Indyref8

[grovel]

ItsAllGoingToBeFine, but who will be Prime Minister? Pretty unsatisfactory changing halfway through. My suggestion was that maybe Cameron, Clegg, Miliband et al agree on a team and step back themselves. It would make the end result a joint enterprise and could prevent years of feuding in rUK.

It would have to be two eyes for a baby tooth to justify the political backtrack, as well as the economic risks.

We've all been saying it for years now.

My view was always that a currency union would place very tight controls on Scotland's spending, which is why many dont want a currency union.

But when Salmond keeps insisting that it is The Plan- why do you keep supporting it?

I support Yes not the SNP/Salmond, as I have previously said I probably would not vote yes in 2016. However, yes, I do think a CU/sterlingisation will need to be in place for a short time while the finances are disentangled.

Not vote SNP, sorry...

The problem is we are between a rock, and a hard place. I don't think we'd get the currency union but if we did it would be on those kind of terms.

To put this in context

Last year, total GERS expenditure for Scotland was £65billion
Our current deficit was £8.6 Billion
Our current+capital deficit was £12 billion

Imagine if we had to get that in to a surplus?

What about this

"In our opinion, as North Sea oil production slows, we estimate that the non-oil economy would need a 10% to 20% devaluation to restore competitiveness. This would require a 5% to 10% fall in wages, driven by a steep rise in unemployment."

However, yes, I do think a CU/sterlingisation will need to be in place for a short time while the finances are disentangled.

But look at that report. High unemployment. Huge cuts. Massive hardship.... why???

www.neweconomics.org/blog/entry/scottish-independence-uk-dependency

This blog appears to suggest that Uk needs a currency union with Scotland rather than vice versa

just another it is grim reading.

I'll take Credit Suisse over that I'm afraid. Moody's have also said that a CU would be bad for rUK. These are big reputable organisations who have done extensive research and who really, really know their stuff.

But look at that report. High unemployment. Huge cuts. Massive hardship.... why???

Because in the long term it will be worth it. I'm shitting myself for me and my family, but it is the right thing to do.

And what about the rest of the cuts heading our way from Westminster? Cameron isn't even half way through his austerity measures. Miliband has said he'd see them through if elected (which I doubt he will be).

Grim.

Concern in The Lancet about the impact of TTIP on the NHS in Scotland.

No reassurance that Westminster is ensuring that the devolved service will remain safe (questions of funding notwithstanding) once if the TTIP Agreement is signed

Well obviously we can all point to obvious articles that argue the slant of a report.

www.businessinsider.com/goldman-sachs-scottish-independence-could-trigger-a-eurozone-style-financial-crisis-2014-9

Still, back to the credit Suisse report...

But when do you see the long term starting? How many people are going to really really suffer while you're waiting for the long term to kick in?

ItsAll, I don't mean to be blunt. But let's assume for the sake of discussion that Credit Suisse are right. We have a deep and long lasting recession. Wages need to drop by 5-10%. Or we have to get in to a surplus almost immediately.

Who do you think that would hurt the most? You say you think it's the right thing to do, but we are talking damage that could last a generation here, not a bit of a tough time. What will the opportunities for our children be if we have to cut spending that severely?

Read the article. There may be cuts heading our way, but they won't be half as hellish as that.

And we're promised financial stability, no job losses, no more tough times as part of the union?

We are not promised anything because life is uncertain, the future is uncertain, we don't know who will be in power. But this is a different level of uncertainty. A totally different scale.

As Rita said there are plenty of uncertainties with a No vote too, along with the certainty that WM has barely begun its austerity cuts, cuts that Labour have pledged to honour.

Yes, in a worst case scenario a Yes could throw Scotland into turmoil for a generation (although I think this is unlikely) but this vote is forever. I believe the benefits of an independent Scotland will be massive and well worth some short term pain.

Some short term pain?! That's all you take from that?

Please, please, please, take off the blinders. This is what you are signing up for.

If massive swinging cuts to existing services and benefits need to be made, as per the Credit Suisse report, how likely is it that those same benefits and services will be re-instated once the economic situation stabilised?

What if a much leaner and meaner state becomes the new norm during those years of pain?

What, you mean like in America?

Those talking about austerity from WM - do you have figures for exactly how much has been cut over the last few years? Not from individual areas but in total?

Freddie It is too serious a topic to joke about given the implications for Scotland but I did see this Daily Mash article today.

www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/international/americans-warn-scotland-about-hope-change-bullshit-2014091090404