball and believing we'd say no, forced the yes/no single question. This was their first tactical mistake, because plenty of us are thrawn enough to say, "Well, fuck you then, I'll vote yes" and no amount of scare stories will alter that decision.

Next, BetterTogether, the no campaign, started Project Fear; their own name for it, btw. They thought they could scare us into a no vote; we're too poor, too wee, oil is running out and a blight on our economy, we wouldn't be protected by the might of the British military, and they'd bomb our airports. Sadly, with recorded evidence of senior WM politicians of all stripes admitting our economy is perfectly sound enough for us to go it alone, and evidence that actually they'd been lying to us about oil for 40 years, the scares fell flat. When the MoD only found out about an anauthorised Russian military vessel in Scottish waters from Twitter, and it took 48 hours for a vessel from Portsmouth to arrive, well, you can imagine the reaction.

Meanwhile, the yes campaign was taking off. It's a genuine grassroots movement, with hundreds of local groups all over the country, getting out on the streets, talking to people. Crowdfunding of websites like www.wingsoverscotland.com spread the news, and a Daily Mail story about evil cybernats provided invaluable free publicity. The yes campaign is soaring, the message positive.

Which is why WM parties are now offering versions of "more devo". LibDems are not trusted and no-one really thinks they'll remain in power after the next General Election. Labour's offering is an incoherent shambles of more power over income tax levels, which it would be impractical if not impossible to use. Tories will present theirs next month, but whatever it is, it's all too late. (And not helped by their intransigence over the £, tbh)

And yes, Cameron probably has turned more "don't knows" into yes than Salmond. The lovebombing was particulary entertaining.

Project Fear; their own name for it, btw

The Sunday Herald claim that some inside Better Together use that name. Their campaign director says he has never heard anyone use the term.

Blair MacDougall is a lying toad. I spit in his general direction.

wingsoverscotland is run by a nutter in a bath.

And this doesn't look like soaring to me.

whatscotlandthinks.org/questions/should-scotland-be-an-independent-country-1#table

Better Together need to get their arse in gear though. I agree with you on that.

Cricket-there has been a shift in Scotland in recent years in that most Scots now consider themselves to be Scottish first.

But this isn't what this campaign is about.

Going back to the original OP the yes movement is wider than the SNP and Yes Scotland (the main campaigning organisation). There is also a significant RIC (radical independence conference) as well as individuals who want an iScotland but a different one from the White Paper eg republicans/anti EU/ pro own currency/ common weal policies etc. My point is not all of Yes want a currency union. The arguments for a yes vote stand even if this doesn't happen yet the No campaign keep harping on about it.

I've been out canvassing in different areas. On the streets of Scotland people are more worried about how WM policies are effecting them rather than the maybe/what ifs of WM threats re currency union.

Close, Peach, a nutter in Bath. However nutty he may be, he provides a valuable alternative source of information, and always gives supporting evidence. The incredible success of his crowdfunding appeal (target £53k, achieved in under eight and a half hours, eventually closing at well over double his target) shows his site is wanted, and appreciated by ordinary punters.

No, it shows that overemotive imagery and overuse of THEY and US, combined with a good old dose of Braveheart, can manipulate people.

Ah, Peach, your use of the Braveheart rhetoric shows you are unfamiliar with the site. You couldn't be more wrong.

How about www.bellacaledonia.org.uk, www.newsnetscotland.com, www.businessforscotland.co.uk? All nutty followers of Hollywood movies from a decade ago?

I did 4 years in Scotland and I graduated with an MA as my first degree.

If you graduate from Oxford or Cambridge you graduate with a BA. It is converted to an MA after the passage of a certain amount of time and the exchange of money.

Quite different.

I don't read the BNP site for immigration statistics.

I don't believe in conspiracies. If what the Yes campaign are saying is true, it won't be hidden on their own sites.

And I've actually never visited the Better Together website either.

But yes, it is not a postgraduate degree. Perhaps I should have said "you will graduate with a degree called a Masters." I was just trying to make the point that things are different in Scotland!

Wings doesn't do conspiracy theories either. Honestly, you should have a look, follow a few links, interesting stuff. But of course you don't have to believe any of it.

Withextradinosaurs- you do have a point about rUK people not understanding things that are very different in Scotland (up thread someone implied that we had the same judicial system which is far from the case).

The Scottish under grad degree is normally 4 years but the 4th year is at the same qualification level as the rUK BA and the BAs the new Scottish unis give out.

It does cause confusion and it is annoying.

IMO the Scottish education system is much better.

The remark was "we've jointly built judicial systems", which is entirely correct. Scotland may have a separate legal system, but its legal concepts have been influenced to a considerable degree by English common law, and for most of the history of the Union, has shared a final court of appeal.

Whether education in Scotland is superior is a matter of debate now. It doesn't rank that highly worldwide.

Anyway, to answer the OP, the reason why the Yes campaign wants to "keep the pound" is to avoid scaring people into voting No.

For the same reason, they claim an independent Scotland will keep the Queen, open borders with England, continue within the EU, maintain a joint defence force, and so on. In short, the claim is that iScotland will continue to have all the bits of the UK that Scots like.

To be frank, the Yes campaign's position on keeping the pound is nothing short of disgraceful, and it makes me really angry. There are a lot of people around who have been given the impression that the pound is an asset that can be split, like a bar of chocolate. It isn't, of course. It is just a unit of exchange. If iScotland adopted another currency, ie, its own, it would be no different from the adoption of the Euro a decade ago.

withextradinosaurs - with respect, it isn't that different. A four year MA in selected arts degrees from an ancient university is an undergraduate degree, not a post graduate degree, the same as an MA undergraduate degree from Oxford or Cambridge. Both are equivalent to a BA or BSc from, say, a Russell Group university as neither have required additional study.

An Masters degree from a Russell Group university is quite different

They want to 'keep the pound' because any of the alternatives would mean losing the referendum. That's entirely understandable, but since the independent Bank of England says it won't work, the Yes campaign is in a bit of a hole.

To be frank, the Yes campaign's position on keeping the pound is nothing short of disgraceful, and it makes me really angry. There are a lot of people around who have been given the impression that the pound is an asset that can be split, like a bar of chocolate

Yes, me too. It's terrifying that they keep this charade of 'it's ours just as much as it is rUKs' when it's blatantly not true.

And just to go back to 'clootie dumpling of doom', I am wheezing laughing

Not so long ago Salmond was describing the Pound as "a millstone round Scotland's neck". Now he's telling rUK that they will be sharing the currency with iScotland.
He just seems to say whatever he thinks will get the most votes, without any consideration for reality.
Yesterday he was guaranteeing that rUK will carry on building it's warships in a foreign country.