This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- MA English Literature at St Andrews
- Introducing an Eelam flag emoticon on TSR
- Cambridge CS chances
- Modern Studies Higher
- Edinburgh vs Durham
- St Andrews 5 year VS England 4 year degrees
- Calling All Scottish Students!!
- how to study for national 5 English
- Realistically, do I have a shot of getting into vet med?
- Dentistry Backups?
- I've found St Andrews to be a racist university
- Should I do a nursing college course in S5?
- dentistry
- missing school
- PhD Funding Scottish History/Museums
- University Admissions Advice
- I feel like dropping out sometimes
- Is it bad that I DON'T want to be an 'independent woman'?
- Official University of Glasgow Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entry
- Veterinary medicine interviews 2024 entry
Is Scottish independence a 'good or bad' thing?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by L i b
Well, no. You see, there being no legal basis to recover that debt has already been accepted by the UK Government. The UK Government has sole title to it, and will continue to do so. However it has already said it expects an independent Scotland to repay a share of it.
However if an independent Scotland reneged on that share of the debt, several things would happen--
1. It would not receive any transitional co-operation from the UK Government. In practice, this would mean taxes could not be collected, welfare benefits could not be paid - in essence, significant government functions would cease to take place until hugely expensive emergency system could be put in place.
2. Scotland would receive no assets from the UK Government. While it may be impossible to remove every UK Government building in Scotland out of it, anything moveable and of value would be removed and nothing would be shared - for example, currency reserves. Scotland would have to borrow large sums of money simply to pay its bills in the interim.
However if an independent Scotland reneged on that share of the debt, several things would happen--
1. It would not receive any transitional co-operation from the UK Government. In practice, this would mean taxes could not be collected, welfare benefits could not be paid - in essence, significant government functions would cease to take place until hugely expensive emergency system could be put in place.
2. Scotland would receive no assets from the UK Government. While it may be impossible to remove every UK Government building in Scotland out of it, anything moveable and of value would be removed and nothing would be shared - for example, currency reserves. Scotland would have to borrow large sums of money simply to pay its bills in the interim.
IMF.
3. Scotland would likely not be allowed into the EU and NATO. There would not only be no currency union, but no passport union, no mutual defence pact, nada.
No EU isn't the end of the world, it could always join the EEA. And it wouldn't matter whether Scotland was part of NATO or not, if any country invaded Scotland it would pose so much a threat to the rUK that it would never happen. Ireland is a perfect example of this.
4. Scotland would ruin its international reputation and indeed its relationship with the rest of the UK.
Is the rest of the world are going to stop trading with Scotland? I think not.
There a numerous other ways that the UK can enforce payment of debts due, but that's pretty much sufficient. The idea that we wouldn't is not only bloody childish, but it would ruin Scotland to an extent we've not seen since Darien.
If the rUK keeps the assets it keeps the debt. Plain and simple.
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Boab
And with that I'm finished.
Keep on lying Mr Mature. You do seem to enjoy it.
Keep on lying Mr Mature. You do seem to enjoy it.
Here's another thread you may want to follow.
http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=2637152&p=46966107#post46966107
Just to give you a sense of how a potential foreign country's electorate view a currency union.
Original post by Boab
HahahahahaYou're citing that as fact?! Go crawl back from under whatever rock you came.
Well see my other reply too.
Ho ho Ho ha, the Scots want to keep the British Queen, keep the British pound, keep the Bank of England as their bank, .....why bother to pretend to want independence.??? Does France want the British queen and the pound too? No? I wonder why. Does the republic of Ireland want to have the British Queen and the British Pound??? No, I wonder why? Could it be because they are truly independent nations???
(edited 10 years ago)
Original post by Horsedobbin
Haha very funny but the majority of Scots disagree with you.
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/425925/Scots-demand-vote-on-keeping-the-Queen
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/425925/Scots-demand-vote-on-keeping-the-Queen
Oh right could you just get them all to mention this to me then, assuming someone's opinion vs right to rule is even valid.
