Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - Scottish people in Korea

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Scottish people in Korea - read this!
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> General Discussion Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Steelrails

Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System

Posted: Mon May 12, 2014 6:53 pm Post subject:

Quote:

The fact is that the vote in September doesn't actually confer independence. Scotland would only become independent once the RUK gov. gives its consent after negotiations have been completed.

A row over something huge like debt could see those negotiations being pushed far past the 2016 deadline. The fact is there is nothing compelling the RUK gov. to let Scotland go without a commitment to pay back its debt.

While I agree that simply walking away without negotiating on debt and all that would be disastrous and the UK would respond with measures that would probably ruin the Scottish economy, the Scottish people could do it without a "by your leave". They don't need the consent of the UK. What, would London try and bomb them back to the negotiating table?

But yeah, just leaving without securing debt would be moronic for Scotland. The punitive economic measures that would be inflicted on them would cost far more than any debt settlement. I agree that separatism, while romantic in a way, is pointless and reckless for many of the reasons you have mentioned, but I do believe that Scotland as an independent nation has a right to exist with or without the consent of the British government. That's like saying that if England wanted to leave a union of Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, and Cornwall, it would need the permission of Scotland to do so.

Anyways, as an American, let me caution those who would whimsically engage in secession...You are always better off united than divided. Unless you were Ireland and totally getting screwed over for centuries...

Lucas

Joined: 11 Sep 2012

Posted: Mon May 12, 2014 7:26 pm Post subject:

Quote:

Anyways, as an American, let me caution those who would whimsically engage in secession...You are always better off united than divided. Unless you were Ireland and totally getting screwed over for centuries...

When your work in ESL is done, could you pop over to Israel and sort out the Middle East out please?

aq8knyus

Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London

Posted: Mon May 12, 2014 8:59 pm Post subject:

Quote:

Yet the Bank of England said it would have no problem with a currency union, and without a currency union the Scots have no reason to take on that debt.

The BoE will do whatever it is asked to do as the currency union is fundamentally a political decision between the RUK and Scottish governments. Therefore if you have all the major political leaders of all the major RUK parties saying that they will oppose a currency union you cannot have a currency union.

Also the BoE along with the Treasury have warned that a currency union would not be advantageous for the RUK and it would involve the Scots ceding sovereignty. If the economic case for independence only makes sense with a currency union you might as well stay in the union.

aq8knyus

Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London

Posted: Mon May 12, 2014 9:07 pm Post subject:

Steelrails wrote:

Quote:

I agree that it is a lot more nuanced than just the RUK 'letting' the Scots leave, but the RUK is under no obligation to conclude negotiations for formal Scottish independence until they are satisfied and that is unlikely without a deal in regards to Scotland's huge debt.

In anycase the only reason why more and more Scots are even interested in independence is because they think they will get Norweigian style wealth. Nobody is going to start throwing bombs about.

jazzmaster

Joined: 30 Sep 2013

Posted: Mon May 12, 2014 10:46 pm Post subject:

aq8knyus wrote:

Steelrails wrote:

Quote:

And without a currency union Scotland won't take on any of the debt. So we're back to the start again.

Your final point is an out and out lie. You've gotten to the point where you're so desperate you've started insinuating the Scots greed is the "only reason" for them wanting independence.

I'm glad you're finally showing your true colours.

For Scots independence isn't about being anti-English. It's about being able to control their own affairs, instead of allowing the current ruling elite and existing structures of authority to ignore what is best for the people of Scotland while lining their own pockets.

aq8knyus

Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London

Posted: Mon May 12, 2014 11:14 pm Post subject:

Quote:

And without a currency union Scotland won't take on any of the debt. So we're back to the start again.

Let me say this again.

The RUK has ruled out a currency union.

A currency union is the only hope Scotland has of maintaining its vitally important balance of trade and finance industry.

The issue of debt is completely seperate.

The RUK and Scotland will reach an agreement about how much debt Scotland will inherit. The figure is unknown and the Scots could negotiate for a smaller debt if they agree to keep Faslane etc.

BUT

There is no way in hell that 146 bn can just be walked away from, that is politically and economically unacceptable for the RUK AND Scotland.

The pound is not a shared asset it belongs to the United Kingdom, if you leave good luck, but don't expect the RUK to underwrite your country's finances.

aq8knyus

Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London

Posted: Mon May 12, 2014 11:17 pm Post subject:

Quote:

Your final point is an out and out lie. You've gotten to the point where you're so desperate you've started insinuating the Scots greed is the "only reason" for them wanting independence.

