Is England not shitting itself Scotland becomes independent cos then they will have the tories FOREVER

[ssd]

Its a thought isnt it....

DC must be rubbing his hands, get rid of those bloody labour voters in Scotland and we;ll be in gov forever!!!!

As I've said before, Scotland meaning the difference between a Tory or Labour Government is a fallacy.

The only time in recent years the Scottish Labour MPs have made a meaningful difference was, ironically enough, the 2010 election, when, without the Labour MPs, the ConDem coalition would've turned into a Conservative majority so no real difference there - and even that, you can lay some of the blame at Labour's door as it refused even to discuss coalitions with any other parties.

I don't agree with everything that is posted in "Wings over Scotland" - but I do like the way that it always links to the original source material, so I can make up my own mind, but here is a good explanation why the fear of perpetual Tory rule is a fallacy. I have seen a better graphic of it somewhere, but can't find it.

Agreed, Scotland needs to find its own way in the world. UK is becoming more like a Stalinist police state every year.

Twinklestein….I’m sorry if you believe that the truths are “confused ramblings”, but I do understand ideologically, why people need to blame the Conservatives for everything, but if I can, I’m happy to take the time to explain any of my confusions to you, and you have the time to listen.

You see even Mr Brown when admitting that he screwed up with the banks, still had to say that he shouldn’t have listened to them, when he never listen to ANYONE, not even Blair or MP’s within his own party – never mind the City and BoE who told him NOT to sell 40% of our gold reserves at a 20-year low price (under $300 an ounce versus the $1,900 plus a year ago). No government had sold our gold, even in the dark days of the 1970’s and early 1980’s, and we still don’t know where the proceeds went.

metro.co.uk/2011/04/11/gordon-brown-i-made-big-mistake-on-banks-before-financial-crisis-650630/

If you do not believe me, read for yourself, from the FSA Brown created during his first year in power, in an unwieldy regulatory tripartite where too many important issues (including Northern Rock early on in the crash) slipped through the cracks.

www.theguardian.com/business/2011/dec/12/labour-regulations-city-rbs-collapse

So all three main UK political parties insist that an Independent Scotland will have it’s own currency and control it’s own interest rates, rather than have interest rates set by the BoE - where similar to the problems of a ‘one rate fits all’ EU, what might be right for England, may not be right for Scotland – which could lead to restrictive, or overly loose money e.g. inflation.

And this also right for England, as if Scotland, used to spending more money per head that the UK (see below), gets itself in trouble, it needs to sort itself out.

www.martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/scotnews09/090112-cuba.html

Scotland on a par with Cuba for state largesse
Jason Allardyce January 11, 2009

"Welcome to McCuba. Scotland is set to become the third most state-dependent country in the world. Soon Havana and Baghdad will be the only capitals that rely more on public spending than Edinburgh, according to economic forecasters.

They say the uneven flow of government funds to north of the border is putting an “unfair burden” on English taxpayers. They predict that public spending will soon rise to the equivalent of almost 70% of Scotland’s gross domestic product.

The forecasters — from the Centre for Economic and Business Research (CEBR), a consultancy that advises the UK government — warn in a report that the burgeoning Scottish public sector is “unsustainable”.

*The CEBR paper, commissioned by The Sunday Times, shows that the annual public sector wage bill in Scotland has risen by 55% to £12 billion since the Scottish parliament was established in 1999, with nearly one in four working for the state. A further £2.3 billion is spent annually on pensions for public sector workers, whose ranks have grown by nearly 50,000 in the past 10 years.

The report will renew concerns among English taxpayers about the preferential treatment enjoyed by the Scots, who benefit from free personal care for the elderly, no tuition fees and free school meals.

The extra level of funding per head that Scotland receives has grown from £828 in 1999 to £1,644. In 1999 the state spent £4,993 per head in Scotland and £4,165 in England. Now Scotland receives £9,179 and England gets £7,535

Last year public spending was the equivalent of 43% of GDP in England and 56% in Scotland, placing Scotland 20th on a table of 160 countries most dependent on state spending, and England 67th.

The CEBR forecasts that the Scottish figure will rise to 67% by 2012-3, while the UK will rise to 48%. This would place Scotland in third place in the league of countries most dependent on state spending.

John Blundell, director-general of the Institute of Economic Affairs, said: “Scotland has been heading this way for an awfully long time. Adam Smith must be rolling in his grave.

“My impression is very much that Scotland got into a vicious circle of creating more and more benefits and more government jobs"

Frankly I hope we stay together, but unlike the original post here, lets cut through all the pooh and put all the facts on the table for those voting, as south of the border we don't have a say.

Moving on from here, Scotland now needs to figure out, with all the theoretical benefits of financial independence, where over time they can decide the exchange rate of the Scottish Groat(?), and what interest rate is neither too stimlautive or loose for its OWN economy – where the markets would CURRENTLY price Scottish interest rates on the international markets e.g. for 2-10 year Scottish government bonds, and decide Scottish domestic interest rates from there on.

The good news is that over the past year or two, some of the weaker country’s within the EU have seen their bond rates fall substantially; Greece 10-year government bonds are now at 7.36%, Portugal is now 5.0% and Spain 3.66% - but they are under the financial protection European Central Bank – so I’d suggest that an independent Scottish 10-year borrowing rates would be initially higher than all those, and would slowly fall over years, if allowed to join the EU. All IMO.

I think these latest threats and all the political parties ganging up is not really a good idea. If I had a vote I'd be more likely to vote yes after this. Lots of small countries have their own currency and do very well. Last year I thought it would be a no vote but now I'm not so sure at all.

The thing I'd like to ask the "yes" voters is what advantages do they feel keeping the pound gives them?

Surely after the recent events with the Euro that it's clear even to the most stupid economically illiterate that if you have currency union then you need to have MORE political union and very similar fiscal policies.

The reason the Euro floundered is because you had countries like Greece spending money like it was growing on trees and the trusty old German's keeping their costs down and spending little. Ultimately the differences tore it apart.....with mainly Germany picking up the tab.

So in this instance unless Scotland agrees to keep to keep their taxes and economic policies roughly the same as England/Wale & NI then it won't work out.

If they do promise that then what's really the point of independence? If they refuse then why would the rest of the UK want to pick up the tab for if/when Scotland have a crisis?

I have to say I'm quite chuffed about this announcement. Its a really positive move that Westminster has finally said something concrete about what will happen after independence.

If Scotland isn't in a currency union there are many many other options, none of them dire. It will make things more difficult for both rUK and Scotland, but is by no means a deal breaker.

And of course, if Scotland has no share in UK currency it would be rather rich to expect them to take on a share of that currencies debt...

Thank you for saying that, Viviennemary, it's pretty much what I'm seeing around me. I think the refusal today re the pound sterling (and they can't stop us using it) was a serious tactical error on the part of the No lot.

And will people please stop calling a Scottish currency a "groat". We are not mediaeval, and independence will not plunge us into the dark ages. These sly wee digs are just irritating.

I agree OldLady. I don't think tactically it is a very wise move, even if the reasons are sound.

And of course, if Scotland has no share in UK currency it would be rather rich to expect them to take on a share of that currencies debt...

That's alright, we'll just keep all the Army, Navy & RAF, you can use the money you'd save from not paying your share to hire & equip your own.....

Every time I hear someone say "we won't take on the debt" it just sounds petulant - sorry....

Every time I hear someone say "we won't take on the debt" it just sounds petulant - sorry....

Not petulant. Scotland is an equal partner in the Uk, not a colony. Therefore on independence Scotland should take on a proportion of the UK's debts, and a proportion of the UKs assets.

At the moment, Westminster seems to be thinking of Scotland as a colony entitled to nothing, but being petulant if we won't take on our share of debt.

So the Scots will be denied the chance to have a military presence to 'assist' other countries?
They'll just have to join up with the UN troops and take a more humanitarian stance on the world stage. or have a militia, like Switzerland.
Plus, if all those Scottish military personel have to go home as they won't be part of the UK aemed forces, there will be a very large, experienced group available to help train up.
Do you know what the US troops called the British troops in the ME in joint operations?
The Borrowers. Never enough kit, so they used to liberate anything they could lay their mitts on.