Original post by Snagprophet
Oh right could you just get them all to mention this to me then, assuming someone's opinion vs right to rule is even valid.
Is this meant to disprove everything in the article I posted???
And how???
Original post by L i b
Well, no. You see, there being no legal basis to recover that debt has already been accepted by the UK Government. The UK Government has sole title to it, and will continue to do so. However it has already said it expects an independent Scotland to repay a share of it.
However if an independent Scotland reneged on that share of the debt, several things would happen--
1. It would not receive any transitional co-operation from the UK Government. In practice, this would mean taxes could not be collected, welfare benefits could not be paid - in essence, significant government functions would cease to take place until hugely expensive emergency system could be put in place.
2. Scotland would receive no assets from the UK Government. While it may be impossible to remove every UK Government building in Scotland out of it, anything moveable and of value would be removed and nothing would be shared - for example, currency reserves. Scotland would have to borrow large sums of money simply to pay its bills in the interim.
3. Scotland would likely not be allowed into the EU and NATO. There would not only be no currency union, but no passport union, no mutual defence pact, nada.
4. Scotland would ruin its international reputation and indeed its relationship with the rest of the UK.
There a numerous other ways that the UK can enforce payment of debts due, but that's pretty much sufficient. The idea that we wouldn't is not only bloody childish, but it would ruin Scotland to an extent we've not seen since Darien.
However if an independent Scotland reneged on that share of the debt, several things would happen--
1. It would not receive any transitional co-operation from the UK Government. In practice, this would mean taxes could not be collected, welfare benefits could not be paid - in essence, significant government functions would cease to take place until hugely expensive emergency system could be put in place.
2. Scotland would receive no assets from the UK Government. While it may be impossible to remove every UK Government building in Scotland out of it, anything moveable and of value would be removed and nothing would be shared - for example, currency reserves. Scotland would have to borrow large sums of money simply to pay its bills in the interim.
3. Scotland would likely not be allowed into the EU and NATO. There would not only be no currency union, but no passport union, no mutual defence pact, nada.
4. Scotland would ruin its international reputation and indeed its relationship with the rest of the UK.
There a numerous other ways that the UK can enforce payment of debts due, but that's pretty much sufficient. The idea that we wouldn't is not only bloody childish, but it would ruin Scotland to an extent we've not seen since Darien.
Apart from all this being your usual nonsense, let us deal with one sentence:
"it has already said it expects an independent Scotland to repay a share of it."
'Expecting' something is not the same as getting it.
How on earth can Scotland "renege" on a 'debt' which it did not incur in the first place?
Scotland has NO NATIONAL DEBT and ABSOLUTELY NO LEGAL OBLIGATION to pay a share of the UK NATIONAL DEBT incurred by WESTMINSTER.
The SNP have been very fair in saying an independent Scotland would take on a fair share.
But as they have made very clear,
No share of assets = No share of liabilities, FULL STOP.
No sharing the Pound = Keep the Debt
And most people in Scotland are no longer afraid of what rUK will do to them if they dare vote for independence.
rUK will become the laughing stock of the world if it tries to bully a Scotland which has just democratically voted for Independence.
Scotland already has an extremely good international reputation and it would be enhanced even further if rUK tried to bully it.
Can you now admit that you were talking utter nonsense when claiming that after a Yes vote, rUK could negotiate Scotland's entry to the EU, otherwise Scotland would have to wait for years?
How on earth can a 'foreign' country negotiate someone else's entry into an international organisation?
Like your cheerleader MatureStudent36, you lie and then shamelessly move on and then start the cycle of the same lies all over again.
Original post by Maths Tutor
Apart from all this being your usual nonsense, let us deal with one sentence:
"it has already said it expects an independent Scotland to repay a share of it."
'Expecting' something is not the same as getting it.
How on earth can Scotland "renege" on a 'debt' which it did not incur in the first place?
Scotland has NO NATIONAL DEBT and ABSOLUTELY NO LEGAL OBLIGATION to pay a share of the UK NATIONAL DEBT incurred by WESTMINSTER.
