Scottish Independence

[bocadillo]

There is of course a royal element that may be sensitive. They'd have to lose their holidays at Balmoral. .

Balmoral is owned by the royal family, not by the crown. I see no reason why the royal family could not holiday in a foreign country if they so wished.

 

[homer]

There is of course a royal element that may be sensitive. Can he remain the Duke of Edinburgh? Surely not. They'd also have to lose their holidays at Balmoral. Poor them. I'm sure there are more peculiar things that would be affected. Frankly, the more ridiculous the royal family appear, the happier I am. I'm all for them being negotiated out to Scotland as part of the deal anyway.

Not quite sure where you're coming from here. The Queen would still be Head of State in an independent Scotland, and nothing has even been hinted at in this debate that suggests they would ever want to remove the monarchy

 

[Mawsley]

What would be the point of Scotland, or any other country that wanted to be a real country, using a currency over which they had no control?

Dollarisation

 

[Brown Nose]

Not quite sure where you're coming from here. The Queen would still be Head of State in an independent Scotland, and nothing has even been hinted at in this debate that suggests they would ever want to remove the monarchy

Head of state is a bit different though isn't it. We don't have a Duke of Syndey or Prince of Ontario.

 

[Macky]

The pound is owned and controlled by the Bank of England. Therefore, it is only legal tender in countries that the BofE sets monetary policy for. If the BofE stops supplying, restocking and supporting the currency in Scotland, that's that. The BofE won't accept currency from banks/business and people in Scotland. They can set up a Band of Scotland and use a Scottish Pound, but it will be a completely separate currency.

Given the total shambles that is the 'euro', why on earth would England and Wales allow another country to use its currency? It's one of the key flaws in the 'yes' campaign, the fact that they don't have a currency plan.

Again, there is absolutely nothing that Westminster or the BoE can do to prevent Scotland from continuing to use the pound.

 

[Macky]

What would be the point of Scotland, or any other country that wanted to be a real country, using a currency over which they had no control?

I'm not suggesting for a moment that it would be a good idea for them to do that, I'm just responding to BN's comment about taking the pound off of them.

 

[Macky]

Queen would still be Head of State in an independent Scotland, and nothing has even been hinted at in this debate that suggests they would ever want to remove the monarchy

I'm reasonably sure that SNP's official policy is to retain the monarchy.

 

[Macky]

 

[jb5000]

Again, there is absolutely nothing that Westminster or the BoE can do to prevent Scotland from continuing to use the pound.

That is true, but the Scottish government would be unable to print more pounds when it needed them, which would restrain its actions during the normal course of the financial year (tax revenues tend to come in at the end, but you spend throughout) and completely lock it up in the event of a financial crisis. That's likely to mean interest rates would always be slightly higher than they would be in rUK for consumers and the government, meaning higher taxes, lower standards of living and weaker public services, and no control over inflation which can be pretty important during a slump. That's no freedom - keeping the pound in this way would mean many of the important decisions about Scotland would still be made in Westminster, but that Scotland had just stopped itself being represented in Westminster. (See also the UK leaving the EU on that bit)

 

[Darth Vodka]

The pound is owned and controlled by the Bank of England. Therefore, it is only legal tender in countries that the BofE sets monetary policy for

Non seqitur

If a bank issues a note, anyone can use it as their currency

They have no say on how rates change or how much is printed though

The Vatican has no say on how many Euros are printed

Scotland could issue Groats and everyone could pile into UKP and reject the groat, like Ecuador did with USD and its now dead Sucre

 

[Macky]

That is true, but the Scottish government would be unable to print more pounds when it needed them, which would restrain its actions during the normal course of the financial year (tax revenues tend to come in at the end, but you spend throughout) and completely lock it up in the event of a financial crisis. That's likely to mean interest rates would always be slightly higher than they would be in rUK for consumers and the government, meaning higher taxes, lower standards of living and weaker public services, and no control over inflation which can be pretty important during a slump. That's no freedom - keeping the pound in this way would mean many of the important decisions about Scotland would still be made in Westminster, but that Scotland had just stopped itself being represented in Westminster. (See also the UK leaving the EU on that bit)

Yes, but it would also mean that Scotland would leave Westminster paying for all of the Uk's national debt.
Pragmatically there will have to be a formal currency union, neither of them have much choice about that.

 

[bocadillo]

I'm not suggesting for a moment that it would be a good idea for them to do that, I'm just responding to BN's comment about taking the pound off of them.

Yes

 

[bocadillo]

Yes, but it would also mean that Scotland would leave Westminster paying for all of the Uk's national debt.

Another non sequitur.

 

[Macky]

Another non sequitur.

Is it? Perhaps I should've been clearer. Both parties will need to sit down and hammer out a deal whereby Scotland agree to take on a portion of the national debt and the cabal of crooks in Westminster agree to enter into a formalised currency union with them. Otherwise they will only be ****ing each other.

 

[Matt_B]

Is it? Perhaps I should've been clearer. Both parties will need to sit down and hammer out a deal whereby Scotland agree to take on a portion of the national debt and the cabal of crooks in Westminster agree to enter into a formalised currency union with them. Otherwise they will only be ****ing each other.

Isn't ****ing each other the entire point of politics? Us plebs are just the plastic mat to catch the mess.

 

[jb5000]

Yes, but it would also mean that Scotland would leave Westminster paying for all of the Uk's national debt.
Pragmatically there will have to be a formal currency union, neither of them have much choice about that.

It wouldn't mean that at all - the two are seperate issues and if Scotland don't reach a settlement over their share of national debt (and everyone says that should be along population lines) who on earth would lend to them in the future, except at ramped up interest rates?

 

[Macky]

It wouldn't mean that at all - the two are seperate issues

Yes, of course they are separate issues, but they both represent two metaphorical trump cards held by either side, among others.
The point that I was trying to make was that despite all of the bluster and propaganda being spewed everywhere, both sides will have to get around the table, if the ballot produces a yes vote, and a formal currency union looks the most likely and the preferable outcome for both.

who on earth would lend to them in the future, except at ramped up interest rates?

The same people who lend to every other country, banksters. Scotland will have no problems getting rid of treasuries, the rate of which won't be based on whether or not they've helped out the rest of the UK with theirs. In fact, you could actually argue it the opposite way.

 

[pork pie fox]

It's a feckin farce.

Without all this stuff being pre-agreed, how the feck can they hold a referendum? No doubt Westminster thought that without this being sorted they'd be fairly certain of a no vote (as people would be too scared to vote yes without knowing what the implications were), and it's clearly a lot closer than they anticipated.

 

[bocadillo]

Is it? Perhaps I should've been clearer. Both parties will need to sit down and hammer out a deal whereby Scotland agree to take on a portion of the national debt and the cabal of crooks in Westminster agree to enter into a formalised currency union with them. Otherwise they will only be ****ing each other.

If Scotland refuses to take their share of the national debt, whatever the reason, they will be skating on very thin ice. What kind of reputation would give them as a country? Who would want to deal with them?

 

[Macky]

If Scotland refuses to take their share of the national debt, whatever the reason, they will be skating on very thin ice. What kind of reputation would give them as a country? Who would want to deal with them?

I refer the honourable gentleman to the reply I gave some moments ago