|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
aq8knyus
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London
|
 Posted: Sun May 11, 2014 11:18 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| jazzmaster wrote: |
It's interesting to see the desperation among the English to keep the union with Scotland alive.
The British empire is well and truly finished and Scotland leaving would be the final nail in the English coffin. All they would be left with are London riots, football hooliganism, and diminishing chants of "Engurland" as their national team once again embarrasses themselves at the world cup.
All the while the Scots are deciding their own fate, while enjoying the prime minister begging them to stay part of the union (which incidentally I think they will). As the Scots ponder their decision, the English swing between ever more desperate please, or attempting to use scare tactics to ensure a no vote. These very scare tactics are actually increasing the amount of Scots voting for independence. Scotland the Brave, indeed.
And as for the English, I think the pathetic trolling nature of the OP speaks volumes. |
You have to admit that keeping sterling whilst not being in a currency union is a pretty terrifying prospect. Scotland would join an elite club along with Ecuador and Montenegro.
In the event of independence the effect on the RUK would be minimal.
Economically the RUK would maintain its position as 2 Tn+ dollar economy and the only country to get a rebate and an exemption from an obligation to join the Euro. A rebate that Scotland would not only lose, but also have to contribute towards, just another few hundred million needlessly lost.
Also whilst RUK exports to Scotland accounted for 10% of the total, Scottish exports to the RUK amounted to 70% of their total exports (73.6 bn out of 98 bn).
Whilst 1.5% of UK tax comes from North Sea Oil & Gas, it accounts for between 10-20% of Scottish tax revenues. Yet, the value of this resource is set to fall by 4 bn over the next three years and is in need of urgent modernisation. The UK gov has pledged 200 Bn to help improve the productivity of UK Oil & Gas, to put that into perspective that figure is greater than the entire Scottish GDP. Could the Scottish gov. match that?
In all other fields the RUK is a soft power superpower and globally would keep its seat at the top tables of the UN security council, G7 and G20. It is also a nuclear power and would still retain its staus as one of the foremost military powers in the world.
Scotland would lose all this and worse it would have to enter into competition with the RUK.
It is not scare tactics to highlight the immense benefits that Scots reap from the union and to point out how damaging it would be to Scotland if they should secede. Also so many people in both Scotland and England have significant familial ties in both countries (including myself) that we are essentially one people.
Do you and the YES campaign have anything to offer besides anti-English rhetoric? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
le-paul
Joined: 07 Apr 2009
Location: dans la chambre
|
| Posted: Sun May 11, 2014 6:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jazzmaster wrote: |
| le-paul wrote: |
| jazzmaster wrote: |
The British empire is well and truly finished and Scotland leaving would be the final nail in the English coffin. All they would be left with are London riots, football hooliganism, and diminishing chants of "Engurland" as their national team once again embarrasses themselves at the world cup.
|
Yes, youve just summarised England perfectly, that's all the country is... 
I think you missed the bit where actually, most English people couldnt give a toss one way the other whether or not Scotland/Wales/Ireland or Cornwall is part of our Government or taking money from our taxes. I for one would love to cross the border and have to change money and feel like Im on holiday!
I love Scotland the way it is, its a beautiful country - if they want to be independent, good luck to them I say! Im sure it would do wonders to preserve their culture.
Btw, Why are you so bitter toward the Brits Jazzmaster? |
I'm not bitter, i just have a low tolerance for the crap many little Englanders have. |
Would you care to elloborate on this? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
guavashake
Joined: 09 Nov 2013
|
| Posted: Sun May 11, 2014 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| le-paul wrote: |
| jazzmaster wrote: |
| le-paul wrote: |
| jazzmaster wrote: |
The British empire is well and truly finished and Scotland leaving would be the final nail in the English coffin. All they would be left with are London riots, football hooliganism, and diminishing chants of "Engurland" as their national team once again embarrasses themselves at the world cup.
|
Yes, youve just summarised England perfectly, that's all the country is...
I think you missed the bit where actually, most English people couldnt give a toss one way the other whether or not Scotland/Wales/Ireland or Cornwall is part of our Government or taking money from our taxes. I for one would love to cross the border and have to change money and feel like Im on holiday!
I love Scotland the way it is, its a beautiful country - if they want to be independent, good luck to them I say! Im sure it would do wonders to preserve their culture.