The SNP have been very fair in saying an independent Scotland would take on a fair share.
But as they have made very clear,
No share of assets = No share of liabilities, FULL STOP.
No sharing the Pound = Keep the Debt
And most people in Scotland are no longer afraid of what rUK will do to them if they dare vote for independence.
rUK will become the laughing stock of the world if it tries to bully a Scotland which has just democratically voted for Independence.
Scotland already has an extremely good international reputation and it would be enhanced even further if rUK tried to bully it.
Can you now admit that you were talking utter nonsense when claiming that after a Yes vote, rUK could negotiate Scotland's entry to the EU, otherwise Scotland would have to wait for years?
How on earth can a 'foreign' country negotiate someone else's entry into an international organisation?
Like your cheerleader MatureStudent36, you lie and then shamelessly move on and then start the cycle of the same lies all over again.
"it has already said it expects an independent Scotland to repay a share of it."
'Expecting' something is not the same as getting it.
How on earth can Scotland "renege" on a 'debt' which it did not incur in the first place?
Scotland has NO NATIONAL DEBT and ABSOLUTELY NO LEGAL OBLIGATION to pay a share of the UK NATIONAL DEBT incurred by WESTMINSTER.
The SNP have been very fair in saying an independent Scotland would take on a fair share.
But as they have made very clear,
No share of assets = No share of liabilities, FULL STOP.
No sharing the Pound = Keep the Debt
And most people in Scotland are no longer afraid of what rUK will do to them if they dare vote for independence.
rUK will become the laughing stock of the world if it tries to bully a Scotland which has just democratically voted for Independence.
Scotland already has an extremely good international reputation and it would be enhanced even further if rUK tried to bully it.
Can you now admit that you were talking utter nonsense when claiming that after a Yes vote, rUK could negotiate Scotland's entry to the EU, otherwise Scotland would have to wait for years?
How on earth can a 'foreign' country negotiate someone else's entry into an international organisation?
Like your cheerleader MatureStudent36, you lie and then shamelessly move on and then start the cycle of the same lies all over again.
Where's the UK said it won't share assets?
Original post by Boab
Presumption presented as fact!
U-turns happen all the time as you well low and I'm sure the rUK has far more pressing issues than a currency union.
U-turns happen all the time as you well low and I'm sure the rUK has far more pressing issues than a currency union.
U-turns don't happen all the time. They happen infrequently and typically when there's a disastrous reaction to something, or where something becomes more trouble than its worth. Now, there never will be that disastrous reaction: the people of the rUK back the government on this. As for becoming more trouble than it's worth, even if you accept the SNP's point about exchange costs, it still doesn't really amount to much in the grand scheme of things.
But this isn't a "pasty tax" or anything else. This is something that there is now an official UK Government paper on record saying that it would harm the country to have a currency union. This is where there is clear advice from the civil service not to do this. This is where there is a cross-party consensus against this. There has never, ever been a U-turn in such circumstances.
To your other part, I've read the Treasury paper. Dismissing it as "lies" is simply foolish and denigrates a very serious issue. As for the pressing nature of issues, I'd say this is in fact a matter of fundamental importance.
Original post by Maths Tutor
No sharing the Pound = Keep the Debt
No sharing the Pound = Keep the Debt
That whole post was pathetic. However lets focus on this bit. It is in Scotland's interests to keep the debt. If the are 'seen' to renege on the debt, they would have massively high interest rates, and no incentive for rUk to share anything. Scotland is leaving rUK. hence the are leaving rUK's pound. The pound is Scotland's pound, as long as it is in the UK. Also some assets such as the software, that runs the databases etc, will be essential to Scotland's good running. Ultimately this 'no pound = no debt' will screw Scotland.
Original post by Stalin
IMF.
MMF?
No EU isn't the end of the world, it could always join the EEA. And it wouldn't matter whether Scotland was part of NATO or not, if any country invaded Scotland it would pose so much a threat to the rUK that it would never happen. Ireland is a perfect example of this.
