Is Scottish independence a 'good or bad' thing? Watch

Poll: Should Scotland be an independent country?
YES (299)
32.12%
NO (632)
67.88%
This discussion is closed.
R-KAM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2161
Report 6 years ago
#2161
Subbing to the thread.

Just skimming through a bit of it, people don't seem to know Scotland couldn't join the Euro even if we wanted to.
1
Psyk
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#2162
Report 6 years ago
#2162
(Original post by R-KAM)
Subbing to the thread.

Just skimming through a bit of it, people don't seem to know Scotland couldn't join the Euro even if we wanted to.
Why not? I realise that an independent Scotland probably wouldn't be in a position to adopt the Euro straight away, but I thought that they'd probably be obliged to move towards it like most non-Eurozone EU countries are (e.g. Poland, Czech Republic).
0
Jordan_1
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2163
Report 6 years ago
#2163
(Original post by R-KAM)
Subbing to the thread.

Just skimming through a bit of it, people don't seem to know Scotland couldn't join the Euro even if we wanted to.
Go on then, explain how we can't, with some solid evidence?
0
R-KAM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2164
Report 6 years ago
#2164
(Original post by Psyk)
Why not? I realise that an independent Scotland probably wouldn't be in a position to adopt the Euro straight away, but I thought that they'd probably be obliged to move towards it like most non-Eurozone EU countries are (e.g. Poland, Czech Republic).

(Original post by Jordan_1)
Go on then, explain how we can't, with some solid evidence?
To join the Euro, you have to commit your currency to the ERM (Exchange Rate Mechanism) for two years. We don't have a currency we can commit to this as we plan on keeping the pound. So we can't join it if we want to, and we can't even be forced to either.

David Cameron even confirmed that Alistair Darling's view is just untrue.

http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/euro/adoption/who_can_join/

I'd also like to state myself as being in the Yes camp :top:
0
Maths Tutor
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2165
Report 6 years ago
#2165
(Original post by R-KAM)
I'd also like to state myself as being in the Yes camp :top:
On this thread that is like waving a red flag at a bull!
0
flugelr
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#2166
Report 6 years ago
#2166
(Original post by R-KAM)
To join the Euro, you have to commit your currency to the ERM (Exchange Rate Mechanism) for two years. We don't have a currency we can commit to this as we plan on keeping the pound. So we can't join it if we want to, and we can't even be forced to either.

David Cameron even confirmed that Alistair Darling's view is just untrue.

http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/euro/adoption/who_can_join/

I'd also like to state myself as being in the Yes camp :top:
Surely there are a lot of 'Ifs' in that argument?

My understanding is that any new EU member now must sign upto the ERM, thereby effectively signing up to the Euro. If Scotland is in an offical currency union with rUK (thus making independence rather pointless) then you might be right, but if rUK aren't willing to make it an official union (and I really can't see why they would, how would England benefit from such an agreement) then Scotland could be forced to sign up.
0
R-KAM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2167
Report 6 years ago
#2167
(Original post by Maths Tutor)
On this thread that is like waving a red flag at a bull!
I noticed, thought it's best to get it out early though!


(Original post by flugelr)
Surely there are a lot of 'Ifs' in that argument?

My understanding is that any new EU member now must sign upto the ERM, thereby effectively signing up to the Euro. If Scotland is in an offical currency union with rUK (thus making independence rather pointless) then you might be right, but if rUK aren't willing to make it an official union (and I really can't see why they would, how would England benefit from such an agreement) then Scotland could be forced to sign up.
Not really, we just don't meet the criteria without setting up our own currency, but what would be the point in spending money to set up your own just to join the rather risky euro? As I said earlier as well, we can't be "forced" to.

That does not make independence pointless, Scotland has a share of the BoE (as do Wales and NI) so have every right to use the pound. It's a fully convertible currency, any country in the world can use it if they want. New Zealand and Australia both used it for a period after leaving British rule. Plenty of other instances of countries sharing currency and being entirely independent of each other.

The rUK would benefit (as would we) from not having a currency barrier in the way of trade. We would still be massive exporters to each other.
1
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#2168
Report 6 years ago
#2168
(Original post by R-KAM)
Scotland has a share of the BoE (as do Wales and NI) so have every right to use the pound. It's a fully convertible currency, any country in the world can use it if they want.
Two points:

The BoE is a public institution wholly owned by the treasury solicitor on behalf of the UK government. It is not a company with shares that Scotland owns a few of; it is an institution of the state.

