Indyref 6

[StatisticallyChallenged]

Welcome to indyref 6

Spidergirl8 asked close to end of last thread:

What impact would independence have on fiscal policy and economic stability
What impact would the ageing population have on the future
Is the predicted future a positive one, based on fact

If the bite goes no, what has actually been achieved? Does that not just put Scotland on the back foot?

Let's try and give not too biased answers please!

Just looking at the David Smith article...

He predicates his prophecies of doom firstly on an assumption that oil and gas revenues will fall. He take this info from OBR and Sir Iain Wood, neither of whom are exactly unbiased. I don't happen to believe that we need oil and gas revenue to make the figures stack up but even if we do, it is not written in stone that they are going to decline any time soon. See for example this www.scotsman.com/news/politics/top-stories/scottish-independence-1-trillion-oil-claim-1-3529183 article today (from The Scotsman which is not exactly known as having a yes stance either). The oil and gas industry source quoted is reporting potentially huge oil reserves off the West Coast where there has hitherto been no extraction. (If this is the case, I can think straightaway of another source of income for Faslane in addition to Scottish defence work.)

He also maintains that Scotland is operating at a deficit. This has been debunked elsewhere. We are currently a net contributor to UK plc.

With targeted support for Scottish industry, investment in infrastructure, and the ability, for example, to develop large capital projects such as interconnectors across the North Sea to sell renewable energy to Europe, we could be in an even stronger situation.

I'm not taking down my Yes stickers on the basis of this article.

But we aren't sceptical about the benefits of CU deee
We are sceptical that the CU will be available to us.
Entirely different.

If there is a yes vote, will you currency union sceptics then want the rUK to enter one?

From the perspective of the rUK, no.

From the perspective of a Scot, I think it's the best option for the Scottish economy, although I am not a fan of the political repercussions. On one hand, the economy is more likely to stay afloat, on the other, you're handing control straight back to Westminster without the ability to vote to influence it.

If there is a yes vote I would want a currency union as I can't see how Scotland will survive without it. It's not great as interest rates will be set by the Bank of England but the alternative is what exactly?

Exactly what Santana said.

Honest answer Deeedeee, I don't know. There are aspects of a currency union which would benefit us at least in the short term, it could well help Scotland with stability whilst we sort everything else out and make more definite policies and plans, whilst we had our first elections, etc etc etc. But it wouldn't be great in the long term - the treasury have said that because of what happened in the eurozone the restrictions would be heavy. I think in the longer run, if we had to be independent, I'd prefer for us to have our own currency.

Yes I know but I'm wondering if after a yes vote whether no voters will become supporters of the scottish government's request for currency union or whether you will sit on your hands and mumble I told you so?

We are currently a net contributor to UK plc

Can you quote the numbers for this please?

Fanny- I'm puzzled why are you in favour of a currency union? If it's all going to be so fantastic going it alone why do you want one?

And as Santana says why would you want to hand fiscal control to the Bank of England?

Question for the yes voters actually: if the option is currency union and Trident stays in Scotland, do you accept or decline?

too wee?

I'm wondering if after a yes vote whether no voters will become supporters of the scottish government's request for currency union or whether you will sit on your hands and mumble I told you so?

I'm a bit confused why you're asking this. What's the effect of us supporting a CU? It's not going to affect the solid economic reasoning behind its rejection.

Anyway, I would hope it would go through because it's the best option of a bad bunch.

Ok, so you'd all be in support of Scotland pursuing a currency union in the event if a yes vote?

Do you think that the electorate if Scotland might be unanimous in wanting the scottish government to pursue a currency union in the event of a yes vote?

I asked a question about currency union a while ago. Interested in what no voters have to say. Sorry for reposting.

"Many no voters on this thread have suggested that - despite the constitutional attractions of independence - it would not be worth voting for essentially because it would spook the markets, and the short-term consequences of spooking the markets should trump all other considerations.

When it comes to a currency union, no voters have suggested both that Scotland and rUK are too fiscally integrated, too economically intertwined, and too administratively interwoven to make independence worth the bother AND that a currency union would be impossible because a successful currency union depends on a high degree of fiscal integration (which we have and would have). These two positions can't be coterminous.