Defence isn't all about invasion.
As for the EEA, I'm not sure why you'd think an application to join the EEA would be any easier.
Is the rest of the world are going to stop trading with Scotland? I think not.
Well, you've only disagreed with a point you raised, not one I did.
If the rUK keeps the assets it keeps the debt. Plain and simple.
The UK Government has never suggested that it will not share assets. The only administration to threaten any part of that equation are the Scottish Government.
As we've seen, if an equitable solution cannot be found, then Scotland will be the one that suffers. It's not a realistic proposition.
Original post by Maths Tutor
Apart from all this being your usual nonsense, let us deal with one sentence:
"it has already said it expects an independent Scotland to repay a share of it."
'Expecting' something is not the same as getting it.
How on earth can Scotland "renege" on a 'debt' which it did not incur in the first place?
Scotland has NO NATIONAL DEBT and ABSOLUTELY NO LEGAL OBLIGATION to pay a share of the UK NATIONAL DEBT incurred by WESTMINSTER.
"it has already said it expects an independent Scotland to repay a share of it."
'Expecting' something is not the same as getting it.
How on earth can Scotland "renege" on a 'debt' which it did not incur in the first place?
Scotland has NO NATIONAL DEBT and ABSOLUTELY NO LEGAL OBLIGATION to pay a share of the UK NATIONAL DEBT incurred by WESTMINSTER.
I don't disagree with anything you've said there. In fact, I've already stated most of it. There isn't a legal obligation to pay it, although there is a moral one to my mind. However, as stated, there is an expectation that an independent Scotland will act in that way without compulsion.
If it doesn't, I've outlined just some of the consequences. Once again, the Nationalists seem to think if they play hardball, everyone will just accept it - that's obviously not reality.
The SNP have been very fair in saying an independent Scotland would take on a fair share.
But as they have made very clear,
No share of assets = No share of liabilities, FULL STOP.
But as they have made very clear,
No share of assets = No share of liabilities, FULL STOP.
No-one is saying that there would be no sharing of assets other than the SNP. The UK Government has been quite clear that it is more than willing to share assets.
No sharing the Pound = Keep the Debt
Well, I'm sorry, that's a completely different matter. Scotland has a moral obligation to pay debts run up on its behalf. The UK doesn't have a moral obligation to share its currency, or its institutions, or anything else. The UK is entitled to Scotland's debt payments, Scotland isn't entitled to use the pound. As such, the Scottish Government is withholding something it ought to give, on the basis that it isn't getting something it has no right too.
Elementary morality can demonstrate that is wrong.
And most people in Scotland are no longer afraid of what rUK will do to them if they dare vote for independence.
rUK will become the laughing stock of the world if it tries to bully a Scotland which has just democratically voted for Independence.
Scotland already has an extremely good international reputation and it would be enhanced even further if rUK tried to bully it.
rUK will become the laughing stock of the world if it tries to bully a Scotland which has just democratically voted for Independence.
Scotland already has an extremely good international reputation and it would be enhanced even further if rUK tried to bully it.
Not if an independent Scotland has behaved improperly, which is what you are advocating. In that case, the international community - which, incidentally, clearly doesn't much care for Scottish secession - would take a very dim view of it.
I'm not sure why you think this is 'bullying'. The UK Government has every right to do all of these things. How on earth is it bullying someone to say you will not co-operate and assist them when they have acted against your legitimate interests?
Can you now admit that you were talking utter nonsense when claiming that after a Yes vote, rUK could negotiate Scotland's entry to the EU, otherwise Scotland would have to wait for years?
How on earth can a 'foreign' country negotiate someone else's entry into an international organisation?
Like your cheerleader MatureStudent36, you lie and then shamelessly move on and then start the cycle of the same lies all over again.
How on earth can a 'foreign' country negotiate someone else's entry into an international organisation?
Like your cheerleader MatureStudent36, you lie and then shamelessly move on and then start the cycle of the same lies all over again.