Btw, Why are you so bitter toward the Brits Jazzmaster? |
I'm not bitter, i just have a low tolerance for the crap many little Englanders have. |
Would you care to elloborate on this? |
Posting drunk on Monday morning ^ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
le-paul
Joined: 07 Apr 2009
Location: dans la chambre
|
| Posted: Sun May 11, 2014 7:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| guavashake wrote: |
| le-paul wrote: |
| jazzmaster wrote: |
| le-paul wrote: |
| jazzmaster wrote: |
The British empire is well and truly finished and Scotland leaving would be the final nail in the English coffin. All they would be left with are London riots, football hooliganism, and diminishing chants of "Engurland" as their national team once again embarrasses themselves at the world cup.
|
Yes, youve just summarised England perfectly, that's all the country is...
I think you missed the bit where actually, most English people couldnt give a toss one way the other whether or not Scotland/Wales/Ireland or Cornwall is part of our Government or taking money from our taxes. I for one would love to cross the border and have to change money and feel like Im on holiday!
I love Scotland the way it is, its a beautiful country - if they want to be independent, good luck to them I say! Im sure it would do wonders to preserve their culture.
Btw, Why are you so bitter toward the Brits Jazzmaster? |
I'm not bitter, i just have a low tolerance for the crap many little Englanders have. |
Would you care to elloborate on this? |
Posting drunk on Monday morning ^ |
Yep, I made a spelling mistake - so what? Do you want to get into a 4 day long argument about it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jazzmaster
Joined: 30 Sep 2013
|
| Posted: Sun May 11, 2014 8:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| le-paul wrote: |
| jazzmaster wrote: |
| le-paul wrote: |
| jazzmaster wrote: |
The British empire is well and truly finished and Scotland leaving would be the final nail in the English coffin. All they would be left with are London riots, football hooliganism, and diminishing chants of "Engurland" as their national team once again embarrasses themselves at the world cup.
|
Yes, youve just summarised England perfectly, that's all the country is...
I think you missed the bit where actually, most English people couldnt give a toss one way the other whether or not Scotland/Wales/Ireland or Cornwall is part of our Government or taking money from our taxes. I for one would love to cross the border and have to change money and feel like Im on holiday!
I love Scotland the way it is, its a beautiful country - if they want to be independent, good luck to them I say! Im sure it would do wonders to preserve their culture.
Btw, Why are you so bitter toward the Brits Jazzmaster? |
I'm not bitter, i just have a low tolerance for the crap many little Englanders have. |
Would you care to elloborate on this? |
See the OP. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
guavashake
Joined: 09 Nov 2013
|
| Posted: Sun May 11, 2014 8:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| le-paul wrote: |
| guavashake wrote: |
| le-paul wrote: |
| jazzmaster wrote: |
| le-paul wrote: |
| jazzmaster wrote: |
The British empire is well and truly finished and Scotland leaving would be the final nail in the English coffin. All they would be left with are London riots, football hooliganism, and diminishing chants of "Engurland" as their national team once again embarrasses themselves at the world cup.
|
Yes, youve just summarised England perfectly, that's all the country is...
I think you missed the bit where actually, most English people couldnt give a toss one way the other whether or not Scotland/Wales/Ireland or Cornwall is part of our Government or taking money from our taxes. I for one would love to cross the border and have to change money and feel like Im on holiday!
I love Scotland the way it is, its a beautiful country - if they want to be independent, good luck to them I say! Im sure it would do wonders to preserve their culture.
Btw, Why are you so bitter toward the Brits Jazzmaster? |
I'm not bitter, i just have a low tolerance for the crap many little Englanders have. |
Would you care to elloborate on this? |
Posting drunk on Monday morning ^ |
Yep, I made a spelling mistake - so what? Do you want to get into a 4 day long argument about it? |
No thanks. I just made a comment because it was commentable... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jazzmaster
Joined: 30 Sep 2013
|
| Posted: Sun May 11, 2014 10:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| jazzmaster wrote: |
It's interesting to see the desperation among the English to keep the union with Scotland alive.
The British empire is well and truly finished and Scotland leaving would be the final nail in the English coffin. All they would be left with are London riots, football hooliganism, and diminishing chants of "Engurland" as their national team once again embarrasses themselves at the world cup.
All the while the Scots are deciding their own fate, while enjoying the prime minister begging them to stay part of the union (which incidentally I think they will). As the Scots ponder their decision, the English swing between ever more desperate please, or attempting to use scare tactics to ensure a no vote. These very scare tactics are actually increasing the amount of Scots voting for independence. Scotland the Brave, indeed.
