Scottish independence: let's have an honest debate (P3)

1145146148150151516

Comments

  • CoolSharpHarpCoolSharpHarp Posts: 7,565
    Forum Member
    Brawlad wrote: »
    Actually if you read the reports rather than the red top headlines you will find that you are speaking nonsense.

    Did he not refer to Westminster politician's as Lord Snooty's?
    Did he not make the threat over European fishing boats?
    Has he not made threats over UK debt?
    He could have made a case for using a different currency without resorting to slagging of the pound, but he can't resist cheap political point scoring.
  • muntamunta Posts: 18,285
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    mimik1uk wrote: »
    no share of assets would basically mean Scotland cannot operate as an independent country

    even the Dunleavy report which YES supporters have held up repeatedly regarding costs and timescales for transition says that Scotland will be dependent on the rUK for up to ten years for a number of core services and will have to lease those services until such time they can be implemented as a separate Scottish function

    so what sort of lease arrangements do you think the rUK will offer for these core services when salmond has refused to take any share of debt and waived a share of assets

    I mentioned something similar earlier. If Scotland refuses to pay any debts then rUK can refuse to give Scotland any assets or support to set up a Revenue office. No Revenue office means not being able to collect tax from individuals or from oil companies. It would take many months to set up a new Revenue office so during that time Scotland would have no money. No money to pay for infrastructure, no money to pay for wages. No money to pay the MSPs.

    Is Salmond really an Economist, because he doesn't seem to have thought this through.

    That's really not a good way to start a Country off on a good start.
  • LostFoolLostFool Posts: 90,623
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Brawlad wrote: »
    Why should a new country be saddled with debt from the continuing state. It is their debt afterall.

    And a big part of that debt was built up rescuing Scottish banks. If the debt belongs to the UK then does the majority shareholding in the RBS. Maybe we should rename it the Royal Bank of the Rest of the United Kingdom?

    It also means that the UK owns anything else in Scotland built or paid for with that debt. Hopefully Gordon Brown will have kept a record of what he spent the money on.
  • mimik1ukmimik1uk Posts: 46,701
    Forum Member
    the no share of the debt thing makes for a great soundbite but in reality it cant happen as the consequences of that position are just untenable

    unfortunately , as proved on these forums, people fall for it
  • fermynfermyn Posts: 2,766
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Salmond's Plan B is clear - Scotland will use the pound without a currency union, but instead of taking the opportunity to explain to the voters what this actually would mean in practise, he kept bleating on about the referendum being a mandate for Scotland to demand a currency union.

    He can demand all he likes, it's not going to happen because any Westminster party which caved in to such demands would be held to account in the forthcoming general election by the rUK voters.

    I simply don't understand how the Yes voters can put their faith in such a man 'negotiating' on their behalf. He comes across as a belligerent, intransigent bully to those looking on.
  • BrawladBrawlad Posts: 5,711
    Forum Member
    mimik1uk wrote: »
    contradict yourself much ?

    Just pointing out that the assets will be shared unless rUK refuses to share the assets. The ball is in their court
  • BrawladBrawlad Posts: 5,711
    Forum Member
    fermyn wrote: »
    Salmond's Plan B is clear - Scotland will use the pound without a currency union, but instead of taking the opportunity to explain to the voters what this actually would mean in practise, he kept bleating on about the referendum being a mandate for Scotland to demand a currency union.

    He can demand all he likes, it's not going to happen because any Westminster party which caved in to such demands would be held to account in the forthcoming general election by the rUK voters.

    I simply don't understand how the Yes voters can put their faith in such a man 'negotiating' on their behalf. He comes across as a belligerent, intransigent bully to those looking on.
    You mean fair but firm negotiator.
  • mimik1ukmimik1uk Posts: 46,701
    Forum Member
    Brawlad wrote: »
    Just pointing out that the assets will be shared unless rUK refuses to share the assets. The ball is in their court

    the UK haven't refused to share the assets

    a currency union is not an asset
  • BrawladBrawlad Posts: 5,711
    Forum Member
    LostFool wrote: »
    And a big part of that debt was built up rescuing Scottish banks. If the debt belongs to the UK then does the majority shareholding in the RBS. Maybe we should rename it the Royal Bank of the Rest of the United Kingdom?

    It also means that the UK owns anything else in Scotland built or paid for with that debt. Hopefully Gordon Brown will have kept a record of what he spent the money on.