I don't even know what you're talking about. The Scottish Government cannot negotiate EU entry from within the EU, that much is ascertainable under the EU treaties. Theoretically, the UK Government could request these treaties be changed and pursue that as the UK Government is an international actor. That is a theoretical, but entirely unlikely, course of action.
It's also not remotely relevant to anything and I'm rather sick of you asking me ridiculous questions about things that clearly don't mean anything to anyone other than you.
Original post by MatureStudent36
So if they are bluffing, looks like we're keeping trident
no, try again.
Original post by Cryptographic
That whole post was pathetic. However lets focus on this bit. It is in Scotland's interests to keep the debt. If the are 'seen' to renege on the debt, they would have massively high interest rates, and no incentive for rUk to share anything. Scotland is leaving rUK. hence the are leaving rUK's pound. The pound is Scotland's pound, as long as it is in the UK. Also some assets such as the software, that runs the databases etc, will be essential to Scotland's good running. Ultimately this 'no pound = no debt' will screw Scotland.
Scotland hasn't got any debt to default on, it's all been guaranteed by Westminster.
Scotland can choose to take a portion of the debt, it's all part of the negotiations.
Original post by TheBugle
Scotland hasn't got any debt to default on, it's all been guaranteed by Westminster.
Scotland can choose to take a portion of the debt, it's all part of the negotiations.
Scotland can choose to take a portion of the debt, it's all part of the negotiations.
But the international perception will be that they have reneged.
Original post by L i b
MMF?
It'd be one way to cover the costs in the short term.
Defence isn't all about invasion.
Ireland and Switzerland seem perfectly safe without NATO - Scotland would be no different.
As for the EEA, I'm not sure why you'd think an application to join the EEA would be any easier.
Alright, EFTA then.
Well, you've only disagreed with a point you raised, not one I did.
I don't think Scotland's international reputation would change if it decided to refuse the debt if the assets were not shared - that's perfectly logical. And I'm sure the rest of the world will agree.
The UK Government has never suggested that it will not share assets. The only administration to threaten any part of that equation are the Scottish Government.
Really? What about the BoE?
As we've seen, if an equitable solution cannot be found, then Scotland will be the one that suffers. It's not a realistic proposition.
And how will Scotland suffer?
Original post by TheBugle
Scotland hasn't got any debt to default on, it's all been guaranteed by Westminster.
Scotland can choose to take a portion of the debt, it's all part of the negotiations.
Scotland can choose to take a portion of the debt, it's all part of the negotiations.
South Sudan took its share of debt.
You'll tend to find you can't just walk away from debt.
I know nationalists have this fantasy that we can, but we really can't.
Original post by Cryptographic
But the international perception will be that they have reneged.
Says who? (genuinely curious).
Original post by TheBugle
Says who? (genuinely curious).
Approx 10% of UK national debt is ours.
Markets don't like people reneging in their financial responsibilities. It tends to increase borrowing costs substantially.
Original post by Maths Tutor
You are on the record as saying you hate being Scottish.
Original post by L i b
A complete lie.
Let us see if it is a "complete" lie:
Original post by Maths Tutor
As the leading anti-Scottish Independence poster on this thread, and no doubt a 'proud Scot', why else would you not proudly display the name of the Scottish city you live in?
As the leading anti-Scottish Independence poster on this thread, and no doubt a 'proud Scot', why else would you not proudly display the name of the Scottish city you live in?
Original post by L i b
Get lost. And I'm not proud of an accident of birth.
Every single member of 'Better Together' is a "proud and patriotic Scot, BUT - - -".
And it goes without saying that every single person voting Yes is a "proud and patriotic Scot, NO IFS, NO BUTS.
YOU seem to be the ONLY 'Scot' "not proud of an accident of birth".
On the balance of evidence, I have concluded that you are either not Scottish, or have Scottish origin but don't live in Scotland.
You have left no doubt that you are a British Nationalist, flying the biggest symbol of all of British Nationalism - the British Royal Navy flag - Britannia ruling the waves.