And as for the English, I think the pathetic trolling nature of the OP speaks volumes. |
You have to admit that keeping sterling whilst not being in a currency union is a pretty terrifying prospect. Scotland would join an elite club along with Ecuador and Montenegro.
In the event of independence the effect on the RUK would be minimal.
Economically the RUK would maintain its position as 2 Tn+ dollar economy and the only country to get a rebate and an exemption from an obligation to join the Euro. A rebate that Scotland would not only lose, but also have to contribute towards, just another few hundred million needlessly lost.
Also whilst RUK exports to Scotland accounted for 10% of the total, Scottish exports to the RUK amounted to 70% of their total exports (73.6 bn out of 98 bn).
Whilst 1.5% of UK tax comes from North Sea Oil & Gas, it accounts for between 10-20% of Scottish tax revenues. Yet, the value of this resource is set to fall by 4 bn over the next three years and is in need of urgent modernisation. The UK gov has pledged 200 Bn to help improve the productivity of UK Oil & Gas, to put that into perspective that figure is greater than the entire Scottish GDP. Could the Scottish gov. match that?
In all other fields the RUK is a soft power superpower and globally would keep its seat at the top tables of the UN security council, G7 and G20. It is also a nuclear power and would still retain its staus as one of the foremost military powers in the world.
Scotland would lose all this and worse it would have to enter into competition with the RUK.
It is not scare tactics to highlight the immense benefits that Scots reap from the union and to point out how damaging it would be to Scotland if they should secede. Also so many people in both Scotland and England have significant familial ties in both countries (including myself) that we are essentially one people.
Do you and the YES campaign have anything to offer besides anti-English rhetoric? |
Not having a currency union with the rUK would be a blow, but being able to walk away from the debt is always a plus. There are already comments about England bluffing about the currency union.
Perhaps the Yes campaigners are tired of governments who ignore recommendations to set up oil funds, which would have greatly benefited Scotland. Norway did set up an oil fund which is now around 475billion pounds. While Westminster has built up debts over 1trillion pounds and the UK is one of the most indebted countries in the world.
Perhaps the Yes campaigners believe that having control of the 4trillion pounds worth of oil is more important than giving Westminster control over it for 200billion.
Perhaps the Yes campaigners don't want nuclear warheads in Scotland and are tired of Westminster dumping radioactive shells in Scottish water.
Perhaps the Yes campaigners realize Scotland is richer per head than the rest of the UK, and is tired of paying. Or that Scotland has paid more tax per head than the rest of the UK for the past 33 years.
But the best reason is that perhaps the Yes campaigners realize that the benefits of having total control over their own affairs outweigh the risks of going it alone. The more the English try to scare them, the more Scots turn to "Yes".
And 83% of Scots say they have a Scottish national identity. That's hardly what I'd call "one people" with the English.
We could exchange numbers all day, but I don't have the time or interest to do so.
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. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lucas
Joined: 11 Sep 2012
|
| Posted: Sun May 11, 2014 10:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| 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. |
Best of luck to the Scots.
I might buy a holiday home there!
http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-45606554.html?premiumA=true
After living in Korea, this could be called a 'character' building!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aq8knyus
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2014 6:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="jazzmaster"]
| Quote: |
| Not having a currency union with the rUK would be a blow, but being able to walk away from the debt is always a plus. There are already comments about England bluffing about the currency union. |
Scotland walking away from all of its debt is pure fantasy. We are talking between 92 and 146 Bn pounds here, the RUK is not going to let scotland go until a deal has been reached.
Scotland leaving its debt would mean that the RUK's debt to GDP ratio would go up and stay at over 100%. Even if there is a Yes vote Scotland would still remain within the UK until negotiations have been completed. The RUK still has the power, so please disabuse yourself of that notion.
| Quote: |
| Perhaps the Yes campaigners are tired of governments who ignore recommendations to set up oil funds, which would have greatly benefited Scotland. Norway did set up an oil fund which is now around 475billion pounds. While Westminster has built up debts over 1trillion pounds and the UK is one of the most indebted countries in the world. |
That old chesnut. Norway began its fund in 1990 when it was running a defecit and only made its first payment after running a surplus in May 1996.
Scotland is going to have to start running a surplus before it can create a sovereign wealth fund. As I stated their debt on independence will stand between 92-146 Bn or 64-86% of its GDP. It will be many moons before you can start building a fund.
That is unless the incompetents within the SNP are going to continue to borrow whilst saving at the same time.
| Quote: |
| Perhaps the Yes campaigners believe that having control of the 4trillion pounds worth of oil is more important than giving Westminster control over it for 200billion. |
The ONS projects that there is 120 Bn worth of North Sea reserves remaining. The SNP has stated that it the remaining reserves stand at 1.5 Tn. Where are you getting this 4 Tn figure from?
