Quantcast
Scottish Independence, yay or nay? - Page 34 - GF - General Forum - The Liverpool Way Jump to content
Baltar

Scottish Independence, yay or nay?

Recommended Posts

Totally agree, see that slapper Kate is up the duff again....Deja vu me thinks. Pick a pretty bird to marry a Royal, get her to breed like a rat as quick as possible, then boom, she'll be in a French tunnel before she knows it. 

 

It'll be ginger.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fucking hell hasn't this happened yet?

 

I know another 9 days of this guff for an area less important economically and culturally than the west midlands. The 'Yes' vote is obviously going to win, by suddenly offering a range of new powers, the 'Better Together' campaign is clearly now desperate and stinking of 'loser'.

 

Good on the Scots, the 'Yes' campaign is really rattling the powers the be in Westminster which can only be a good thing.

 

Scottish independence will undoubtedly be a good thing long term however having King Salmond in power for the foreseeable future may be less so. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Miliband is completely bewildered about everything. Thinking that English councils flying the Saltire is going to help the No vote just shows how clueless Labour are about what is happening here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see Ed Miliband is in Liverpool to raise the Saltire on top of the City Council building with Joe Anderson ... think I'll vote No now.

 

I think that should read "satire".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of my friends works for RBS, accounts are being closed and transferred south at an alarming rate, the lack of publicity is to prevent a run on the Scottish banks, but I can't see that lasting.

 

This could become very interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tomorrow's PMQs cancelled so that Cameron, Miliband and Clegg can all come up here to persuade us to vote No. Yes campaign will be delighted!

The Scots being advised on what to do by the English. I think I can see the flaw in that.
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of my friends works for RBS, accounts are being closed and transferred south at an alarming rate, the lack of publicity is to prevent a run on the Scottish banks, but I can't see that lasting.

 

This could become very interesting.

What does this mean? At the moment you would just have a British bank account right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of my friends works for RBS, accounts are being closed and transferred south at an alarming rate, the lack of publicity is to prevent a run on the Scottish banks, but I can't see that lasting.

 

This could become very interesting.

 

The RBS is not a Scottish bank. It's 80% owned by the UK government who bought it with UK taxpayers money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest davelfc

Panic is rarely associated with common sense.

 

All i do know is that this has buggered up the dollar/pound exchange rate at a time when I was looking to make use of the decent exchange rate while over in the US.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Panic is rarely associated with common sense.

 

All i do know is that this has buggered up the dollar/pound exchange rate at a time when I was looking to make use of the decent exchange rate while over in the US.

It's only down a few cents, unless you are trading huge volumes of cash, that small pecentage will not make a big difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of my friends works for RBS, accounts are being closed and transferred south at an alarming rate, the lack of publicity is to prevent a run on the Scottish banks, but I can't see that lasting.

 

This could become very interesting.

 

My brother works for RBS & reckons this is bollocks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a friend from England, he's got a small penis, he likes to write lies about having friends in Banks and they tell him about stuff going on with accounts leaving Scotland. He is a nice chap though.

 

On a serious note, you can see how indifferent English are and how Scotland will be the losing side in case the independence go through, as UK politicians travel North in panic with a scope to bride Scots to vote NO to the independence. 

 

The UK political and financial elite are begging Scots to vote NO, because they care about them and because the remaining UK will be a paradise while Scotland will become like us here in Somalia.  

 

HAR HAR HAR

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/why-an-independent-scotland-could-become-the-richest-country-on-earth-9096120.html

 

Why an independent Scotland could become the richest country on Earth
 

On a per capita basis, the nation has all the ingredients to be one of the world's most prosperous nations

 

An independent Scotland could become the richest country on earth. I’m not joking. It has all the necessary ingredients. Let me explain.

Each year the World Bank, the IMF and the CIA each independently publish a list of the richest countries in the world - as measured by GDP per capita at purchasing power parity.

The UK sits at a rather disappointing 21st, but topping those rankings you have the likes of Qatar, Luxembourg, Singapore, Brunei, Norway and Switzerland.

Some of these nations have got there thanks to their oil. But oil isn’t everything – otherwise the likes of Saudi Arabia (28th), Russia (43rd) or Iran (78th) would feature.

Others have got there because they are financial or commercial centres. But the same regulatory options that have enabled them to be so are open to other countries - they have just not been adopted.

There is, however, one characteristic common to all the top ten ranking nations, bar one. It is that they are small. In the top five, Singapore and Norway both have around 5 million; Qatar 3 million; Luxembourg and Brunei around half a million.

The one exception is the US. It ranks 6th (IMF), 7th (World Bank) and 14th (CIA). In 1950, and indeed in 1970, it was top. Back then though, its states were semi-autonomous and, on a gold standard, its money was independent. As its state has grown and power become more centralized, its ranking has slid.

