Member Since: 28 Feb 2010
Location: Dumgoyne
Posts: 1473
they should change the currency to scrote as long as salmond is at the help3 Flash Indicators
Clock on Dash
GVIF & Reverse Camera
D4 Bluetooth
EGR's Blanked
18th Feb 2014 12:44 pm
countrywide
Member Since: 16 Sep 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 6019
JMC wrote:
Will you still be leaving a more socially just, emerging country, one where we look after people instead of spending 3x more per head than EU average on weapons?
How do you work that out, based on reality or what you have been promised. It's also a slightly arrogant assumption as well.
How may Bawbees to a Groat ? or is it the other way around ?
I think it's 100 bawbees to a groat, but these are semantics. I'm sure that given Westminster's current stance, rUK will not be accepting (or even acknowledging) groats, so the issue of debt repayment just won't arise.
Everyone looses sight of a very simple FACT in this debate surrounding a potential Yes vote:
A 'Yes' vote on 18th September, in itself changes nothing. We shall all remain UK and EU citizens, pay our taxes to that nice Mr Osborne
On a subsequent Independence day, if the EU member states (including the UK government, but not of course the not-yet-existent Scottish Government) have not put in place transition arrangements, then chaos will reign - the legal framework for all commercial agreements and contracts between parties in Scotland and in other parts of the EU (including rUK) having been vaporized as midnight struck.
The EU member states will, of course, understand their duty to put in place arrangements that will make this transition smooth, and not a transition to chaos but to stability. The present framework for Scottish membership of the EU is working well enough, and efforts to change it in any substantial way would produce lengthy (all sides at least agree about this) negotiations, of uncertain outcome. Until an EU member state says that it would want to change the basis of Scotland's membership of the EU, it is entirely safe to assume that none of them do. EU membership is open to any recognized European democracy that meets the Copenhagen criteria and adopts the acquis communautaire. Scotland has been within the EU/ EC for over forty years and does meet these criteria. It is in nobody’s interest to throw Scotland out of the single market – not Scotland, the rest of the UK, the other member states, business or anyone would gain from this. This is exactly the same rationalle for keeping Stering, as it is in nobody's interests for the alternative (except to scare people). There is also no ‘queue’ to get into the EU. Applicants are admitted as and when they are ready.
On the 1st February 1993, formal negotiations began for Finland, Sweden, Norway and Austria to join the EU. By the summer of 1994 everything was signed and sealed. Scotland, already being fully compliant with EU law etc, would find it even easier than Norway.The older I get, the more I realise that people confuse wrinkles for wisdom
Founder member of Club FFRRV
Club Orange, Mint or Fruit
Club Walnut Sniffers
18th Feb 2014 12:50 pm
Simonstarski
Member Since: 24 Jun 2012
Location: Cornwall
Posts: 686
How on earth do you figure, that Scotland can't pay it's debts if it can't have the pound?
A new currency would be formed, or arrangements would be made to use the euro, dolor, whatever. It won't be the pound tho, you're just going to have to suck it up and accept this fact.
Scotland's share of the debt will be determined upon seperation, be that £200b or however much. The then newly selected currency of an independent Scotland would be used to service that debt.
The risk then becomes global exchange rates. Should the new Scotland currency fall in value Scotland will have to pay more. Equally should the currency strengthen the debt becomes smaller.
The argument that Scotland can't pay without the pound is a nonsense.
You have to ask if the risk is worth it? Keeping in mind any products imported into the EU would be subject to around 19% import duties and vat. I can't think of many Scottish products that could take a near 20% price rise and still remain competitive against its EU equivalent.
How can this possibly be good for Scottish business?
Looking forward from this the only option would be to devalue the new Scottish currency. A side effect is the Scottish people paying more for basic needs like imported medical supplies, Energy, cars, televisions hell just about everything but whiskey and beef.
Again, wage rises, a run on the currency, cost of living trade barriers equals massive inflation.
I have many Scottish friends. I've no wish to renew my passport just to visit them so am backing the no camp.Narpy Grill, tinted windows, Smooth leather wheel (TLO Group buy), ACM fitted (thanks TLO), Rear door loom and Row 2 & 3 audio switch upgrade, RRS 20" wheel change, 285 Cooper LTZ's Sat Nav Mod (until I get a Faultmate upgrade), Front & Rear lamp guards. 4x4 screen now switched on - Woody32, Follow me home reverse lights - woody32, Auto release EPB - Woody32. Off Road Navigation - Woody32. Remap + EGR's switched off. Full chassis clean and Waxoyl.
18th Feb 2014 12:54 pm
Disco_Mikey
Member Since: 29 May 2007
Location: Dundee, Scotland
Posts: 20795
JMC wrote:
A 'Yes' vote on 18th September, in itself changes nothing. We shall all remain UK and EU citizens, pay our taxes to that nice Mr Osborne
On a subsequent Independence day, if the EU member states (including the UK government, but not of course the not-yet-existent Scottish Government) have not put in place transition arrangements, then chaos will reign - the legal framework for all commercial agreements and contracts between parties in Scotland and in other parts of the EU (including rUK) having been vaporized as midnight struck.
I, for one, would like to know what happens BEFORE we should have to go independent
Whether we will have the £ or not
Whether we will be in Europe
etc
Seems a bit odd, that they want the country to decide to be independent, or stay in the UK, before the rest of the country will actually know what is going to happenMy D3 Build Thread
Will you still be leaving a more socially just, emerging country, one where we look after people instead of spending 3x more per head than EU average on weapons?
How do you work that out, based on reality or what you have been promised. It's also a slightly arrogant assumption as well.
I'm sorry if you think I'm being arrogant but I'm unsure of where you see this. The reality is an EU average spending per capita (excluding UK) of about €300 on defence, compared with €700 here. (I should apologise - that's not 3x more, but it is more than double!). 'More socially just' is because we want to look after our old people and guarantee an education for our children. This is where our priorities lie and we have been able to do this at the moment, within the constraints of a balanced budget, whilst still paying too much to Westminster.The older I get, the more I realise that people confuse wrinkles for wisdom
Founder member of Club FFRRV
Club Orange, Mint or Fruit
Club Walnut Sniffers
Whether we will have the £ or not
Whether we will be in Europe
Seems a bit odd, that they want the country to decide to be independent, or stay in the UK, before the rest of the country will actually know what is going to happen
I would be willing to bet that we would use the £ and be in Europe. The only reason that you are not seeing any debate is simply that Westminster will not sit down and discuss the possibilities because they want to keep Scotland on their books. Cameron, Osborne et-al don't want to contemplate what would happen, so it suits their case to shout doom and gloom. There is nothing else they can do since sitting down and being adult would compromise everything they have suggested thus far. At the end of last year, BOTH Darling and Carmichael said that keeping the pound was the most logical thing to do. They don't say that now because they have been re-briefed on the strategy.The older I get, the more I realise that people confuse wrinkles for wisdom
Founder member of Club FFRRV
Club Orange, Mint or Fruit
Club Walnut Sniffers
18th Feb 2014 1:09 pm
A.J.M
Member Since: 31 Oct 2009
Location: Carluke
Posts: 2833
17 February 2014
Commenting on the continuing currency debate surrounding the issue of Scottish independence, Simon Walker, Director General of the Institute of Directors, said:
“While businesses on both sides of the border would regret new transaction costs resulting from an independent Scotland adopting a new currency, this inconvenience would pale in comparison to the financial danger of entering an unstable currency union.
“As we’ve seen with the Eurozone, having countries with separate fiscal plans using the same currency can be very problematic. And if an independent Scotland did not have control of its monetary policy, it would raise the question, is that independence?â€
Trying to threaten the largest market for your goods is stupid.
The only ones who will lose out are Scots businesses.
Why should the majority of people be affected by what is a minority of people?
So, to summarise.
No pound.
No auto entry into Europe.
No mention of our own currency.