Incidentally the SNP got it's figure from taking the higest estimate of remaining barrels of oil (24 million) and then converted its worth using current prices. Considering that oil prices are notoriously volatile the only logic for their figure is that they purposefully decided to deceive.
Not only that, but the remaining reserves are only recoverable by making the needed modernisation of the industry that Scotland's tiny economy is incapable of doing.
| Quote: |
| Perhaps the Yes campaigners don't want nuclear warheads in Scotland and are tired of Westminster dumping radioactive shells in Scottish water. |
The only way the Scots have a hope in hell of getting a few quid knocked off their debt is by agreeing to keep Faslane open. I could see Scotland's debt fall by 10 Bn+ if they make an arrangement.
| Quote: |
| Perhaps the Yes campaigners realize Scotland is richer per head than the rest of the UK, and is tired of paying. Or that Scotland has paid more tax per head than the rest of the UK for the past 33 years. |
Scotland is only richer per head with Oil and Gas figured in and its second largest industry, financial services, is almost entirely dependent on London.
Scotland is rich thanks to the UK making the 1 Tn+ worth of investment into North Sea Oil and by interconnecting their financial services industry with that of London. Also by providing a huge market for their exports which, as I have said, account for over 70% of Scotlands total.
You start cutting yourself off from that support, start putting up barriers and borders and you can expect that prosperity to be threatend.
| Quote: |
| But the best reason is that perhaps the Yes campaigners realize that the benefits of having total control over their own affairs outweigh the risks of going it alone. The more the English try to scare them, the more Scots turn to "Yes". |
Its funny how saying no to a currency union is a scare tactic and yet if a currency union did exist it would make Scotland more beholden to London than it ever was within the union.
If pro-indy people want independence they should do so without trying to threaten the RUK into letting them keep all the safety nets of being part of a major world economy.
| Quote: |
| And 83% of Scots say they have a Scottish national identity. That's hardly what I'd call "one people" with the English. |
Half of Scots have relatives in England, 500,000 RUK citizens live in Scotland and 700,000 Scots live in England. We are one whether people want it to be true or not, but cool story about that random poll you googled.
| Quote: |
| We could exchange numbers all day, but I don't have the time or interest to do so. |
Considering how utterly fatuous many of the claims of the SNP are I completely understand why you wouldn't want to get involved in a fact based discussion.
| Quote: |
| 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. |
Scottish independence is at best about greed, supporters want to divide a small continguos island and drive apart a people whose customs and culture has been deeply interwoven simply to make a few extra quid.
They are, however, going to get the shock of their lives when the cost of borrowing increases and when they find out that the much vaunted riches of North Sea oil cannot pay for a generous welfare state and a sovereign wealth fund. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jazzmaster
Joined: 30 Sep 2013
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2014 7:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="aq8knyus"]
| jazzmaster wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Not having a currency union with the rUK would be a blow, but being able to walk away from the debt is always a plus. There are already comments about England bluffing about the currency union. |
Scotland walking away from all of its debt is pure fantasy. We are talking between 92 and 146 Bn pounds here, the RUK is not going to let scotland go until a deal has been reached.
Scotland leaving its debt would mean that the RUK's debt to GDP ratio would go up and stay at over 100%. Even if there is a Yes vote Scotland would still remain within the UK until negotiations have been completed. The RUK still has the power, so please disabuse yourself of that notion.
| Quote: |
| Perhaps the Yes campaigners are tired of governments who ignore recommendations to set up oil funds, which would have greatly benefited Scotland. Norway did set up an oil fund which is now around 475billion pounds. While Westminster has built up debts over 1trillion pounds and the UK is one of the most indebted countries in the world. |
That old chesnut. Norway began its fund in 1990 when it was running a defecit and only made its first payment after running a surplus in May 1996.
Scotland is going to have to start running a surplus before it can create a sovereign wealth fund. As I stated their debt on independence will stand between 92-146 Bn or 64-86% of its GDP. It will be many moons before you can start building a fund.
That is unless the incompetents within the SNP are going to continue to borrow whilst saving at the same time.
| Quote: |
| Perhaps the Yes campaigners believe that having control of the 4trillion pounds worth of oil is more important than giving Westminster control over it for 200billion. |
The ONS projects that there is 120 Bn worth of North Sea reserves remaining. The SNP has stated that it the remaining reserves stand at 1.5 Tn. Where are you getting this 4 Tn figure from?