    The assets in Scotland would becomes Scotland's . The UN is quite clear on this
  • BrawladBrawlad Posts: 5,711
    Forum Member
    mimik1uk wrote: »
    does Wikipedia have a page for the phrase "grasping at straws"

    Why? Do you have a need for one?
  • mimik1ukmimik1uk Posts: 46,701
    Forum Member
    Brawlad wrote: »
    Why? Do you have a need for one?

    when your level of debate descends to this level I think its time to put you on ignore ...
  • fermynfermyn Posts: 2,766
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Brawlad wrote: »
    You mean fair but firm negotiator.

    I'm sure that's how the 1m Yes voters see him - but that's not how he comes across to the 63m other people in the UK.
  • LostFoolLostFool Posts: 90,623
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Brawlad wrote: »
    The assets in Scotland would becomes Scotland's . The UN is quite clear on this

    Those nuclear subs (at least the ones currently in Scottish waters) and missiles are all yours then. Be careful with them and don't go selling them to the Russians or Chinese behind our back.

    But we'll keep the RBS.
  • jmclaughjmclaugh Posts: 63,988
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The SNP want their cake and their halfpenny. Assets, as they put it, would be divvied up if Scotland becomes independent, thereafter both are on their own. The SNP want alimony too.
  • LostFoolLostFool Posts: 90,623
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    jmclaugh wrote: »
    The SNP want their cake and their halfpenny. Assets, as they put it, would be divvied up if Scotland becomes independent, thereafter both are on their own. The SNP want alimony too.

    I'm currently watching the BBC Scotland debate from last night (iplayer link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b04g487x/the-referendum-debate-26082014) and John Swinney is promising the moon on a stick - increased public spending, no austerity, no tax rises and reducing the deficit. He's making Ed Balls look economically competent.

    Charles Kennedy is excellent. He really should have run the No campaign.
  • DerekPAgainDerekPAgain Posts: 2,708
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Brawlad wrote: »
    The debt is the UKs . Scotland , as a state , does not presently exist. It has no debt.

    And try getting a loan without a credit record!

    Works for soverign states just as well as people.
  • onecitizenonecitizen Posts: 5,042
    Forum Member
    The business leaders said: "As job creators, we have looked carefully at the arguments made by both sides of the debate. Our conclusion is that the business case for independence has not been made.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/11057905/Scottish-business-leaders-say-case-for-independence-has-not-been-made.html
  • mimik1ukmimik1uk Posts: 46,701
    Forum Member
    onecitizen wrote: »
    The business leaders said: "As job creators, we have looked carefully at the arguments made by both sides of the debate. Our conclusion is that the business case for independence has not been made.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/11057905/Scottish-business-leaders-say-case-for-independence-has-not-been-made.html

    thms must have missed that link ;-)
  • LostFoolLostFool Posts: 90,623
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    onecitizen wrote: »
    The business leaders said: "As job creators, we have looked carefully at the arguments made by both sides of the debate. Our conclusion is that the business case for independence has not been made.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/industry/11057905/Scottish-business-leaders-say-case-for-independence-has-not-been-made.html

    Clearly they are all "spivs and speculators" so their opinion should be disregarded and we should listen to the ramblings of anonymous blogs.
  • Black SheepBlack Sheep Posts: 15,219
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Complete and utter guff, The Tory government changed the law to benefit London to the detriment of the devolved governments.

    So you actually have no answer to the real evidence that Scotland isn't paying for the London sewer system other than a two year old unfounded article that you cannot back up?
  • Black SheepBlack Sheep Posts: 15,219
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Orri wrote: »
    So the plan is to build a 25km tunnel to discharge untreated sewage into the sea? Wouldn't it be worth investigating how much it'd cost to treat the sewage, possibly extract fertiliser from it, possibly recycle the water content and potentially save both money and the environment?

    It might just be your right. However, it doesn't deflect from the fact that were not paying for it?
  • FrankieFixerFrankieFixer Posts: 11,530
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Got my postal vote in today. Anyone else got theirs?
  • Black SheepBlack Sheep Posts: 15,219
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Brawlad wrote: »
    Why should a new country be saddled with debt from the continuing state. It is their debt afterall.

    In your case, perhaps Westminster should get in quick and declare the rest of the UK independent from Scotland, let us have the BOE and declare the whole debt ours?
Sign In or Register to comment.