Is Scottish independence a 'good or bad' thing?

The message was really, the UK won't enter into a currency union; use sterling without one if you wish. Surely the people of Scotland can't be as unintelligent, on the whole, as to misinterpret it as you describe?

No they are not, which is why they can see through the threats and know that decisions on a currency union will be taken after the vote, when negotiations begin, not now!

No they are not, which is why they can see through the threats and know that decisions on a currency union will be taken after the vote, when negotiations begin, not now!

The issue of currency isn't perhaps as important to voters as had been previously thought. Although evidence shows the economy is the biggest factor in how people intend to vote, I don't think abstract arguments about currency really make much difference to the average voter. What the joint declaration did do, in my opinion, was send a message to Scotland from all the major parties that "We won't let you have your own currency." Maybe they're bluffing, maybe they're not - I have no idea - but on an emotional level, if voters aren't principally concerned about the issue of currency, all this does is antagonise them. If you have a choice between one option that promises the Earth and one option that is seen to issue threats, you're going to side with the first. Add George Osborne's unpopularity in Scotland into the mix and it's really no surprise at all.

That's how I see it, anyway.

1.6k people is a big survey.

Also there is an EU law that states the a large amount of Scottish finance businesses will have ot move south to where they do most of their business.

Also finance institutions are massively risk averse. They do not want to be in a country with:
No central bank underpinning it.
OR
Worries about which currency they use.
OR
Relying on a petrocurrency.

Apart from the incidence of a currency union (Very, very unlikely), a large amount of Scottish finance companies will move south.

And a final point, why would it be fair, for rUK to exclude Scotland from sharing the pound? We have for 3 hundred years contributed to building it into the currency it is today.

On your first point, I have explained the EU rule previously, so with respect, you are incorrect. Financial Institutions are not allowed to be based in another member state if it is clear they are doing so to avoid stricter regulation.

On the topic of Businesses leaving in general, we read plenty newspaper headlines before the devolution referendum and no exodus occured.

Again I'm not an expert on financial matters but if the Fiscal Commission have recommended use of the pound outwith a currency union that is good enough for me, and to again, go back to Standard and Poor's:

"There is no fundamental reason why Scotland could not successfully float it's own currency"

And a final point, why would it be fair, for rUK to exclude Scotland from sharing the pound? We have for 3 hundred years contributed to building it into the currency it is today.

No sharing of the assets equals No sharing of the debt which is absolutely fair in my view.

There we differ. The three UK party leaders have made a joint declaration from which there is no going back. Whichever of them does so will look an utter monkey and will lose electorally, especially since the UK population generally is against a currency union. We took the same attitude to the euro - it isn't wise for a large country not to have full control over its currency, as the euro has proved.

So we should vote Yes on the premise that everything the SNP says is gospel and everything RUK says is a lie then.


Posted from TSR Mobile

This is a ridiculous argument.

Of course they can reverse their position. Are we living in world where politicians honour all initial declarations?

The poll showing rUK opposition to it has no real depth to it. It was the question of the day, and people answered yes or no irrelevant on their passion (or lack thereof) on the issue.

Come the negotiations, it will likely be a cross party commitment given the fact two parties are in charge and they'll probably want Labour figures in there to limit any repercussions on public opinions.

There are far more issues that will be up for negotiation than just this.

The general election won't be for another four years after the negotiations have been concluded.

Much the opposite. The message was 'no currency union'. If Scotland wanted to use its own currency it is more than welcome to, so the question must be asked as to why the Yes campaign is advocating having no financial independence whatsoever by maintaining a currency union with the evil RUK.


Posted from TSR Mobile

This is a ridiculous argument.

Of course they can reverse their position. Of course, but I have pointed out why they are backed into a corner (in fact they deliberately backed themselves into it). Are we living in world where politicians honour all initial declarations? No, but some are less easily broken than others

The poll showing rUK opposition to it has no real depth to it. Whatever that means It was the question of the day, and people answered yes or no irrelevant on their passion (or lack thereof) on the issue. Isn't that what polls normally do?

Come the negotiations, it will likely be a cross party commitment given the fact two parties are in charge and they'll probably want Labour figures in there to limit any repercussions on public opinions. So?

There are far more issues that will be up for negotiation than just this. Of course, but we are discussing this.

The general election won't be for another four years after the negotiations have been concluded. So?

Of course not.
But it is clear that undecideds may have been tipped finally to YES, and NOs to undecideds because of the dislike of being threatened by Osbourne, Balls and Alexander.

On your first point, I have explained the EU rule previously, so with respect, you are incorrect. Financial Institutions are not allowed to be based in another member state if it is clear they are doing so to avoid stricter regulation.

On the topic of Businesses leaving in general, we read plenty newspaper headlines before the devolution referendum and no exodus occured.

Again I'm not an expert on financial matters but if the Fiscal Commission have recommended use of the pound outwith a currency union that is good enough for me, and to again, go back to Standard and Poor's:

"There is no fundamental reason why Scotland could not successfully float it's own currency"

And a final point, why would it be fair, for rUK to exclude Scotland from sharing the pound? We have for 3 hundred years contributed to building it into the currency it is today.

No sharing of the assets equals No sharing of the debt which is absolutely fair in my view.

Your drama queen arguments do little to increase your credibility!

First, fairness is a concept for primary schoolchildren to argue over. Secondly, sterling was England's currency before Scotland came to the union. Thirdly, the UK is not preventing iScotland from using sterling. It is just that we don't want to bail out your banks again.



Sterling is not an asset capable of being divided, though you are welcome to use it. It is a currency union that you want, and which would have to be created.

You bailed out out banks?

You want to quantify that? Not quite as straightforward as you are making out, is it?

If it results in RUK's taxpayers being asked to prop up the banks of that country which raised a middle finger to the union, none of those politicians stands much chance of re-election. Osborne I strongly suspect had his eyes on No. 10 so for him to risk that would be incredibly foolish.


Posted from TSR Mobile

Answers above. Your attitude seems predicated on believing everything the SNP tells you and disbelieving anything anyone else says. You don't appear to think things through in any depth.