Anyone can use the pound, as you say. The strange thing is that those Scots in favour of independence seem to want to use sterling (which will be managed purely in the interests of the UK) despite the fact they will have no influence on decisions taken about it. How does this give them greater autonomy? Every year that passes will see the economies of Scotland and the UK diverge, particularly as Scotland's will be so heavily reliant on the North Sea, with completely different needs in terms of interest rates, inflation and so on.
0
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#2169
Report 6 years ago
#2169
(Original post by R-KAM)
I noticed, thought it's best to get it out early though!




Not really, we just don't meet the criteria without setting up our own currency, but what would be the point in spending money to set up your own just to join the rather risky euro? As I said earlier as well, we can't be "forced" to.

That does not make independence pointless, Scotland has a share of the BoE (as do Wales and NI) so have every right to use the pound. It's a fully convertible currency, any country in the world can use it if they want. New Zealand and Australia both used it for a period after leaving British rule. Plenty of other instances of countries sharing currency and being entirely independent of each other.

The rUK would benefit (as would we) from not having a currency barrier in the way of trade. We would still be massive exporters to each other.

It may have missed you by but your argument about the benefits of a currency union may not as be popular down south when people are still looking at the PIIGS.
0
MatureStudent36
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#2170
Report 6 years ago
#2170
(Original post by Good bloke)
Two points:

The BoE is a public institution wholly owned by the treasury solicitor on behalf of the UK government. It is not a company with shares that Scotland owns a few of; it is an institution of the state.

Anyone can use the pound, as you say. The strange thing is that those Scots in favour of independence seem to want to use sterling (which will be managed purely in the interests of the UK) despite the fact they will have no influence on decisions taken about it. How does this give them greater autonomy? Every year that passes will see the economies of Scotland and the UK diverge, particularly as Scotland's will be so heavily reliant on the North Sea, with completely different needs in terms of interest rates, inflation and so on.

Nobody really knows what the SNP want. First it wanted to be outside the EU, then it wanted to be inside the EU. Then it wanted to adopt the Euro, now it doesn't want the Euro. Maths tutor seems to think that there's a possibility of a currency union with Norway on the cards. Some of the SNPs senior members are pushing for our own currency now.

http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics/...ound-1-2913013

And I don't know what the earlier comment about us having a Completly different outlook than the rest if the UK came from from another poster. I seem to have plenty in common with other people throughout the rest if the UK.



It would appear that the yes campaign have even bigger problems.

http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics/...king-1-2924728
0
R-KAM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2171
Report 6 years ago
#2171
(Original post by Good bloke)
Two points:

The BoE is a public institution wholly owned by the treasury solicitor on behalf of the UK government. It is not a company with shares that Scotland owns a few of; it is an institution of the state.

Anyone can use the pound, as you say. The strange thing is that those Scots in favour of independence seem to want to use sterling (which will be managed purely in the interests of the UK) despite the fact they will have no influence on decisions taken about it. How does this give them greater autonomy? Every year that passes will see the economies of Scotland and the UK diverge, particularly as Scotland's will be so heavily reliant on the North Sea, with completely different needs in terms of interest rates, inflation and so on.
Under international law an Independent Scotland would still 'own' circa 9% of it. Keeping the same currency, inflation and interest rates as one of your main trading partners would be a good thing economically. The pound would also want the backing of oil and other exports. It'd make sense for all of us. I'm not against eventually moving to our own currency down the line however. It would just make it more expensive for the rUK to buy our energy and exports.


(Original post by MatureStudent36)
It may have missed you by but your argument about the benefits of a currency union may not as be popular down south when people are still looking at the PIIGS.
It might not be popular down south, but it makes the most economic sense in at least the short term for both parties.


(Original post by MatureStudent36)
Nobody really knows what the SNP want. First it wanted to be outside the EU, then it wanted to be inside the EU. Then it wanted to adopt the Euro, now it doesn't want the Euro. Maths tutor seems to think that there's a possibility of a currency union with Norway on the cards. Some of the SNPs senior members are pushing for our own currency now.

http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics/...ound-1-2913013

And I don't know what the earlier comment about us having a Completly different outlook than the rest if the UK came from from another poster. I seem to have plenty in common with other people throughout the rest if the UK.

It would appear that the yes campaign have even bigger problems.

http://m.scotsman.com/news/politics/...king-1-2924728
We can't join the euro. It's a toss up between keeping the pound or starting our own. Last I read I think it was their plan to keep the pound.