Incidentally the SNP got it's figure from taking the higest estimate of remaining barrels of oil (24 million) and then converted its worth using current prices. Considering that oil prices are notoriously volatile the only logic for their figure is that they purposefully decided to deceive.
Not only that, but the remaining reserves are only recoverable by making the needed modernisation of the industry that Scotland's tiny economy is incapable of doing.
| Quote: |
| Perhaps the Yes campaigners don't want nuclear warheads in Scotland and are tired of Westminster dumping radioactive shells in Scottish water. |
The only way the Scots have a hope in hell of getting a few quid knocked off their debt is by agreeing to keep Faslane open. I could see Scotland's debt fall by 10 Bn+ if they make an arrangement.
| Quote: |
| Perhaps the Yes campaigners realize Scotland is richer per head than the rest of the UK, and is tired of paying. Or that Scotland has paid more tax per head than the rest of the UK for the past 33 years. |
Scotland is only richer per head with Oil and Gas figured in and its second largest industry, financial services, is almost entirely dependent on London.
Scotland is rich thanks to the UK making the 1 Tn+ worth of investment into North Sea Oil and by interconnecting their financial services industry with that of London. Also by providing a huge market for their exports which, as I have said, account for over 70% of Scotlands total.
You start cutting yourself off from that support, start putting up barriers and borders and you can expect that prosperity to be threatend.
| Quote: |
| But the best reason is that perhaps the Yes campaigners realize that the benefits of having total control over their own affairs outweigh the risks of going it alone. The more the English try to scare them, the more Scots turn to "Yes". |
Its funny how saying no to a currency union is a scare tactic and yet if a currency union did exist it would make Scotland more beholden to London than it ever was within the union.
If pro-indy people want independence they should do so without trying to threaten the RUK into letting them keep all the safety nets of being part of a major world economy.
| Quote: |
| And 83% of Scots say they have a Scottish national identity. That's hardly what I'd call "one people" with the English. |
Half of Scots have relatives in England, 500,000 RUK citizens live in Scotland and 700,000 Scots live in England. We are one whether people want it to be true or not, but cool story about that random poll you googled.
| Quote: |
| We could exchange numbers all day, but I don't have the time or interest to do so. |
Considering how utterly fatuous many of the claims of the SNP are I completely understand why you wouldn't want to get involved in a fact based discussion.
| Quote: |
| 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. |
Scottish independence is at best about greed, supporters want to divide a small continguos island and drive apart a people whose customs and culture has been deeply interwoven simply to make a few extra quid.
They are, however, going to get the shock of their lives when the cost of borrowing increases and when they find out that the much vaunted riches of North Sea oil cannot pay for a generous welfare state and a sovereign wealth fund. |
The UK has accepted all of the debt 1,400Billion.
The debt in the article is what Scotland would assume if reasonable agreements on a raft of issues are agreed.
The UK debt include 450Billion pounds of quantitative easing used to buy bonds therefore Scotland is entitled to almost 40 Billion Pounds of bonds which can be cashed at any time - not a bad cushion if required.
You must remove all cost currently set against Scotland e.g. Scottish office/ Lords/ Trident / etc.
The basic facts IF Scotland accepts the debt and is allocated it' share of ALL assets would be a Scotland with debt to GDP of 75percent and a rUK with debt to GDP of 112percent.
The above facts are from the Financial Times.
As regards the legality of the debt to rating agencies have issued clear statements on rUK obligations.
Seems like the currency union might be workable after all. In which case all that trade you're talking about might not disappear after all.
Your assumptions of what would happen in the future are merely that - assumptions.
My poll actually asked people their opinions, as opposed to your figures which are meaningless. Your condescending comment about "cool story" shows why so many Scots want nothing to do with people like you.
So we could see Scotland with control of the North Sea Oil, a currency union (as a trade off for accepting their share of the debt), and a debt to GDP of 64-86%, while the rUK has a debt to GDP of 112%.
I see why you're so desperate to claim we are one people.
I suggest you and the OP return to reading the Daily Mail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aq8knyus
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2014 8:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="jazzmaster"][quote="aq8knyus"][quote="jazzmaster"]
| Quote: |
The UK has accepted all of the debt 1,400Billion.
The debt in the article is what Scotland would assume if reasonable agreements on a raft of issues are agreed.