No mention of pensions, public sector spending.
No credible plans in place to answer the above.
No ideas to replace the jobs that will go from the shipyards and Faslane.
Are we seeing a picture yet?In loving memory of FA54WSK.
Rest well old friend, your work is done.
18th Feb 2014 1:15 pm
Simonstarski
Member Since: 24 Jun 2012
Location: Cornwall
Posts: 686
JMC your entire case seems for yes seems to rely on guess work. Oh they'll give us the pound, Europe will love us. The point you fail to grasp is.. What if they don't?
I think it's fair to add that no resnobale plan B exists.
Wee Eck would say God visited him and told him if he thought it would win a vote.Narpy Grill, tinted windows, Smooth leather wheel (TLO Group buy), ACM fitted (thanks TLO), Rear door loom and Row 2 & 3 audio switch upgrade, RRS 20" wheel change, 285 Cooper LTZ's Sat Nav Mod (until I get a Faultmate upgrade), Front & Rear lamp guards. 4x4 screen now switched on - Woody32, Follow me home reverse lights - woody32, Auto release EPB - Woody32. Off Road Navigation - Woody32. Remap + EGR's switched off. Full chassis clean and Waxoyl.
18th Feb 2014 1:18 pm
KenR
Member Since: 17 Jan 2010
Location: Argyll Scotland
Posts: 331
JMC - I think you will find the the delectable deputy first minister has threatened to renege on the debt, should currency union not be forthcoming.
I also note that you are beginning to sound like Salmond "The EU member states will, of course, understand their duty to put in place arrangements that will make this transition smooth..."
It would be a lot more subtle for a member state (eg Spain) to make difficuties during the transition than to come out and say No directly - the only people to suffer would be Scotland
18th Feb 2014 1:29 pm
euangibson
Member Since: 24 Dec 2010
Location: Borders
Posts: 11027
Simonstarski wrote:
JMC your entire case seems for yes seems to rely on guess work.
I wouldn't berate him,the entire SNP manifesto was produced using the same principle "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool,than to speak out and remove all doubt" ?.....what rubbish...
Locking rear E-diff
RLD spare wheel protector & sump guard
Extended roof rails
Series 111 mudflaps
Black side tubes,grill and vents
Timed climate remote
Hids4u interior lights
D4 Firenze my2012 HSE
D3 Java 2005 SE manual (sold,sadly,thanks for the memories)
1966 '88 Series 2a....still starts in the morning better than I do...
18th Feb 2014 1:31 pm
sacimiddx
Member Since: 09 Mar 2007
Location: hants
Posts: 2144
does occur to me that if England stood alone after Scottish independence it would be harder for it to leave the EU, which might suit many EU members nicely - hence the anti Scots independence agenda being put forward by them atmIllegitimi Non Carborundum
It may surprise many to find that I'm not totally stupid..... I'm also not an SNP member and I don't speak for Alex Salmond - though I certainly believe he is being unfairly represented in the media. My preferred option would be to resurrect Margaret Thatcher, but few of my countrymen will concur with this.
Of course there is a lot of guesswork and assumption on all sides. No country has ever chosen independence from within the EU. However, there's about 150 countries who have chosen independence in the last century and not one of them has gone crawling back or failed. I don't want to list all of them, but here are some of the closer ones:
December 6, 1917 - Finland
February 24, 1918 - Estonia
November 11, 1918 - Poland
December 1, 1918 - Iceland
December 6, 1921 - Ireland
October 29, 1923 - Turkey
August 16, 1960 - Cyprus
Sept. 21, 1964 - Malta
March 11, 1990 - Lithuania
June 25, 1991 - Croatia
June 25, 1991 - Slovenia
Sept. 6, 1991 - Latvia
January 1, 1993 - Czech Republic
January 1, 1993 - Slovakia
Many of these are of a similar size to Scotland. NONE of them have the natural resources that we do. None of them have a global market for a specific product like we do (perhaps Guinness in Ireland but it's nothing like the whisky market).
All I am doing is indicating a personal preference for smaller, more accountable and more localised government for a country that always has been a separate country in the minds of most people on both sides of the fence. This is why we have Scottish teams in the likes of the commonwealth games or the six nations etc. It doesn't necessarily follow that we can win much though!
At present, we are governed from afar by non-representative politicians who consider Scotland to be an inferior nation and seek only to retain us for their own financial ends.The older I get, the more I realise that people confuse wrinkles for wisdom
Founder member of Club FFRRV
Club Orange, Mint or Fruit
Club Walnut Sniffers
does occur to me that if England stood alone after Scottish independence it would be harder for it to leave the EU, which might suit many EU members nicely - hence the anti Scots independence agenda being put forward by them atm
Two very important things to point out here:
Firstly, there is no 'England alone'. You make the same (imperialist) mistake here ignoring Wales & N.I. - just as many do with Scotland at the moment.
Secondly, you will not find ANY anti-independence message across the EU - only Barroso has raised his head in the game for his own ends - and he doesn't represent the EU. The situation is not like Catalonia, where the Spanish government has ruled out an independence referendum and the constitution forbids secession. Incidentally, Barroso has got himself tied in knots with his repeated argument that an independent Catalonia would be outside the EU. The real point about the Spanish constitution is that an independent Catalonia is impossible altogether, so Catalonia could not be outside the EU. By suggesting that it would be outside the EU, Barroso has fallen into the trap of accepting that Catalonia could be independent.
The first step for an independent Scotland would be the question of a Notice to Withdraw - just as Greenland had to provide when it voted for independence and decided to withdraw from the EU.
In real terms the successor state that is likely to be the rUK takes on the mantle of the new membership, but Scotland is not automatically ejected. A notice to withdraw can be provided by either the EU or Scotland and is likely to be two years minimum. In Scotland's case, probably longer.
With that in mind, Scotland remains a member with MEP's in the European Parliament and negotiations for membership continuing take place in the notice period. Salmond is absolutely right to indicate to voters that negotiations will occur whilst Scotland is still in the bosom of the EU and it is utterly wrong for Barroso to claim Scotland would automatically be outside the EU on voting for independence or even from the date selected for independence to commence.
It is also fatuous for him to suggest it would be difficult, if not impossible for Scotland to accede to membership based on an ill informed position. It was clear that Barroso put a personal spin on the issue and has presented either a dishonest or false proposition deliberately.
Meanwhile, the UK Media has jumped on this and blown it all out of proportion...... what a surprise!The older I get, the more I realise that people confuse wrinkles for wisdom
Founder member of Club FFRRV
Club Orange, Mint or Fruit
Club Walnut Sniffers
18th Feb 2014 2:08 pm
Jward
Member Since: 12 Feb 2014
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 72
Unfortunately JMC for every intelligent post you have put up, you have then spoilt it by putting something that just doesn't reflect that intelligence.
Your analogy of parent and child for me is very wrong as the child didn't enter into debt as a joint beneficiary. The analogy should be a married couple with a mortgage then getting divorced and the one (Scotland) wanting to just walk away from the marriage and be single again but believing that they should have no responsibility for the mortgage. It doesn't matter what currency Scotland would use, not having the pound wouldn't mean they don't owe their share of the debt anymore than me saying my debt was in euros but I'm English so I don't pay the debt, just means you pay back at the agreed current exchange rate or agree an amount in the new currency which would be risky as the GBP is stable and a new currency is unlikely to be.
Also noting the countries you state... How many Scotland's can you get in turkey? How does your tourism compare to them, Cyprus or even Malta? If you think your whiskey trade is enough to sustain the economy... Oh dear I do fear for Scotland.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
The reality is an EU average spending per capita (excluding UK) of about €300 on defence, compared with €700 here. (I should apologise - that's not 3x more, but it is more than double!). 'More socially just' is because we want to look after our old people and guarantee an education for our children. This is where our priorities lie and we have been able to do this at the moment, within the constraints of a balanced budget, whilst still paying too much to Westminster.