An independent needing the international capital markets e.g. government bills and bonds, does NOT want to default of English debts – otherwise the markets will price your borrowings closer to Greece’s a few years back, at 14% plus

Not a good idea, as Scottish banks or other lenders will only be able to fund themselves ABOVE their governments borrowing rates, as in theory few banks are a better credit than their government.

Sorry re above...."An independent SCOTLAND......

"An independent Scotland would in such circumstances have no debt, a budget surplus (because our current deficit is entirely down to UK debt repayments – without those Scotland would be in the black BEFORE it even factored in savings from different policy choices, like the £800m a year on defence), and a vast reserve of tangible resources, most notably oil, as security.
The rUK, by comparison, would have a debt of £1,500,000,000,000 and a huge budget deficit. If you were going to lend someone money, would you choose the guy living within his means with plenty of assets, or the guy who already owes his entire annual salary and is still spending more than he earns?"

This kinda sums it up frm Wings.

Wouldn't be defaulting as Westminster already said they would take full responsibility for debt.

We also have a 10% share in BoE assets, it belongs to the UK not Westminster.

Now everyone now knows where they stand on Sterling (and interest rates) clearly every aspect of a Scottish divorce from the UK has to be SORTED out BEFORE the Scottish Referendum e.g. divvy up of debt and assets, including the small picture stuff – as no one in Scotland should have any doubt of the facts before they vote.

Politically there appears no upside for Westminster, as if everything is sorted now they are being tricksy, and if they do it after the vote, they are reneging on some sort of SNP understanding which would be seen as unforgivable – so on balance, as they say, better out than in

Btw is there an official name for what Scotland would call their own currency, or is it like the Scottish Play, unmentionable?

Btw is there an official name for what Scotland would call their own currency

Scottish Pound maybe. Clydesdale/RBS/BOS/ all already print specific Scottish tender.

It's interesting that dh, who was a "Don't Know" verging to "No" has now become a committed "Yes" with this latest intervention. His rationale is that he is fed up with being told that Scotland is "too small, too stupid" to survive on its own and has got fed up of waiting for "Better Together" to explain exactly why Scotland is "better together". He says he can see why England might be better together (not just the balance of payments issues but also, quite literally, living room in Scotland as England progressively floods while Scotland rises under isostatic rebound he's a geographer ) - but he hasn't seen any arguments why Scotland would be better together - only threats.

Personally, I am somewhat concerns by the headline in today's Herald "Yes does not mean Yes" . If Scotland does vote "Yes" (and it is still by no means certain that it wll), what does that say for UK democracy?

I'm seeing a lot of that kind of reaction on my twitter, prettybird (well, not so much the geography stuff, though it's true!). Threats are not working any more, they're just enraging folk.

Well what did you expect? The dirty tricks brigades will soon be out in force, on both sides.

Cameron and Salmond are each fighting for their political futures. The other parties are waiting to rob their dead bodies. It's not going to be pretty.

Meanwhile, the rest of us will just have to make our minds up as best we can. There are so few indisputable 'facts' in this that all we can rely on is our knowledge of human nature and history.

When you talk to people who have already formed their views, there's usually a point at which the logic runs out and prejudice and gut feeling fill the gaps in their arguments.

Whenever I read or hear something I always think, who is telling us this, and why?

Here's the link to the Herald article. The Herald is mostly on the 'Yes' side, I think.

www.heraldscotland.com/politics/referendum-news/yes-does-not-mean-yes.23438016

The Sunday Herald is more pro than the Herald. I almost cancelled my delivery earlier this week, their stories have been so negative.

Interesting Peter Hitchens article in today's Mail on Sunday about Scotland, independence, the UK and the EU. Sad, but there is some truth in it.

'I think we have lost Scotland. I felt it the other day, a disturbing sensation like that moment when the tow-rope parts, the strain too great for its rotten, decayed fibres to bear.

...

As for the Prime Minister’s threat to take the whole Cabinet to Scotland, the actual sight of this squad of third-raters and phonies on the streets of Glasgow or Stirling should make a Nationalist victory certain."

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2560410/PETER-HITCHENS-We-ask-Scots-loyal-ones-betraying-Britain.html