The UK debt include 450Billion pounds of quantitative easing used to buy bonds therefore Scotland is entitled to almost 40 Billion Pounds of bonds which can be cashed at any time - not a bad cushion if required.
You must remove all cost currently set against Scotland e.g. Scottish office/ Lords/ Trident / etc.
The basic facts IF Scotland accepts the debt and is allocated it' share of ALL assets would be a Scotland with debt to GDP of 75percent and a rUK with debt to GDP of 112percent.
The above facts are from the Financial Times.
As regards the legality of the debt to rating agencies have issued clear statements on rUK obligations.
Seems like the currency union might be workable after all. In which case all that trade you're talking about might not disappear after all.
Your assumptions of what would happen in the future are merely that - assumptions.
My poll actually asked people their opinions, as opposed to your figures which are meaningless. Your condescending comment about "cool story" shows why so many Scots want nothing to do with people like you.
So we could see Scotland with control of the North Sea Oil, a currency union (as a trade off for accepting their share of the debt), and a debt to GDP of 64-86%, while the rUK has a debt to GDP of 112%.
I see why you're so desperate to claim we are one people.
I suggest you and the OP return to reading the Daily Mail. |
40 billion? Is that it?
Scotland's financial services industry owns assets worth vastly more than their GDP, the total assests of RBS and HBOS alone are 15 times the size of the Scottish economy. In addition nearly 94% of all Scottish insurance products are sold in the RUK.
Scotland will not be able to maintin its financial services industry without the RUK. So say goodbye the better part of 13bn a year tax revenue and who knows what will happen to the 100,000 people who work in the industry and are themselves top rate tax payers.
See how little a one off 40 Bn is looking now?
That is not even taking into account Scotland's public sector debt.
Scotland's public sector debt is 11% higher than the RUK, with 10% of the working population employed in the public sector and a faster rate of ageing than the RUK. In total Scotland's public sector debt stands at 123% of GDP.
You are also forgetting the most important thing.
All potential chancellors have ruled out a currency union. Scotland's economy is only a tenth the size of the RUK.
Scotland will leave the UK with a weak untested currency, a far lower credit rating, no lender of last resort to gurantee their banks and the need to buy huge amounts of sterling to start its own currency.
As for your other points.
The RUK guranteed debt because Scotland doesn't have the ability to pay, when the gurantee was made it was done so on the basis that Scotland would pay off its debt to the RUK over time. Thereby allowing the RUK debt to GDP ratio to fall back to the mid-80% position it is now.
Also Scotland, using the figures you cited, would have such a large GDP to debt ratio that no sovereign wealth fund could be created, so no Norway option for Scotland.
The rest of it amounted to Tories! The Mail! The English! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aq8knyus
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2014 8:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| My poll actually asked people their opinions, as opposed to your figures which are meaningless. Your condescending comment about "cool story" shows why so many Scots want nothing to do with people like you. |
My identity is British and I have significant family and cultural ties to Scotland. There are many like me.
My connection to Scotland is not any less or inferior just because my identity includes facets of Englishness as well Scottishness.
I dont want a Scotland that divides and forces people to choose between being English or Scottish.
We are mixed and that is a source of strength. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jazzmaster
Joined: 30 Sep 2013
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2014 3:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="aq8knyus"][quote="jazzmaster"][quote="aq8knyus"]
| jazzmaster wrote: |
| Quote: |
The UK has accepted all of the debt 1,400Billion.
The debt in the article is what Scotland would assume if reasonable agreements on a raft of issues are agreed.
The UK debt include 450Billion pounds of quantitative easing used to buy bonds therefore Scotland is entitled to almost 40 Billion Pounds of bonds which can be cashed at any time - not a bad cushion if required.
You must remove all cost currently set against Scotland e.g. Scottish office/ Lords/ Trident / etc.
The basic facts IF Scotland accepts the debt and is allocated it' share of ALL assets would be a Scotland with debt to GDP of 75percent and a rUK with debt to GDP of 112percent.
The above facts are from the Financial Times.
As regards the legality of the debt to rating agencies have issued clear statements on rUK obligations.
Seems like the currency union might be workable after all. In which case all that trade you're talking about might not disappear after all.
Your assumptions of what would happen in the future are merely that - assumptions.
My poll actually asked people their opinions, as opposed to your figures which are meaningless. Your condescending comment about "cool story" shows why so many Scots want nothing to do with people like you.
So we could see Scotland with control of the North Sea Oil, a currency union (as a trade off for accepting their share of the debt), and a debt to GDP of 64-86%, while the rUK has a debt to GDP of 112%.