There's still over a year to go before the vote, it'll swing all over the place over the coming months.
0
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#2172
Report 6 years ago
#2172
(Original post by R-KAM)
Under international law an Independent Scotland would still 'own' circa 9% of it.
Rubbish! A seceding state cannot own a percentage of the state institutions of the country it has left. If Scotland needs a central bank it will have to set one up. You'll be telling us that an independent Scotland will expect to own 9% of the Palace of Westminster and Buckingham Palace next, and 9% of the other state institutions such as the Competition Commission, the Teasury, the Foreign & Commonwealth Office and the Supreme Court. It won't; it will need to set up its own equivalent bodies (which will cost a lot of money).

It would just make it more expensive for the rUK to buy our energy and exports.
That would vary over time and would be somewhat volatile as currencies fluctuate; sometimes it will be cheaper, sometimes more expensive.

There's still over a year to go before the vote, it'll swing all over the place over the coming months.

If by all over the place you mean between about 25% and 35% in favour of independence, I agree.
0
R-KAM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2173
Report 6 years ago
#2173
(Original post by Good bloke)
Rubbish! A seceding state cannot own a percentage of the state institutions of the country it has left. If Scotland needs a central bank it will have to set one up. You'll be telling us that an independent Scotland will expect to own 9% of the Palace of Westminster and Buckingham Palace next, and 9% of the other state institutions such as the Competition Commission, the Teasury, the Foreign & Commonwealth Office and the Supreme Court. It won't; it will need to set up its own equivalent bodies (which will cost a lot of money).

That would vary over time and would be somewhat volatile as currencies fluctuate; sometimes it will be cheaper, sometimes more expensive.

There's still over a year to go before the vote, it'll swing all over the place over the coming months.

If by all over the place you mean between about 25% and 35% in favour of independence, I agree.
I would not say that no. We would not have to set up our own equivalent bodies, the BoE could be our central bank until we wanted to set up our own currency. As I’ve said before, it makes economic sense for the both of us to continue using the pound. We don’t want the costs of setting up a new currency etc straight away (as you said, expensive) or having currency in the way of trades (rUK are by far our main exporter) and rUK would not want to lose Scottish exports that help increase the value of it. (Oil & Gas industry equates to 20% of UK corporation tax for example)

I’d guess it would be more expensive more often than not. Oil and energy costs will likely always rise (Norway’s government forecasts & OECD forecasts) Scotland would likely have a very strong currency, it has a small population, it’s oil rich, gas rich, renewable rich etc (people really seem to underestimate our renewable energy potential).

Just now, yes. Neither of us can predict how it’s going to go, it’s discussions are very much in their infancy. Plus there’s a lot of bull**** being thrown around by both camps and the press at the minute. As long as this thread stays sensible it’ll be good. It’s going to be the biggest vote of a lot of our lives up here. :top:
0
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#2174
Report 6 years ago
#2174
(Original post by R-KAM)
We would not have to set up our own equivalent bodies
Of course you would. How can an independent country exist without diplomatic links to the outside world, for instance? Or without a body that regulates industry? Or a Treasury equivalent? Scotland would need to create all sorts of bureaucratic institutions to replace ones the UK has. The set-up costs would be high.

I’d guess it would be more expensive more often than not. Oil and energy costs will likely always rise (Norway’s government forecasts & OECD forecasts) Scotland would likely have a very strong currency,
Then why is the Norwegian krone now trading at about 5.80 to the US dollar when it was at only 5 to the dollar in 2008? That is 16% worse. It is preposterous to suggest that adverse currency fluctuations won't happen, sometimes for long periods and often big ones. Oil and gas are bought and sold in dollars, so Norway's income has fallen compared to what it would have been in 2008. And things were worse in 2002 when it was at about 9 to the dollar.

the BoE could be our central bank until we wanted to set up our own currency.
So you are happy that independence would give you less say in the most important decisions affecting the Scottish economy? You would move from a situation where the BoE has to take the Scottish economy into account, as a part of the UK, to one where it would take no account of it at all. And it would be in the hands of a foreign power. This doesn't seem to have received a great deal of thought.
0
pane123
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#2175
Report 6 years ago
#2175
(Original post by Good bloke)
Of course you would. How can an independent country exist without diplomatic links to the outside world, for instance? Or without a body that regulates industry? Or a Treasury equivalent? Scotland would need to create all sorts of bureaucratic institutions to replace ones the UK has. The set-up costs would be high.