In 2011 over two thirds responded to a pollster that they would back independence if it meant an extra 500 quid.

In 2013 that figure fell to 52%, but it still represents a huge proportion.

All this braveheart nonsense is only important for a small minority.

Economics and money is at the heart of this debate and it is simply a lie to say otherwise.

jazzmaster

Joined: 30 Sep 2013

Posted: Mon May 12, 2014 11:38 pm Post subject:

aq8knyus wrote:

Quote:

And without a currency union Scotland won't take on any of the debt. So we're back to the start again.

The issue of debt isn't separate. The Scottish government have said that without a currency union they will not take on any of the debt.
You claiming otherwise doesn't make it so.

The facts are the rUK government says their will be no currency union (although insiders have undermined this), and the Scottish government has said that without a currency union they will not take on any of the debt.

The FT also says a currency union would be best for all of Britain http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/8bf832a8-b984-11e3-b74f-00144feabdc0.html#axzz31VvRv85z

And your final attempt to justify your lies about the Scots' "only reason" being greed doesn't work. The survey doesn't ask if it's the "only reason" and 52% is hardly an overwhelming majority.

Your posts have become nothing but conjecture, scare mongering, and libelous lies. If you truly have Scottish relatives then there's a good chance they would be embarrassed at some of the statements you've made.

Your posts, and attitude, show the posters here why so many Scots are voting for independence.
For Scots independence isn't about being anti-English. It's about being able to control their own affairs, instead of allowing the current ruling elite and existing structures of authority to ignore what is best for the people of Scotland while lining their own pockets.

aq8knyus

Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London

Posted: Tue May 13, 2014 1:01 am Post subject:

Quote:

The issue of debt isn't separate. The Scottish government have said that without a currency union they will not take on any of the debt.
You claiming otherwise doesn't make it so.

It is a seperate issue because the pound is not an asset that can be divided, Scotland has no right to the currency if it decides to leave the UK.

The debt it has accumulated is a burden it must shoulder, the effects of welching on its debt are even more dire for Scotland than a 75% GDP to debt ratio.

In every scenario Scotland will lose its incredibly successful financial services industry as no bank is going to want to stay. If you think the cost of borrowing is high now wait till Scotland has to borrow from the capital markets at punishing interest rates. Who would invest in a country that welches on it's debt?

Have you even begun to think through how catastrophic it would be for Scotland's economic and global standing if it welched. For your next google adventure try 'Capital Flight'.

Quote:

The facts are the rUK government says their will be no currency union (although insiders have undermined this), and the Scottish government has said that without a currency union they will not take on any of the debt.

The FT also says a currency union would be best for all of Britain http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/8bf832a8-b984-11e3-b74f-00144feabdc0.html#axzz31VvRv85z

You can't even google correctly.

The FT didn't say a currency union would be the best for Britain, that article is an opinion piece. It is the opinion of Anton Muscatelli who is a professor at Glasgow university.

You do understand the difference between an editorial and an opinion piece?

Mark Carney the BoE chief, the Treasury and all major RUK political parties have all come out against a currency union.

Quote:

And your final attempt to justify your lies about the Scots' "only reason" being greed doesn't work. The survey doesn't ask if it's the "only reason" and 52% is hardly an overwhelming majority.

It is still a huge proportion and are you seriously trying to suggest that economics is not at the heart of this debate?

Quote:

Your posts have become nothing but conjecture, scare mongering, and libelous lies. If you truly have Scottish relatives then there's a good chance they would be embarrassed at some of the statements you've made.

I concede that we are dealing with a number of unknowns, but at least I do not engage in out and out delusions.

Currency union, no debt and Norweigian style sovereign wealth funds are not going to happen and I have written extensively in this thread as to why not.

All you have countered with is "Scotland won't take on any of the debt" without even thinking about what that statement entails. Furthermore you have provided dodgy statistics about North Sea Oil being worth 4 Tn pounds and made noise about a paltry 40 Bn pounds, a figure that is dwarfed by the scale of Scotland's liabilities.

Quote:

Your posts, and attitude, show the posters here why so many Scots are voting for independence.