I see why you're so desperate to claim we are one people.
I suggest you and the OP return to reading the Daily Mail. |
40 billion? Is that it?
Scotland's financial services industry owns assets worth vastly more than their GDP, the total assests of RBS and HBOS alone are 15 times the size of the Scottish economy. In addition nearly 94% of all Scottish insurance products are sold in the RUK.
Scotland will not be able to maintin its financial services industry without the RUK. So say goodbye the better part of 13bn a year tax revenue and who knows what will happen to the 100,000 people who work in the industry and are themselves top rate tax payers.
See how little a one off 40 Bn is looking now?
That is not even taking into account Scotland's public sector debt.
Scotland's public sector debt is 11% higher than the RUK, with 10% of the working population employed in the public sector and a faster rate of ageing than the RUK. In total Scotland's public sector debt stands at 123% of GDP.
You are also forgetting the most important thing.
All potential chancellors have ruled out a currency union. Scotland's economy is only a tenth the size of the RUK.
Scotland will leave the UK with a weak untested currency, a far lower credit rating, no lender of last resort to gurantee their banks and the need to buy huge amounts of sterling to start its own currency.
As for your other points.
The RUK guranteed debt because Scotland doesn't have the ability to pay, when the gurantee was made it was done so on the basis that Scotland would pay off its debt to the RUK over time. Thereby allowing the RUK debt to GDP ratio to fall back to the mid-80% position it is now.
Also Scotland, using the figures you cited, would have such a large GDP to debt ratio that no sovereign wealth fund could be created, so no Norway option for Scotland.
The rest of it amounted to Tories! The Mail! The English! |
Without a currency union Scotland has no reason to accept its share of the UK's national debt .
And with a currency union the financial sector would have no reason to leave Scotland.
You can't have your cake and eat it, so what's it going to be? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aq8knyus
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2014 5:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="jazzmaster"][quote="aq8knyus"][quote="jazzmaster"]
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| jazzmaster wrote: |
| Quote: |
The UK has accepted all of the debt 1,400Billion.
The debt in the article is what Scotland would assume if reasonable agreements on a raft of issues are agreed.
The UK debt include 450Billion pounds of quantitative easing used to buy bonds therefore Scotland is entitled to almost 40 Billion Pounds of bonds which can be cashed at any time - not a bad cushion if required.
You must remove all cost currently set against Scotland e.g. Scottish office/ Lords/ Trident / etc.
The basic facts IF Scotland accepts the debt and is allocated it' share of ALL assets would be a Scotland with debt to GDP of 75percent and a rUK with debt to GDP of 112percent.
The above facts are from the Financial Times.
As regards the legality of the debt to rating agencies have issued clear statements on rUK obligations.
Seems like the currency union might be workable after all. In which case all that trade you're talking about might not disappear after all.
Your assumptions of what would happen in the future are merely that - assumptions.
My poll actually asked people their opinions, as opposed to your figures which are meaningless. Your condescending comment about "cool story" shows why so many Scots want nothing to do with people like you.
So we could see Scotland with control of the North Sea Oil, a currency union (as a trade off for accepting their share of the debt), and a debt to GDP of 64-86%, while the rUK has a debt to GDP of 112%.
I see why you're so desperate to claim we are one people.
I suggest you and the OP return to reading the Daily Mail. |
40 billion? Is that it?
Scotland's financial services industry owns assets worth vastly more than their GDP, the total assests of RBS and HBOS alone are 15 times the size of the Scottish economy. In addition nearly 94% of all Scottish insurance products are sold in the RUK.
Scotland will not be able to maintin its financial services industry without the RUK. So say goodbye the better part of 13bn a year tax revenue and who knows what will happen to the 100,000 people who work in the industry and are themselves top rate tax payers.
See how little a one off 40 Bn is looking now?
That is not even taking into account Scotland's public sector debt.
Scotland's public sector debt is 11% higher than the RUK, with 10% of the working population employed in the public sector and a faster rate of ageing than the RUK. In total Scotland's public sector debt stands at 123% of GDP.
You are also forgetting the most important thing.
All potential chancellors have ruled out a currency union. Scotland's economy is only a tenth the size of the RUK.
Scotland will leave the UK with a weak untested currency, a far lower credit rating, no lender of last resort to gurantee their banks and the need to buy huge amounts of sterling to start its own currency.
As for your other points.
The RUK guranteed debt because Scotland doesn't have the ability to pay, when the gurantee was made it was done so on the basis that Scotland would pay off its debt to the RUK over time. Thereby allowing the RUK debt to GDP ratio to fall back to the mid-80% position it is now.