So what I'm asking is - what are the actual obstacles to a currency union - other than (anticipated) public opinion in rUK? Because it doesn't seem guaranteed that public opinion would necessarily be against a currency union in the actual event of independence if it actually offered the greatest measure of stability to Scotland and rUK. I've heard a lot about how currency union could be bad for iScotland, but not a great deal about why it would be difficult for rUK, other than the electorate might not warm to it.

And if hostility to a currency union is based simply on public opinion then it seems that a lot of posters on this thread would feel that those actually making the decision should enter into a currency union anyway - because the short-term consequences of spooking the markets should trump all other considerations."

itsall just read your bc article.

Yes one of the most profound reasons for yes is so we can design a tax and benefit system to suit Scottish needs.

Personally I'm in favour of a citizens income and free 24/7 childcare but I don't see either of them happening any time soon!

We are still using a social security system designed in the 1940s. Imagine if we were driving 40s cars or hadn't changed our health or education systems since then! That would be ridiculous. But we expect a system designed on the male breadwinner model with the assumption of full employment to work in 21st century scotland with zero hours contracts, lone parents, longevity, employed mothers, education lasting well into the 20s, later marriage/partnering, smaller families, more mobility and a labour market that doesn't provide many unskilled jobs.

Universal credit is a disaster and I don't believe it's delay in implementation is entirely unconnected to this referendum.

We need a Scottish social security system that can meet the needs of islanders and the ex manufacturing job deserts of the central belt alike.

I'm wondering if after a yes vote whether no voters will become supporters of the scottish government's request for currency union or whether you will sit on your hands and mumble I told you so?

I'm confused by your question. Of course as it will be the only viable option- salvaging from the wreckage as it were.

Doubt using the RofUK pound would be best for Scotland as we'd have no control.

Probably best to start from scratch with our own currency.

too wee?

Ah a link to the Nos version of Wings FWIW the SNP may have coined the phrase"too wee, too poor, too stupid" but most of the arguments against independence do fit into those categories.

Question for the yes voters actually: if the option is currency union and Trident stays in Scotland, do you accept or decline?
Decline. That answer required no thought whatsoever.

They might ask for one, but I don't think they will get it. Because of the ill feeling being stirred up, I don't think for one minute that English, Welsh and NI voters (who influence their parliamentary representatives) will wish to enter an agreement which is perceived to benefit independent Scotland with no benefit to themselves.
And who would blame them.

The trident question is one me and my husband have been thinking about too , I'm sure that'll feature heavily in the currency negotiations too.

I'm not sure. Maybe if it was agreed that trident would stay for a short period of currency union while Scotland established plans for a new currency and rUK established plans for relocating trident, and both enjoyed economic stability whilst disentangling from each other. A long goodbye. Seems the common sense decent option. Set a time limit if both things. Do away with uncertainty. Help each other!

Probably best to start from scratch with our own currency.

I may agree with that. Timescales are important too e.g. on 19th September if it's Yes we'll still be using the pound. The question is a what point the CU ends and then at what point use of the £ ends.

Ah a link to the Nos version of Wings FWIW the SNP may have coined the phrase"too wee, too poor, too stupid" but most of the arguments against independence do fit into those categories

Not worth much, sorry - very tenuous at best

Question for the yes voters actually: if the option is currency union and Trident stays in Scotland, do you accept or decline?
Decline. That answer required no thought whatsoever

And that is one of the problem with Yes. Too many answers given with no thought whatsoever.

I asked the question because I think it will make a difference to the UK government's position on currency union if there is a yes vote and if everyone in Scotland supported the negotiations. People are influentional and suggestible things. The uk will still be together during negotiations, Scotland can influence the rest of uk. (Especially if Murdoch is swinging behind us. )

Santana- I see both as temporary. If I was in the negotiating team then yes I'd agree to that.

I'd like an independent currency eventually.

I don't see trident being around in 20 years either way. It's too expensive, a pointless vanity project and has little UK public support.