This is because there is a direct correlation between the size of the state and the wealth of the people - the bigger the former, the smaller the latter. The more power is concentrated, the less wealth is spread.

But in a small nation, forced to live from a smaller tax base, there is more of a limit to how big state institutions can grow. Monitoring becomes more efficient, it is harder to obfuscate, so there is more transparency and accountability, and less waste. Change is easier to implement, making a nation flexible, dynamic and competitive. With fewer people, there is less of a wealth gap between those at the top and the bottom.

The evidence of history is that the free-est countries with the widest dispersal of power have always been the most prosperous and innovative.

The city-states of pre- and early-Renaissance Italy are a good example. There was no single ruling body except for the Roman Catholic Church. If people, ideas or innovation were suppressed in one state, they could quickly move to another, so there was competition. Venice, in particular, showed great innovation in turning apparently useless marsh into a unique, thriving city. Renaissance Italy became breathtakingly prosperous and produced some of the greatest individuals that ever lived.

But it would be overtaken by Protestant northern Europe. The bible was translated into local vernacular, and Gutenberg’s printing press furthered the spread of knowledge – and thus the decentralization of power. The pace was set by Holland, also made up of many small states, then Britain led the pack. In spite of its union with Scotland and its later empire building, England would disperse centralized power by reducing the authorities of the monarch after the Civil War of 1642–51, and later by linking its currency to gold.

Since its unification in the late 19th century, Italy has been nothing like the force it once was, blighted by infighting, bureaucracy, organized crime, corruption, rent- seeking, inflation and division. Its state is bloated, its political system dysfunctional.

So back to Scotland.

It now has the opportunity to enact the same legislation, taxation and regulation that other top ten countries on that list employ, following, say, the blueprint of Singapore. It already has a rich tradition in trade, finance and banking.

It has the oil.

And, with just five million people, it is small.

It has all the ingredients to be the richest country on earth – on a per capita basis. It has ‘the triple’. I can think of no other nation in the world with such a wonderful opportunity.

The Scottish contribution to the world, whether in engineering, invention, industry or finance, has been astounding. Think Adam Smith, Alexander Fleming, John Logie Baird, James Watt. You cannot doubt Scottish talent - they are a formidable people. But they do not dominate the global stage as they once did. There will be a tough period of adjustment to get through, yes, but independent, living off their tax base, with dynamism and self-belief restored, they can do so once again.

But, first, they must make the right choices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The RBS is not a Scottish bank. It's 80% owned by the UK government who bought it with UK taxpayers money.

It's registered in Scotland and would become a Scottish bank if independence happened...unless it moved down south

When the Czechs and Slovaks separated there was large scale capital flight from Slovakia and, i'm pretty sure, it would happen to Scotland. We saw it yesterday with the falls in the markets

Whether it's happening yet i'd doubt but nothing would surprise me about this process

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Credit Suisse: Yes vote would mean "deep recession" for Scotland

Financial analysts in London issued a stark warning that Scotland would plunge into a “deep recession” with a sharp rise in unemployment if the yes vote prevails.

The Guardian’s Julia Kollewe has filed this on the warning by analysts at Credit Suisse, led by Andrew Garthwaite.

They assume a 25% probability that Scotland will vote yes, but note that markets tend to “overreact to political tail risk”, and may end up pricing in a 35% probability of a yes vote. 

Economic crisis:

Garthwaite and his team say:

In our opinion Scotland would fall into a deep recession. We believe deposit flight is both highly likely and highly problematic (with banks assets of 12x GDP) and should the Bank of England move to guarantee Scottish deposits, we expect it to extract a high fiscal and regulatory price (probably insisting on a primary budget surplus).

The re-domiciling of the financial sector and UK public service jobs, as well as a legal dispute over North Sea oil, would further accelerate any downturn.

In our opinion, as North Sea oil production slows, we estimate that the non-oil economy would need a 10% to 20% devaluation to restore competitiveness. This would require a 5% to 10% fall in wages, driven by a steep rise in unemployment.

Currency:

The analysts say:

We believe there is a 50% chance of the Scottish currency falling in value, and potentially significantly: of this, we place a 40% probability on a peg to the pound (which we think would ultimately not hold) and a 10% probability on a freely floating currency.

We place a 50% probability on a currency arrangement which would avoid devaluation against sterling: of this, we place a 25% probability on a formal currency union and a 25% probability on a Hong Kong-style currency board.

Constitutional crisis:

The Credit Suisse analysts are also predicting a constitutional crisis, until Scottish MPs are excluded from Westminster. When they are, the Tories would have a long-term electoral advantage in the UK.

Impact on sterling:

They see the pound weakening to $1.50-1.55.

Impact on stocks:

Exporters such as Diageo and Pernod-Ricard should benefit, while domestic plays, especially banks, could suffer (RBS, Lloyds, TSB). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×