Also Scotland, using the figures you cited, would have such a large GDP to debt ratio that no sovereign wealth fund could be created, so no Norway option for Scotland.
The rest of it amounted to Tories! The Mail! The English! |
Without a currency union Scotland has no reason to accept its share of the UK's. national debt .
And with a currency union the financial sector would have no reason to leave Scotland.
You can't have your cake and eat it, so what's it going to be? |
A currency union has been ruled out by all 3 potential chancellors and has no political support within the RUK. It is not going to happen.
Also It is not an assumption that the RUK is not going to let Scotland leave without paying a penny of nearly 146 bn debt. You would be mad to think otherwise.
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.
Finally, that public sector debt will be the final nail in the coffin for any ideas about Norwegian style wealth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jazzmaster
Joined: 30 Sep 2013
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2014 6:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="aq8knyus"][quote="jazzmaster"][quote="aq8knyus"]
| jazzmaster wrote: |
| aq8knyus wrote: |
| jazzmaster wrote: |
| Quote: |
The UK has accepted all of the debt 1,400Billion.
The debt in the article is what Scotland would assume if reasonable agreements on a raft of issues are agreed.
The UK debt include 450Billion pounds of quantitative easing used to buy bonds therefore Scotland is entitled to almost 40 Billion Pounds of bonds which can be cashed at any time - not a bad cushion if required.
You must remove all cost currently set against Scotland e.g. Scottish office/ Lords/ Trident / etc.
The basic facts IF Scotland accepts the debt and is allocated it' share of ALL assets would be a Scotland with debt to GDP of 75percent and a rUK with debt to GDP of 112percent.
The above facts are from the Financial Times.
As regards the legality of the debt to rating agencies have issued clear statements on rUK obligations.
Seems like the currency union might be workable after all. In which case all that trade you're talking about might not disappear after all.
Your assumptions of what would happen in the future are merely that - assumptions.
My poll actually asked people their opinions, as opposed to your figures which are meaningless. Your condescending comment about "cool story" shows why so many Scots want nothing to do with people like you.
So we could see Scotland with control of the North Sea Oil, a currency union (as a trade off for accepting their share of the debt), and a debt to GDP of 64-86%, while the rUK has a debt to GDP of 112%.
I see why you're so desperate to claim we are one people.
I suggest you and the OP return to reading the Daily Mail. |
40 billion? Is that it?
Scotland's financial services industry owns assets worth vastly more than their GDP, the total assests of RBS and HBOS alone are 15 times the size of the Scottish economy. In addition nearly 94% of all Scottish insurance products are sold in the RUK.
Scotland will not be able to maintin its financial services industry without the RUK. So say goodbye the better part of 13bn a year tax revenue and who knows what will happen to the 100,000 people who work in the industry and are themselves top rate tax payers.
See how little a one off 40 Bn is looking now?
That is not even taking into account Scotland's public sector debt.
Scotland's public sector debt is 11% higher than the RUK, with 10% of the working population employed in the public sector and a faster rate of ageing than the RUK. In total Scotland's public sector debt stands at 123% of GDP.
You are also forgetting the most important thing.
All potential chancellors have ruled out a currency union. Scotland's economy is only a tenth the size of the RUK.
Scotland will leave the UK with a weak untested currency, a far lower credit rating, no lender of last resort to gurantee their banks and the need to buy huge amounts of sterling to start its own currency.
As for your other points.
The RUK guranteed debt because Scotland doesn't have the ability to pay, when the gurantee was made it was done so on the basis that Scotland would pay off its debt to the RUK over time. Thereby allowing the RUK debt to GDP ratio to fall back to the mid-80% position it is now.
Also Scotland, using the figures you cited, would have such a large GDP to debt ratio that no sovereign wealth fund could be created, so no Norway option for Scotland.
The rest of it amounted to Tories! The Mail! The English! |
Without a currency union Scotland has no reason to accept its share of the UK's. national debt .
And with a currency union the financial sector would have no reason to leave Scotland.
You can't have your cake and eat it, so what's it going to be? |
A currency union has been ruled out by all 3 potential chancellors and has no political support within the RUK. It is not going to happen.
Also It is not an assumption that the RUK is not going to let Scotland leave without paying a penny of nearly 146 bn debt. You would be mad to think otherwise.
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.
Finally, that public sector debt will be the final nail in the coffin for any ideas about Norwegian style wealth. |
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. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