I don't care what ethnicity you have or where you live. But I strongly oppose the anti-independence lies and distortions you post here.
And no, I am not the least bit 'anti-English'.
Before I leave, let me point out YET ANOTHER LIE of yours - the Scottish electoral system is not proportional representation":
Original post by L i b
We have a more proportional system for electing the Scottish Parliament than we do for the UK Parliament elections, however it is clearly still a far way off being proportional. Note how we have a majority government elected without being close to a majority of the popular vote.
The Scottish parliament is NOT "far way off" being proportional and it HAS a system which IS called 'proportional representation'.
Unlike your beloved Westminster parliament where little more than 30% of the popular vote and little more than 20% of the total electorate can result in 'landslide' wins in parliament.
The leader of the Scottish Tories, Ruth Davidson, came FOURTH in her constituency with LESS THAN 10% of the vote.
If we did not have proportional representation, she would not be a member of the Scottish parliament.
The only purpose of the likes of you is to talk down Scotland at every opportunity..
Original post by Maths Tutor
Let us see if it is a "complete" lie:
Every single member of 'Better Together' is a "proud and patriotic Scot, BUT - - -".
And it goes without saying that every single person voting Yes is a "proud and patriotic Scot, NO IFS, NO BUTS.
YOU seem to be the ONLY 'Scot' "not proud of an accident of birth".
On the balance of evidence, I have concluded that you are either not Scottish, or have Scottish origin but don't live in Scotland.
You have left no doubt that you are a British Nationalist, flying the biggest symbol of all of British Nationalism - the British Royal Navy flag - Britannia ruling the waves.
I don't care what ethnicity you have or where you live. But I strongly oppose the anti-independence lies and distortions you post here.
And no, I am not the least bit 'anti-English'.
Before I leave, let me point out YET ANOTHER LIE of yours - the Scottish electoral system is not proportional representation":
The Scottish parliament is NOT "far way off" being proportional and it HAS a system which IS called 'proportional representation'.
Unlike your beloved Westminster parliament where little more than 30% of the popular vote and little more than 20% of the total electorate can result in 'landslide' wins in parliament.
The leader of the Scottish Tories, Ruth Davidson, came FOURTH in her constituency with LESS THAN 10% of the vote.
If we did not have proportional representation, she would not be a member of the Scottish parliament.
The only purpose of the likes of you is to talk down Scotland at every opportunity..
You really are unhinged aren't you?
Is you're name Peter Dowe by any chance?
Related discussions
- MA English Literature at St Andrews
- Introducing an Eelam flag emoticon on TSR
- Cambridge CS chances
- Modern Studies Higher
- Edinburgh vs Durham
- St Andrews 5 year VS England 4 year degrees
- Calling All Scottish Students!!
- how to study for national 5 English
- Realistically, do I have a shot of getting into vet med?
- Dentistry Backups?
- I've found St Andrews to be a racist university
- Should I do a nursing college course in S5?
- dentistry
- missing school
- PhD Funding Scottish History/Museums
- University Admissions Advice
- I feel like dropping out sometimes
- Is it bad that I DON'T want to be an 'independent woman'?
- Official University of Glasgow Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entry
- Veterinary medicine interviews 2024 entry
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 days ago
Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UKLast reply 1 week ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Where do you stand on the political spectrum (8values)? – Take a quiz here!Last reply 3 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 3 weeks ago
No progress made on half of UK government’s levelling-up targetsLast reply 3 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Even Europe’s far-right firebrands seem to sense Brexit is a disaster- The GuardianLast reply 2 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 4 days ago
Sunak rejects offer of youth mobility scheme between EU and UKLast reply 1 week ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 3 weeks ago
TSR Big Discussion #1: What should be top priority to protect the environment?Last reply 3 weeks ago
Where do you stand on the political spectrum (8values)? – Take a quiz here!Last reply 3 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 3 weeks ago
No progress made on half of UK government’s levelling-up targetsLast reply 3 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?