Your first post on this thread was talking in gleeful terms about the demise of England and reducing the people of England to hooligans and thugs. So please spare me your self-righteouness when your own bigotry is plain to see.

jazzmaster

Joined: 30 Sep 2013

Posted: Tue May 13, 2014 1:39 am Post subject:

aq8knyus wrote:

Quote:

The issue of debt isn't separate. The Scottish government have said that without a currency union they will not take on any of the debt.
You claiming otherwise doesn't make it so.

Quote:

And your final attempt to justify your lies about the Scots' "only reason" being greed doesn't work. The survey doesn't ask if it's the "only reason" and 52% is hardly an overwhelming majority.

It is still a huge proportion and are you seriously trying to suggest that economics is not at the heart of this debate?

Quote:

Your posts, and attitude, show the posters here why so many Scots are voting for independence.

Glad to see you've finally conceded you are dealing with unknowns. You don't know what will happen in the future, and to continue to reply to your conjecture is a waste of my time.

My posts have dealt with the points you have raised.

My first post was in direct response to a trolling OP, so once again please read, and try to understand:
For Scots independence isn't about being anti-English. It's about being able to control their own affairs, instead of allowing the current ruling elite and existing structures of authority to ignore what is best for the people of Scotland while lining their own pockets.

aq8knyus

Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London

Posted: Tue May 13, 2014 7:29 am Post subject:

Quote:

My posts have dealt with the points you have raised.

Except they haven't.

You say a currency union is going to happen despite everyone that matters saying in no uncertain terms that it will not happen.

You say that Scotland can be debt free despite the RUK government opposing this and have provided little in the way of a counter argument as to why Scotland welching on its debts wouldn't be even more disastorous for Scotland.

You say that Scotland could bulid a Norweigian style sovereign wealth fund and yet have no counter for a) falling reserves b) the huge cost of modernisation to get at the remaining reserves c) that not even Norway started making transfers to their fund until they were running a surplus d) Scotland's government is already running an 11% deficit even with oil money e) the debt on independence will prevent any chance of getting a surplus.

Other points to ponder include:

How is Scotland going to pay it's 123% of GDP public sector debt? How is it going to maintain its vitally important FS industry when their assets equal much more than Scotland can afford to cover? How is Scotland going to deal with the inevitably negative 'border effect' on its 70bn+ pounds worth of exports to the RUK?

It is no wonder that you consider answering these questions a 'waste of your time'. Alex Salmond feels the same and like you has fallen back on repeating the same tired lines about Tories, English toffs and bullying whenever reality gets in the way of fantasy.

jazzmaster

Joined: 30 Sep 2013

Posted: Thu May 15, 2014 9:17 pm Post subject:

aq8knyus wrote:

Quote:

My posts have dealt with the points you have raised.

More lies and conjecture.

I've already spoken about the currency union, to suggest talks wouldn't be held on it is ludicrous. And to suggest that Scotland would accept their share of the debt without a union, and to assume that to not accept the debt is disastrous is even more ludicrous and conjecture.

Your point about the North sea oil fund is more lies. My point is that the English government ignored the advice to set one up at the time it would have been most beneficial to Scotland. Acts like this show how the English government has neglected the best interests of Scotland time and time again. Having control of the oil would be in the best interests of Scotland. I'd rather have a government with Scotland's best interests at heart controlling the oil, than the English government.

Your conjecture of the FS industry in Scotland suddenly disappearing is more conjecture and scare tactics.

Your figures about the Scottish budget deficit are also lies. It is not at 11%. Looking at the period 2007-08 to 2011-12 as a whole, Scotland ran an average current budget deficit equivalent to 2.9% of GDP. Over the same period, the UK ran an average current budget deficit equivalent to 5.0% of GDP. Last year it was 8.3%, the UK as a whole was 7.3%.

My reply here exposes your lies, conjecture, and fear mongering. I'm tired of wasting my time with you.

TL:DR
For Scots independence isn't about being anti-English. It's about being able to control their own affairs, instead of allowing the current ruling elite and existing structures of authority to ignore what is best for the people of Scotland while lining their own pockets.

aq8knyus

Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London

Posted: Fri May 16, 2014 5:09 am Post subject:

Quote:

My point is that the English government...

UK government. It is the government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, look at your passport if you don't believe me.

At least try and get the name of the government and country right.

Quote:

I've already spoken about the currency union, to suggest talks wouldn't be held on it is ludicrous. And to suggest that Scotland would accept their share of the debt without a union, and to assume that to not accept the debt is disastrous is even more ludicrous and conjecture.

