Robbo
Member
Registered: 6th Aug 02
Location: London
User status: Offline
|
IoM is still de facto a part of the UK
|
Ojc
Member
Registered: 14th Nov 00
Location: Reading: Drives : Clio 197
User status: Offline
|
I love you all
|
Ben G
Member
Registered: 12th Jan 07
Location: Essex
User status: Offline
|
Fuck the kilt wearing ginger bastards, I say.
|
Cavey
Member
Registered: 11th Nov 02
Location: Derby
User status: Offline
|
You already do dont you Ben?
|
Ben G
Member
Registered: 12th Jan 07
Location: Essex
User status: Offline
|
Only the females.
|
Ben G
Member
Registered: 12th Jan 07
Location: Essex
User status: Offline
|
Shes a convert anyway.
|
Hammer
Member
Registered: 11th Feb 04
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robbo
IoM is still de facto a part of the UK
Strange having to go through customs in a 'United' Kingdom or having 1 part of that United Kingdom in the EU and one not.
|
VegasPhil
Premium Member
Registered: 16th Jan 05
Location: Fareham, Hants Drives: Octavia VRS
User status: Offline
|
I don't think it will happen. There's a lot of proud/stubborn Scots that will vote Yes. But a lot of sensible folk (and English living in Scotland) that will vote no.
Some great points about the shipbuilding on here. As we know there is a big decision to be made on the future/expansion of Scotstoun and closure of Govan which all weighs on the referendum. Where will the T26's be built if they vote yes? Scotland still? Not for me.
Corsa 2.0 16v Vegas - Sold
|
BluKoo
Member
Registered: 8th Apr 02
Location: Stonehaven (Scotland)
User status: Offline
|
I'm voting no.
|
IvIarkgraham
Premium Member
Registered: 27th Mar 04
Location: Ellesmere Port, Cheshire
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by BluKoo
I'm voting no.
CAN'T!
the vote is either Aye or Naw
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
There are as many uneducated sevco fans who will vote no as there are stubborn (probably mostly uneducated) Scots who will vote yes.
Then there are those who have a good idea of why they want to vote either way.
|
IvIarkgraham
Premium Member
Registered: 27th Mar 04
Location: Ellesmere Port, Cheshire
User status: Offline
|
Who are sevco?
|
rustyarchs
Member
Registered: 29th Aug 04
Location: scotland
User status: Offline
|
 the scots pound and the english pound were pegged together before the act of union! then there's the fact most of the commonwealth around 70 countries from areas all over the globe in the 30s joined the sterling area and either used sterling or pegged there currency to it and it didn't fully end till the 80s yet 2 neighbors nowadays cant do similar?
the bank of Englands governor Mark cerny didn't say we cant have the pound he said yes we can but would need to give up some powers, well that's fine as even with that its still a lot more powers than we currently have and i trust him a lot more than i trust mps who know that if this happens they have a lot less money to play with
also i seen somebody comment about labour not wanting independence! actually there's a part of labour who are nationalists and don't want a bigger carer down south. have a look as there's some interesting points put forward http://www.labourforindy.com/articlesblog
|
Hammer
Member
Registered: 11th Feb 04
User status: Offline
|
The Bank of England is an asset, the National Debt is a liability. You can't remove the right to use the Sterling currency and still expect Scotland to pick up its fair share of the debt. It can't logically work like that so they're going to have to come up with some other argument.
|
alan-g-w
Member
Registered: 9th Nov 07
Location: Glasgow
User status: Offline
|
Why couldn't they just pay off the debt in say, Euros? Say it's £5 billion, why couldn't Scotland just pay the equivalent in whatever currency they would choose in a theoretical independent Scotland? It's a physical debt that Scotland has helped to run up and exists, how could an independent Scotland simply change its currency then get away with not paying?
I've heard about labour for independence, they're a tangent group at best. They've got no backing from labour and some of their members are actually registered members with the SNP, which it says is not allowed in their 'rules'.
And John, I've heard just as many bitter Septic fans talking about how they 'want away from these British bastards' and use the example of a tax laden Ireland as an example of how it would work. There's equally little logic in both factions as we know.
[Edited on 14-02-2014 by alan-g-w]
|
luciaadr
Member
Registered: 11th Aug 04
Location: Bexleyheath, Greater London
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Hammer
The Bank of England is an asset, the National Debt is a liability. You can't remove the right to use the Sterling currency and still expect Scotland to pick up its fair share of the debt. It can't logically work like that so they're going to have to come up with some other argument.
You aren't using asset and liability in the same context here. Its only an asset in that its an established currency, its not a pot if gold (ie the opposite of the debt). Only so many years ago AS was saying the pound was holding Scotland back. Would it have been described as an "asset" then?
Scotland cant shirk off their share of the national debt, as when they need to borrow money, and they will, effectively defaulting on a debt will not go in their favour at all on the money markets.
|
Hammer
Member
Registered: 11th Feb 04
User status: Offline
|
I'm using assets and liabilities in the exact context I'm intending - a Central Bank is an asset of the United Kingdom and the National Debt is a liability. In an overall context over and above the financial one.
If there is a split you have to fairly apportion each, you cannot reason a chunk of the debt whilst removing the access to the assets. Well you can, clearly, if you're a Conservative government.
|
alan-g-w
Member
Registered: 9th Nov 07
Location: Glasgow
User status: Offline
|
The British debt has been run up over many years. Scotland has a portion of that debt if we become a separate country. Why do you insist that us losing the pound would reduce our chunk of said debt?
|
Hammer
Member
Registered: 11th Feb 04
User status: Offline
|
You've misinterpreted my point, on 3 occasions now.
|
rustyarchs
Member
Registered: 29th Aug 04
Location: scotland
User status: Offline
|
are you really surprised at there being SNP members who will walk alongside a labour party who are nationalists if we had a Scottish labour who's first goal was not to bide for there taskmasters in wstminster but to run the country for the people in Scotland half of the voters for SNP would jump ship but that doesnt detract from the fact there is a part of the Labour party who support independence
Alan i can see your from Scotland so whats your take on the restructure of the barnett formula after the referendum meaning an estimated loss of 4billlion to Scotlands current finances?
lol hes meaning that if you dont give us our asset - 10 percent of the bank of england and sterling then why the hell would we take our liability
also find it funny that salmond hasn't started to punch back yet. after independence instead of us being nice and letting yous keep trident here for another 7-20 years while there's another suitable base made Scotland on independence theoretically could kick it out on day 1
|
alan-g-w
Member
Registered: 9th Nov 07
Location: Glasgow
User status: Offline
|
Right, so if we were to separate from Britain and our chunk of national debt is (total guess) 35%, you're saying we would theoretically still own 35% of what that debt applied to... this is a fair and valid point, although, as is the case with everything Salmond argues, that's still all very much up in the air and could backfire spectacularly on him still.
Ill admit I don't know enough about the Barnett formula rusty, I don't know what we pay in, what NI pay in or what Wales pay in, or what each country each receives. I do realise though that there are cuts going on everywhere just now and that Scots actually currently receive more cash per head than English residents. I neither agree nor disagree with the way it's given out since I'm not clued up but I'll have a read at some point and see. What are your feelings on it?
[Edited on 14-02-2014 by alan-g-w]
|
alan-g-w
Member
Registered: 9th Nov 07
Location: Glasgow
User status: Offline
|
I agree with the sentiment of your first paragraph as well, I just can't see Labour leaving the puppet strings well enough alone though.
|
rustyarchs
Member
Registered: 29th Aug 04
Location: scotland
User status: Offline
|
our debt at worst is about 10 percent if you look at population but actually less if its financial buddy, not to bad 40-120billion compared to the 1.2 trillion and rapidly growing debt of the Uk
your right about the Scots receive more per head as ours is £1215 higher than the rest of the uk BUT and its a huge BUT taxes raised per person in Scotland is £1687 per head higher compared to the rest of the UK... we give more than we receive so give yourself a pat on the back for being a generous Scot 
i dont mind the barnett formula as its not really that bad for us but if thy get rid of it as funnily enough england wants then the money no longer goes where its deserved it goes where its needed no matter who actually generates the money lol
a scottish labour party will do well as they will become the main party as lets face it the tories will need a miracle to govern Scotland under independence, just imagine a real working democracy for the people of Scotland actually getting governed by the people we vote in
|
Steve
Premium Member
Registered: 30th Mar 02
Location: Worcestershire Drives: Defender
User status: Offline
|
Just vote yes and fuck off. Please.
|
JonnyJ
Member
Registered: 23rd Sep 05
Location: Scotchland
User status: Offline
|
As an Englishman living in Scotland, I'll be voting no. Im not subjecting fellow nothern Englanders to years of Tory rule.
|