Then why is the Norwegian krone now trading at about 5.80 to the US dollar when it was at only 5 to the dollar in 2008? That is 16% worse. It is preposterous to suggest that adverse currency fluctuations won't happen, sometimes for long periods and often big ones. Oil and gas are bought and sold in dollars, so Norway's income has fallen compared to what it would have been in 2008. And things were worse in 2002 when it was at about 9 to the dollar.



So you are happy that independence would give you less say in the most important decisions affecting the Scottish economy? You would move from a situation where the BoE has to take the Scottish economy into account, as a part of the UK, to one where it would take no account of it at all. And it would be in the hands of a foreign power. This doesn't seem to have received a great deal of thought.
Independence in general hasn't received a great deal of thought.

Anyone with a grasp of basic arithmetic can look at our employment stats to see that it quite simply wouldn't work.

I am so sick of hearing about how "we could be like Norway." People seem to have forgotten that the SNP promised we could be like Ireland and Iceland, too.
0
R-KAM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2176
Report 6 years ago
#2176
(Original post by Good bloke)
Of course you would. How can an independent country exist without diplomatic links to the outside world, for instance? Or without a body that regulates industry? Or a Treasury equivalent? Scotland would need to create all sorts of bureaucratic institutions to replace ones the UK has. The set-up costs would be high.

Then why is the Norwegian krone now trading at about 5.80 to the US dollar when it was at only 5 to the dollar in 2008? That is 16% worse. It is preposterous to suggest that adverse currency fluctuations won't happen, sometimes for long periods and often big ones. Oil and gas are bought and sold in dollars, so Norway's income has fallen compared to what it would have been in 2008. And things were worse in 2002 when it was at about 9 to the dollar.

So you are happy that independence would give you less say in the most important decisions affecting the Scottish economy? You would move from a situation where the BoE has to take the Scottish economy into account, as a part of the UK, to one where it would take no account of it at all. And it would be in the hands of a foreign power. This doesn't seem to have received a great deal of thought.
The set up costs would be well worth the investment anyway. There will likely be a couple years at least before full independence is achieved as both governments will have to sort everything out. I imagine we'd still be sharing everything until then.

Norway's economy is still one of the strongest in the world along with Switzerland, Sweden and Finland. It's currency value compared to the dollar doesn't change that. It has a surplus of money and continues to run at a surplus saving this money away for basically a rainy day.

We currently only control 7% of our revenue, with Independence we'd control 100%. We'd be able to set policies that suit us, not London & the South east.

It would still have to take the Scottish economy into account to ensure a stable pound...?

Good Article I

Good Article II


(Original post by pane123)
I am so sick of hearing about how "we could be like Norway."
Why's that?
0
Good bloke
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#2177
Report 6 years ago
#2177
(Original post by R-KAM)
The set up costs would be well worth the investment anyway. There will likely be a couple years at least before full independence is achieved as both governments will have to sort everything out. I imagine we'd still be sharing everything until then.
If you think that Scots will have the costs of setting up their new state and its government/ bureaucratic infrastructure paid for by the UK before it leaves us you have another think coming.

Why do you post propaganda articles by pro-independence websites and label them as good articles?
0
R-KAM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2178
Report 6 years ago
#2178
(Original post by Good bloke)
If you think that Scots will have the costs of setting up their new state and its government/ bureaucratic infrastructure paid for by the UK before it leaves us you have another think coming.
Did not say that anywhere. Nice.
0
pane123
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#2179
Report 6 years ago
#2179
(Original post by R-KAM)
Why's that?
Cherry picking leads not to good debate.
0
R-KAM
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#2180
Report 6 years ago
#2180
(Original post by pane123)
Cherry picking leads not to good debate.
It's a potentially fair comparison. There are similarities. More so than most other countries.


(Original post by Good bloke)
Why do you post propaganda articles by pro-independence websites and label them as good articles?
Only because there's a group of economists stating their opinion on why it'd be good for Scotland to continue to use the pound and potential economic boosts in the event of independence.

It's not just saying vote yes for freedom or anything. I'd happily read articles from economists on why it would be bad for us to use the pound and the economic downturn we'd see if you have them.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you made up your mind on your five uni choices?

Yes I know where I'm applying (58)
66.67%
No I haven't decided yet (19)
21.84%
Yes but I might change my mind (10)
11.49%

Watched Threads

View All