The only thing ludicrous here is how the word of jazzmaster apprently carries more weight than that of all the main political parties in the RUK.

How is it anything other than conjecture to say a currency union is possible when all decision makers involved have flatly ruled it out?

Your belief that Scotland will be allowed to walk away from their debt is an understandable delusion, but to believe that welching on debt would not be ruinous for the Scottish economy is staggeringly ignorant.

Quote:

Your point about the North sea oil fund is more lies. My point is that the English government ignored the advice to set one up at the time it would have been most beneficial to Scotland. Acts like this show how the English government has neglected the best interests of Scotland time and time again. Having control of the oil would be in the best interests of Scotland. I'd rather have a government with Scotland's best interests at heart controlling the oil, than the English government.

Right because Scotland is such a paragon of fiscal propriety. Scotland's public spending is 11-17% more per head than the UK. The idea that Scotland would have made the necessary sacrifices in public spending to facilitate a sovereign wealth fund flies in the face of logic.

In any case the debt it will inherit, the public sector debt and it's own high level of public spending will mean that in order to make transfers to an energy fund Scotland will have to make billions of pounds in cuts to public services.

In terms of oil the SNP's own inflated and fraudulent stats states that there are 1.5 Tn pounds worth of reserves left, the ONS states 120 bn. Your assertion that there are 4 Tn pounds worth of reserves is either a lie or a delusion, you pick.

Quote:

Your conjecture of the FS industry in Scotland suddenly disappearing is more conjecture and scare tactics.

Scotland doesn't have the economic strength to maintain the FS indsutry it has on its own. No lender of last resort will be big enough to gurantee banks whose assests total many times the size of the entire Scottish economy.

You only have to look at Iceland to see what happens when a country has an overly large FS industry.

Add in that the vast majority of exports and services that FS industries in Scotland provide are to the RUK, you start to understand that a border effect coupled with Scotland leaving the pound would be devastating.

No worries though I am sure your response to all that will be 'la la la lies la la la conjecture'.

Quote:

Your figures about the Scottish budget deficit are also lies. It is not at 11%. Looking at the period 2007-08 to 2011-12 as a whole, Scotland ran an average current budget deficit equivalent to 2.9% of GDP. Over the same period, the UK ran an average current budget deficit equivalent to 5.0% of GDP. Last year it was 8.3%, the UK as a whole was 7.3%.

A paper submitted to the Economics Affairs select committe stated that the figure was 11%, but I have no problem accepting the figure you found. Because they both tell the same story, there is a gap between what Scotland can raise and what it spends (53bn raised, 65bn spent)

In the union the gap is meaningless because the UK will always make up the difference for when oil revenue drops, like it did recently when revenues were totalled as being down by 4.5 bn pounds or over 40% from the year before. Rememeber that volatile oil revenue is what the Scottish government is staking the entire Scottish economy on!

Add into the mix the insane plan to squirrel away billions into an energy fund (whilst still borrowing), unpredictable and falling oil prices and revenues, having a currency pegged to sterling without any control over fiscal policy, a deficit whether at 11% or 8% and a 8 bn pound public sector deficit that is on top of a public sector debt 123% of GDP.

Seriously, the only freedom the scottish people will get upon independence is the freedom to decide whether to make severe cuts to services or raise taxes across the board.

Quote:

wasting my time with you.

And yet you keep on replying.

Weigookin74

Joined: 26 Oct 2009

Posted: Mon May 19, 2014 10:42 pm Post subject:

I'm just curious how this works. Don't all the countries of the EU that are supposedly independant share borders and folks move from one place to another anyhow? So, what exactly would happen if they break up? None of my business really, just curious what would be any different? I'm smpathetic as we have the Quebec problem in Canada threatening to split every 15 or 20 years or so.

Lucas

Joined: 11 Sep 2012

Posted: Mon May 19, 2014 11:09 pm Post subject:

Quote:

So, what exactly would happen if they break up?

The mother of all street parties, followed by a huge spike in births 9 months later.

1 year later - a huge spike in divorces

2 years later - a whiskey shortage as the babies begin to drink, causing the NHS to fail, then mass migration to the UK in search of whiskey and health care.

Think nuclear waste ground and more ginger people in the UK!

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> General Discussion Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Page 3 of 4

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe